• linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 minutes ago

    Maybe we’re thinking about this wrong. Maybe we should all start running plugins that just load whatever ads that show up in the background hundreds of times without showing them to us. Every viewer is thousands upon thousands of impressions and click through rates become absolutely miserable. We can make the ads worthless or maybe even make them cost a significant amount of money to host.

  • kamen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Hoping that Vivaldi is going to hold off somehow - perhaps with their built-in ad blocker. And before you say “switch to Firefox”, I’ll say I’m not gonna, at least not until I see native mouse gestures implemented and working everywhere.

    • endofline@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      So you will need to have a backup browser to use only Google services and everything but Google search blocked in ff

  • figaro@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I’m currently using safari on a MacBook. Way more power efficient than chrome.

  • fluckx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    What could go wrong when you let an ad company dictate the browser standards/rules.

    I know we have Firefox and some forks like librewolf, but percentage wise it feels like a lost battle ( even if I am on Firefox ).

    If only people switched en masse to Firefox for the ad blocker. Wouldn’t that be something… One big collective FU to Google.

    Oh well. One can dream I guess.

    • SoGrumpy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The average Joe or Jane have no idea about ad blocking possibilities. They think ads are just the normal price you pay for surfing the web.

      I have even shown people the difference between their browsing experience and mine, and still they can’t be arsed to install an ad-blocker.

      But then again, they use tiktok and Instagram and all the other brain-numbing shit out there.

      • xavier666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        They think ads are just the normal price you pay for surfing part of the web

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I personally wouldn’t mind ads, if they weren’t too obtuse and/or malware ridden.

        I often turn off the adblocker for independent news sites, as theirs are less obtuse and are vetted better than just running an AI to detect nudity and/or slurs.

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 hours ago

          By all means bring back the banner and side ads that are just one banner and a couple of side ads. Breaking every paragraph up by two more ads is just a miserable experience. Have you tried to look up a recipe lately? Trying to find a recipe without an ad blocker pisses me off and off that I just give up on the recipe. Even though I know it’s on the page, between the 5,000 word essay trying to convey their nostalgia for the recipe and the 27 different ads that break that 5,000 word essay into 25 pages, I’d rather DDOS them then get the recipe from them.

      • OfficerBribe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        They think ads are just the normal price you pay for surfing the web.

        Which is great, offsets us who do use adblocks. It would be awful if majority of users would use adblocks.

    • LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There comes a point where one realizes that those around you cannot be relied upon to leverage solutions. Psychopaths get ahead because they’re willing to play dirty. So much of the world can be summed up as large swaths of population being induced to behave or think certain ways by psychopathic manipulators.

      • Gigasser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Data serves a great role in this. It’s a currency of control.

        Political, social, etc.

        Which is why privacy is so goddamn important.

  • Kokesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    21 hours ago

    And what? If someone can live with ads, they can stay. Otherwise anyone can install Firefox. I was all-in Google since the beginning of Gmail. And switching to Firefox was completely painless. Everything works the same, times of website incompatibility are long gone.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Issue is, a lot of people think the only browser in existence is “google”. I even had people looking me at funny for having an e-mail address ending in outlook.com rather than the usual gmail.com, and not because of some anti-MS sentiment, but because they thought e-mail was invented by Google, hance the name “gmail”.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        but because they thought e-mail was invented by Google, hance the name “gmail”.

        Life is scary.

    • Integrate777@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      16 hours ago

      What if websites decide that chrome users earn much more ad revenue and start forcing users to switch with those “This website only supports Chrome” error messages? What if this practice gets popular? I’m sure there are ways to get around it, but the average users who bothered switching to Firefox at all, will just conclude that anything except chrome has a bad browsing experience.

      • gwen@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        i never understood how those messages work? like how would using firefox ruin your website? or how they even detect firefox in the first place lmfao

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          They can in theory make tricks showing that you are using an ad blocker or a specific browser. Even if you set Chrome’s user agent in Firefox.

          I personally wouldn’t make such effort to use such websites then.

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            It’s all fun and games till they check for web USB support. They don’t need to actually use web USB but it’s a telltale sign that you’re not on Chrome.

            • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 hour ago

              A plugin could very easily have Firefox claim to support WebUSB, but return no devices or junk devices. Some of the anti-fingerprinting add-ons already do, iirc.

              • linearchaos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                38 minutes ago

                You get my point though, all they need to do is start supporting a feature that’s not easy to spoof.

                The real defense against this is for people to refuse to use Chrome. It’s not the tail that wags the dog, Make The Firefox user base so big the developers can’t ignore it. Basically IE all over again

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Then apple would whip out their giant throbbing cock and smack them with it because they want people using safari.

      • abbadon420@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I’ve been been a full time Firefox user for three years now. Haven’t experience a single problem like that. Haven’t really experienced any problem at all to be honest

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Unfortunately that has not been the case for me. Some sites for buying concert tickets don’t seem to like Firefox.

          I’ve had problems with several Microsoft sites we use internally for work ever since Edge went to Chrome.

          It’s not Firefox’s fault. Mozilla is abiding by web standards.

          • Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            ·
            19 hours ago

            If you find any websites that don’t work with firefox, you should report them to Mozilla. Firefox has a list of known bad websites, and has fixes for them, usually just a user agent override.

          • abbadon420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            20 hours ago

            I know. My experience with Chrome used to be good too. And we all know what’s up now.

            If Firefox fucks up, I’m fine with abandoning ship and moving on to the next thing. I’m not sure what that would be, but I’m sure I’ll figure that out once we get there.

              • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                There always is a next thing. It’s called Gemini and it has the problem of guys like Google fixed by having a non-extensible standard.

                I’m not joking, too - sometimes even wide masses become practical and just want “no bullshit” Internet publishing. Which Gemini delivers.

                But - would be interesting to have something like Gemini, but serverless.

              • abbadon420@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                18 hours ago

                That is concerning, but Internet Explorer used to be the only option too. Of course things are different now, but I have faith (for lack of anything else).

                • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  18 hours ago

                  That was for a different reason, though. That was Microsoft forcing you to use their software on something you owned. A website can say, “you have to use chrome to access our site,” and that’s not antitrust behavior on the part of Google.

            • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              19 hours ago

              Thats the thing.

              There is basically no alternative. Firefox exists on the mercy of google which is its biggest donor.

              There are very few attempts at a truly open source browser and neither can tackle the biggest problem, which is google pushing websites to adopt their standards, weaponizing ad income to guarantee compliance.

              Currently more then 80% of internet users have a chromium browser while websites creation for many entities is often outsourced out of lack of own IT knowledge. When firefox dies there will be no economic insensitive to build sites accessible by anything but chromium.

              Low key i wish this fires back into anarchy. I hate the corporate web and the only sites i like to see are those free of economic insensitive and all in on an ethical free digital world.

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          20 hours ago

          try changing your user-agent to mock chrome in Firefox while you visit YouTube.

          you should see a drastic difference in UX.

          • abbadon420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            19 hours ago

            I tried YouTube in Chrome on desktop (for about 2 minutes) and I didn’t notice any difference. I’ll just keep using NewPipe on my phone though.

            • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              19 hours ago

              it takes a whole 10 extra seconds for the interface to be usable for me in Firefox. but not when I spoof the user-agent as chrome.

              at least that’s how it was about 4 months ago.

          • abbadon420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            19 hours ago

            NewPipe exclusively. YouTube has been unusable long before I fully moved back to FireFox.

            • Fizz@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Smart choice. YouTube has been fucking Firefox users for a while now. Implementing stuff like a 5s wait to load videos.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      20 hours ago

      times of website incompatibility are long gone

      I wish I could agree with that. Hell, I have to use Chrome to download my phone bill from Virgin, and a couple of others don’t work.

      And don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming FF. It’s these lazy web developers that only target Chrome. I’m sure Safari users get the same shit experience.

      • Kokesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I’ve cried also in dev a lot in the past, but mostly don’t cry so much anymore

    • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      I really wish Firefox implemented easily switchable browser profiles. I am use Firefox mainly but for work I’ll still use edge so I can use this feature.

      • cschreib@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        I don’t know exactly what part of a separate profile you are after, so this may not be a 100% substitute, but I found container tabs in Firefox to work quite well (with some extensions to improve UX). It’s still the same profile though, so passwords and history are shared.

    • Mwa@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      some people dont want firefox bcs its kinda slower then chromium based tbh but it aint bad am not saying firefox is bad

  • nyan@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    We’ve known this was coming for a while now . . . but I suppose not everyone reads tech news.

  • rickdg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    I used to recommend uBlock as a no-brainer, now folks really need to change towards a better browser.

    • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Or get network wide blocking. Doesn’t prevent everything but it does prevent most ads. Makes the internet tolerable at least.

      • datendefekt@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Pihole is good for a private network, but you can forget it in a work setting, especially corporate networks.

      • qprimed@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        60
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        nah, lets get them switched away from chromium based spy machines.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                20 hours ago

                Wouldn’t a company VPN bypass all that even though you are using your own internet connection to connect to the outside world?

                • kill_dash_nine@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  Typically yes, assuming that the company VPN sets DNS to a set of company DNS servers. That is how my company’s works and several others I’ve worked for in the past.

                • kjaeselrek@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  18 hours ago

                  Maybe, I guess I don’t know enough to answer that. I do know that being on a company VPN isn’t always a requirement, though.

                  Either way, I’m not trying to argue for one approach to ad blocking over another as a one-size-fits-all solution, I just wanted to point out that it’s possible to have more control over the network than the computer in some cases.

          • qprimed@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            24 hours ago

            sadly, agreed. mindshare leads to adoption, tho - so putting Firefox in front of more faces is always a positive. after all, its how google dominates.

          • shininghero@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Depends on how lax the IT department is when it comes to random executables. I was able to move the firefox installer to the appdata root, and run a non-admin install to my user profile.

      • rickdg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Something like NextDNS as a no-brainer? It works but hits the limit of the free tier if people use it beyond their phone.

        • nfh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          21 hours ago

          PiHole and a TailScale exit node so you can use it for DNS whether or not you’re on your home network.

          • Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            20 hours ago

            Or a variation of this is TailScale configured to use NextDNS and a TS exit node. That’s for anyone who doesn’t want to maintain a PiHole. I’ve done both. Personal choice.

      • abbadon420@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I recommended pihole to my senior webdeveloper. She didn’t know about it and was blown away by the concept. She installed it immediately and is now living happily ad free.

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Think of it as an iceberg & Chrome users as a boat.

      Assuming no changes, this is landing in Chrome Canary now, so we’re watching the Chrome Canary boat hit the iceberg. The Chrome Beta boat is going to hit in a few weeks. Finally the Chrome Stable boat is scheduled to hit in mid November.

      Now Google may choose to hold back actually enabling this flag immediately. It wouldn’t be the first delay. But likely in mid November is when all the posts will start to appear of people asking where their ad blocker went.

      (Although I’m guessing it actually is delayed until after the holidays and in the new year, but that’s just wild speculation.)