Google Backtracks on Chrome Modifications That Would Have Crippled Ad Blockers (zdnet.com)
Google has changed its stance on upcoming Chrome Manifest V3 changes as benchmark shows they lied about performance hit. Catalin Cimpanu, writing for ZDNet: A study analyzing the performance of Chrome ad blocker extensions published on Friday has proven wrong claims made by Google developers last month, when a controversy broke out surrounding their decision to modify the Chrome browser in such a way that would have eventually killed off ad blockers and many other extensions. The study, carried out by the team behind the Ghostery ad blocker, found that ad blockers had sub-millisecond impact on Chrome's network requests that could hardly be called a performance hit. Hours after the Ghostery team published its study and benchmark results, the Chrome team backtracked on their planned modifications. At the root of Ghostery's benchmark into ad blocker performance stands Manifest V3, a new standard for developing Chrome extensions that Google announced last October.
The only commitment given by Google is to keep the observational API, but that's not the API adblockers care about! Adblockers need the blocking API, and there's no commitment to keep it by Google. Most likely Google will still remove it later, when the heat is off and people moved on to the next outrage.
Remember Doubleclick.com? The lovely people behind those "Punch the Monkey" animated ads a couple decades ago? Guess who bought them.
Remember when Google primarily had text ads? Not even pepperidge farms remembers, their products are pure garbage now. They cheaped them out so much in content without lowering the price, in pursuit of profit, that they're no longer worth buying.
Sadly, many people still make purchases without any consideration for whether they're getting anything for their money. The ad on heavy rotation right now on YouTube is for some shitty horror movie sequel. I see this ad because we use a fire tv stick, obviously I block such things on my PC. Some ads still sneak through occasionally, so if I actually want to watch something without interruption I YouTube-dl it first. But back to the ad. How much have they spent to ensure that I see their unskippable ad 20 times a day? That kind of entrainment might work on toddlers, but it's alienating to everyone else. Even horror movie devotees must get tired of it after the tenth time or so. I, for one, don't want to hear a woman screaming in terror right before I watch a comedy clip, or some daily show. That puts me off right quick.
Did an unskippable ad ever increase revenue?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Already been done. Get yourself some Brave Browser and enjoy.
Just because I want a independent browser does not mean I want one with associated shady micro transaction processor and cryptocurrency bolted on thank-you very much. I think I will stick with Firefox for a truly independent browser that at least tries to respect my privacy between ill-conceived attempts by their corporate overlords to shoot themselves in the foot.
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.