Skip to main content

World: Google, you are so smart, impartial, and benevolent, please write all our protocols and standards.

Google: Oh yeah, btw, we don’t think you should be able to protect yourself from being tracked on our browser.

Google to break uBlock Origin on Chromium.

#SurveillanceCapitalism #Google

@aral That is very, very bad 🙁 I literally can't imagine not using uBlock. The modern web is such a trashfire even *with* uBlock. I'm already on Firefox, but I would move to whatever browser is necessary to keep using uBlock.

Specifically uBlock Matrix 😛🙂


We're a Firefox with uBlock and uMatrix family.

Chrome will do themselves no favours doing this crap.

One of my local news sites, who I had been white listing for years because I wanted to support the site and use the advertising companies; just started blocking their site entirely if they see you're using an ad blocker! Oh well, I'll just read my local news someplace else. *(Turning off javascript prevents them of course from detecting uBlock, lets me read stories anyway)

@aral Wow. So Google is like: Thanks to Microsoft, just about every web browser is now based on our "open source" browser engine. Let's start dismantling all of the technologies that make it possible to avoid our survalience.

God Google makes me so mad!

@aral welp, guess I better go find a new non-Chromium browser now

god fucking damn it

@aral So much for "Don't be evil"

@aral Would this break Brave too since it's based on Chromium? Wouldn't this help grow Brave?

@aral That is a deal breaker for me.

@aral it almost looks legitimate but these constraints look arbitrary and I don't see technical reasoning behind them. Only "longer list is hard to traverse" I guess.
Funny thing is, all adblockers are declarative, even umatrix, from the client side. The browser just have to expose more stuff in the rules. I don't believe it cannot be efficient enough.

@aral I didn't install #Chrome when I re-installed #Linux on my laptop and I haven't missed that ugly thing one bit.


@aral god the comment cops in the bug thread you linked are such pieces of shit, clearly just trying to shut down opposition and move discussion to somewhere where nobody will see it

treating these developers of the most critical extensions with millions of users like shit because they're not willing to jump through the hoops that the comment cops are throwing in their way

ugh fuck google

@aral Well, nobody (including google) is obliged to host other people's opinions on their infrastructure. That's why we are using Mastodon :P

@aral I think it's important to follow up and also use a DNS perimeter blocker as well. It's a little more work, but it's worth it in the end because it works with devices that don't have ad-blocking capability on their own.

@nielsim @aral This will impact users on ChromeOS the most as they will not be able to switch browsers.

Despite the surveillance drawbacks, I have been recommending a Chromebook to utterly non-technical friends and family as a safe and virtually no-maintenance solution. Only thing I had to help with was install uBlock and tweak the blocklists for them. Alas, that solution will have to go out the window as well then.

@fschaap @nielsim And “despite the surveillance” was never “safe” ;)

On a Chromebook, you have far bigger worries than uBlock being blocked; every default service is designed to track and profile you.

@aral @fschaap True, true. Due to the complexity of Windows and its vulnerability for malware, virusses etc I choose for the less complex, easier to use (and also cheap) ChromeOS for my elderly mom. If there is a Linux as easy to use (perhaps Elementary OS?) I might switch her again. On the other hand, she only mails and uses Facebook, so privacy is not very much on her mind. ;)

@nielsim @aral I remember (10 years ago? during the first wave of netbooks) there was a company in the Netherlands selling completely locked down, centrally updated and maintained stripped down Linux PCs as "simple online devices for elderly people". You paid a subscription for integrated ISP and maintenance services and maybe some form of cloud storage (???). I really do think there is a market there for managed, privacy-friendly (thus open source/hardware) devices.

@aral uhm... let’s not?!

@aral And thats why Im pissed of that Firefox is going Chromium. Wow.

@muzkore Did I miss something major or did you mean Edge? :)

@aral I read it earlier ( few weeks ago) but cant find where I read it so scrap what I said. Apologies. If I find it, I will post it.

@fschaap @nielsim Totally agree that we need inexpensive, usable FLOSS devices. Minimal centralised management is fine (e.g., updates) but we should be designing as much as possible to be decentralised. Especially when it comes to the data.

@aral freedom of speech neither requires anyone to distribute your opinion, nor to hear it. It simply states you may not be punished for expressing it.

@Bercik899 I wasn’t aware of this. I’d love to learn how to use Facebook wisely. Do you have any tips?

I thought Facebook might have some impact on our human rights and democracy since they’re so large and powerful and stuff and know so much about us but I can see now that I was probably wrong about that too (thanks, sometimes it’s just hard for me to see these things on my own).

But Google’s bad, right?