• takeda@lemm.eeEnglish
          55·
          24 days ago

          Yeah. What company wouldn’t allow it?

          When I was working for an ad exchange, everyone had adblock installed in their browsers, I found that quite ironic.

          • micka190@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            23 days ago

            Yeah. What company wouldn’t allow it?

            My IT department uninstalled it from my work laptop, and told me not to reinstall it because - and I quote: “The only browser IT officially supports is Google Chrome.”

            What makes this doubly stupid is that I’m a web developer. I literally can’t test my stuff on another browser…

          • shyguyblue@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            23 days ago

            I used to develop ads (non intrusive things for home depot or go RVing) and i used ad blockers. When testing, i would just run private browsing with plugins disabled…

        • Dave@lemmy.nzEnglish
          30·
          24 days ago

          Officially only Edge is supported, but Chrome is tolerated. It’s a full MS environment.

          • reev@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            351·
            24 days ago

            Same here. The worst thing is in their justification of disallowing Firefox they listed that it was not an enterprise application. I get that it might be extra effort to support it but don’t list something factually untrue as a lame cop out for why you don’t want to.

            • NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
              24·
              24 days ago

              Was told it wouldn’t be allowed because you couldn’t restrict it using GPO… Until I told them they could absolutely apply those restrictions using GPO and even provided the ADMX templates.

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          34·
          24 days ago

          At large organizations you’re generally not allowed to download much of anything without it passing through IT security and management first. If it’s a no, it will probably stay a no.

          • Flagstaff@programming.devEnglish
            111·
            24 days ago

            I work for a non-profit and they are way more lenient about what we would like to install as long as the job gets done.

            • skulblaka@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              5·
              23 days ago

              Then you have bad opsec and security holes.

              This matters more for some industries than others. But this attitude lets a malicious employee install basically whatever they want in service of “the job” and you won’t even know you’re being breached until after it’s all over.

              • Flagstaff@programming.devEnglish
                1·
                23 days ago

                Well, we still have to get approval. But it just seems like they don’t mind as much. For example, I don’t know how many companies out there would be fine with installations of AutoHotkey and LibreOffice.

          • slumberlust@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            22 days ago

            In your experience, what large organization restricts this? I’ve worked at a few SaaS companies and a FAANG that always gave us full install rights and browser choice. Granted we are on the software side, but I haven’t experienced this at all.

      • dirthawker0@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        23 days ago

        If you had uBlock origin already, you may have gotten a message through Chrome that it was no longer supported, so it’s been disabled, and gives you the option to remove it. I noticed you don’t have to remove it, and it can be re-enabled. However, I need someone smarter with adblockers than I to say if this is actually helpful and not hazardous.

    • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      2·
      23 days ago

      Is there any firefox based browser on android where I can have easy gestures for the arrow buttons? All the firefox versions I can find require me to do this in two clicks which for the way I browse is a pain in the arse. Can I fix this somehow?

    • Libra00@lemmy.worldEnglish
      9·
      23 days ago

      Yeah, I switched to Firefox when this whole Manifest V3 thing was announced, I only still have Chrome installed because it’s better for PDFs than Firefox and once in a great while i run into a site that doesn’t work right on Firefox.

      • Trashbones@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        1·
        23 days ago

        I actually really like Firefox for reading pdf’s, how is it in chrome? I’ve never actually tried chrome for that because I was still using okular back when I still had chrome installed on anything.

        • Libra00@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          23 days ago

          The main issue I have with Firefox is that some pdfs have this side-by-side layout (especially rpg pdfs) that Firefox respects and I keep having to turn it off every time I load a new one. Chrome doesn’t respect it and shows it a page at a time like I want. My eyes don’t work too good so side by side the text is just too small.

  • Nanook@lemm.eeEnglish
    2024·
    24 days ago

    Google is not an IT company. It’s an advertising company. Surprised Pikachu, it blocks ad blockers.

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish
        15·
        23 days ago

        Because they are at the end of their growth phase and have entered their squeeze until dead phase.

      • ripcord@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8·
        23 days ago

        Yes, but enshittification doesn’t happen all at once. And this is a textbook example of the actual meaning of enshittification.

      • Nanook@lemm.eeEnglish
        6·
        23 days ago

        Yeah it’s always been an ad company. And you are correct, blocking apps is new, welcome to the last stage in the ad-blocking arms race. Glad I degoogled my digital life a decade ago.

  • AlternateRoute@lemmy.caEnglish
    836·
    24 days ago

    But ublock origin lite is by the same dev… Not as many features but it conforms to the new rules and is still much better than not having a blocker if you use chrome or edge.

    • Polderviking@feddit.nlEnglish
      131·
      23 days ago

      The best option here is to just tank Chrome’s market share instead of making something that’s obviously not ideal, work.

    • trn@lemm.eeEnglish
      6·
      23 days ago

      Never has been 🔫 (at least for a couple of years)

    • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      23 days ago

      I only use chrome for my work stuff, and that’s because I work with g-suite a lot.

      Chrome fucking sucks

    • Victor@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      23 days ago

      I wish I could say the same. Web dev. 🫡 But at least I’m using Chromium, if that’s even slightly better.

  • knexcar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    582·
    23 days ago

    This is probably the single thing that got me to switch to Firefox. Privacy whatever, I don’t care about my data or the morality of my tech company or whatever, but mess with my adblocker and goodbye.

    • TehWorld@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      23 days ago

      I’m mostly in the same boat. If you really want to know my kink-search-history, I really DGAF. The morality is nice to think about but it’s all about your personal morals in a lot of cases.

    • Ledericas@lemm.eeEnglish
      619·
      23 days ago

      firefox is going through thier own enshittifcation down the line, they changed ther policy about data recently

      • viking@infosec.pubEnglish
        16·
        23 days ago

        They changed the phrasing, since in some jurisdictions “sharing anonymized data with partners” can apparently be interpreted as a sale of data, if they get something in return, even if it’s not a fiscal payment.

        But after the outrage that sparked, they’ve rephrased the policy again and wrote a lengthy article detailing the reasoning, which is at the very least plausible.

      • dan@upvote.auEnglish
        6·
        23 days ago

        They changed the wording of their policy for legal reasons. They haven’t actually changed what they do. They already updated the text of the policy to clarify.

      • enthusiasm_headquarters@lemmy.worldEnglish
        15·
        23 days ago

        I read about this too, and it worries me. Google has donated over a billion dollars to Mozilla over the years. That alone doesn’t scare me so much as it’s a blatant propaganda tool to deflect the antitrust sentiment that plagues them and will probably some day do its work of breaking them apart.

        Fortunately, there are numerous open source forks. I am currently using Librewolf, a fork of firefox focused on privacy and anti-tracking, and it has worked without a hitch. A couple of my extensions have required fiddling with to get right but it’s part of life if you care about these things.

  • scarabic@lemmy.worldEnglish
    491·
    23 days ago

    I take this as a sign that it genuinely still works to block ads and hasn’t sold out and become malware like those others that used to be popular.

    • Bazoogle@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      23 days ago

      It was removed because Google did away with manifest v2 for browser extensions, and uBlock Origin worked almost entirely from a feature provided in manifest v2. So it was removed because it can no longer work on chromium devices, unless the browser manually adds back in support for it. Firefox has chosen to continue to support manifest v2, so the original uBlock origin is still available. uBlock lite is still available in the chrome store, and uses the new manifest v3. It is more limited in it’s capability, but should be able to get the most obtrusive stuff. The lite version is definitely not nearly as powerful as the original.

      On a side note, it seems to me like the link still works for now. Idk how much longer that will last.

  • g4nd41ph@lemmy.worldEnglish
    32·
    23 days ago

    I swapped to Chrome years ago because YouTube stopped working right on Firefox.

    I’ve started the process of swapping back to Firefox after 10 years with Chrome over this.

      • ysjet@lemmy.worldEnglish
        15·
        23 days ago

        I know what he’s talking about- there was some javascript spec or something that google proposed, and nobody else bought in, so it never actually became part of javascript’s standard.

        But google implemented it into chrome’s javascript engine anyway, and then used it for youtube. There was some fallback code if the new functions weren’t available, but, because of a ‘mistake’ they didn’t work and basically made playback ass for a while until the open source community basically debugged and fixed the issue FOR google, and then spent a few weeks cramming it down google’s throat that it needed fixed.

      • g4nd41ph@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        23 days ago

        It probably didn’t have anything to do with Firefox itself. It’s likely related to something I messed up in FF or it was something to do with the ancient laptop I had at the time being a junk heap, but I tried Chrome and noticed that the trouble didn’t exist there. So I started using Chrome.

        I kept using it because of all the google integration, which was really handy when I was using the google business suite to run my own small business. I shut that down two years ago now, so there’s nothing really keeping me on Chrome any more.

        I swapped back to FF a few days ago and YouTube works fine now. So I’m back on the FF train and giving Google the finger the whole way over banning the adblockers that I liked.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        23 days ago

        The only problem I’ve had is that you can’t view HDR content in YouTube on Firefox.

        That’s not a big part of YouTube (yet), so it is largely unnoticeable.

    • Mike_The_TV@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      23 days ago

      There were a few extensions you could run in firefox that told youtube that it was totally for reals being accessed by a chrome browser.

      • g4nd41ph@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        23 days ago

        Boy, that would have been good to know back in 2015, I feel like I let Google hoodwink me into using Chrome for all that time.

    • karma@feddit.ukEnglish
      5·
      23 days ago

      If they break youtube in alternative browsers or force ads I’ll finally be able to ditch youtube for good.

    • devedeset@lemm.eeEnglish
      4·
      23 days ago

      Ironically YouTube seems to work better for me in firefox, although the issue in chrome may be caused by browser extensions

      • g4nd41ph@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        23 days ago

        Something was going wrong with video playback. Unfortunately, this was about 10 years ago so I don’t remember many specifics about what the problem was.

        • TangledHyphae@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          23 days ago

          I’ve exclusively used firefox to watch youtube on Arch and Ubuntu for years, never had a problem so far for what it’s worth. I keep a laptop in the livingroom with Arch specifically to have adblocking and piping the video out to the TV. The youtube apps are terrible on the Roku last I remember, haven’t tried it in forever but I think the main reason was I didn’t want to see ads anymore.

          • g4nd41ph@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            23 days ago

            My wife and I used the YouTube app on a Roku TV for some time, and it was rough. I’m not sure if the intense lag was caused by the app or the low specs of the TV, but either way it was a poor experience.

  • Arghblarg@lemmy.caEnglish
    311·
    24 days ago

    There’s a way to save your already-installed extension, in “Manage Extensions…” Enable dev mode, then Pack Extension.

    However the browser will probably just refuse to run it soon.

    Vivaldi, for what it’s worth, seems to still run uBlock Origin just fine. I am afraid to uninstall it now to test if it’ll re-install properly.

    My version: 7.1.3570.39 (Stable channel) (64-bit)

    Might be time to finally move to Firefox though, if Vivaldi doesn’t keep Manifest V2 support.

      • Vespair@lemm.eeEnglish
        91·
        24 days ago

        I wish Vivaldi wasn’t Chromium-based, because I think it’s the slickest browser out there.

        But it’s chromium, so it’s time to move on to Firefox regardless.

        Ladybird development can’t happen fast enough.

        • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          12·
          24 days ago

          By that argument the time was a long time ago then. Vivaldi still works with uBlock so nothing has changed on their end. I think it’s still reasonable to use Vivaldi until they are forced to Manifest 3. Despite being Chromium based they’ve always been privacy focused and vocally pro ad blocking. As far as the cult of Firefox, they’ve been showing their true colors lately. They are no saints and their biggest funder is Google. Never forget to follow the money. I’m not personally convinced that a switch on a purely ideological level is indicated.

  • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
    27·
    23 days ago

    And that is why I went to Firefox once Google announced this bullshit.

    Swapping is pretty painless. It even brings over all your passwords and stuff these days. Best get to swapping before Google disable that as well. They’d just love to keep you hostage.

        • DontMakeMoreBabies@lemm.eeEnglish
          91·
          23 days ago

          I think the Brave CEO recently said some Trumpy shit (in case you’re at all curious for the downvoting).

          • 11111one11111@lemmy.worldEnglish
            32·
            23 days ago

            I wish more people were like you. Not everyone can keep up with everyone’s beefs (this one not so much) but it really grinds my gears when I see seemingly polite, on topic, engaging or contributing comments with no replies but still geyting down voted. Especially on a forum as thirsty as Lemmy users are for more user involvement.

            It makes me think there are too many people in the world conditioned to be preset to hate thst the fact a person doesn’t know they’re supposed to hate something is enough grounds to be shunned and hated on. Lol. It’s cool to see someone jump in and say:Hey homie, we don’t hate you we hate a person who is unrelated to the topic of the thread or the context of your comment but we do hate them enough to hate on you

            Edit: the parenthesis comment was meant to imply hating Trump monkeys is glaringly obvious. My comment was about lemmy etiquette and wasn’t about why or why not OP was getting downvoted.

            • Victor@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              23 days ago

              It’s gotta be some kind of sheep brain activation; crowd following behavior. It can be very annoying sometimes.

              Sometimes you’re just voicing a neutral opinion and it gets destroyed. And by neutral I mean it’s not controversial or anything, like racism, it could just be something not exactly everyone would agree with.

              I wish people would use the down vote as Reddit once intended it to mean: off topic and not contributing to the discussion, or perhaps rude, etc. Not “I don’t agree with this”. You should explain why you don’t agree with something, or up vote a comment that already explains it.