this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
320 points (99.7% liked)

Firefox

20351 readers
169 users here now

/c/firefox

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox.

Rules

1. Adhere to the instance rules

2. Be kind to one another

3. Communicate in a civil manner

Reporting

If you would like to bring an issue to the moderators attention, please use the "Create Report" feature on the offending comment or post and it will be reviewed as time allows.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
k_o_t@lemmy.ml
golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
320
Google Chrome’s ad-blocking plan could be a privacy disaster | TechRadar (www.techradar.com)
submitted 2 years ago by furycd001@lemmy.ml to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Chrome’s ad-blocking plan could be a privacy disaster – and a reason to switch to Firefox....

all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mojo@lemm.ee 81 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Name a more iconic duo then Google and privacy disasters

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 74 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Purged by creator

[–] Grebgreb@hexbear.net 18 points 2 years ago

google and dead projects

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

YouTube and supporting content creators.

[–] Killercat103@infosec.pub 2 points 2 years ago

The YouTuber would be better of if you donated 1 cent instead of watching an ad.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 57 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This one and the Tux one have been getting a lot of use lately thanks to Chrome and Win11.

[–] TangledHyphae@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

I have embraced firefox as my primary browser now. I have a few remaining cookies on chrome that I have to re-establish in FF, and then I can't even imagine any reason I'd even need to use chrome again other than some obscure internal web app that I can spin up on a throwaway virtual machine.

[–] ridethisbike@lemmy.world 52 points 2 years ago (2 children)

TL;DR... Google is limiting how many rules that extensions can have. Ad blockers need ~300k to run effectively, Google will limit them to 30k in Chrome citing "privacy and a light weight user experience" as the reason. This change will effectively make ad blockers in chrome all but useless. The solution will likely mean switching to more privacy focused browsers, such as Firefox.

[–] SaintWacko@midwest.social 39 points 2 years ago

Brb, installing ad blocker part 1 through 10

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

So you just need to to some regex magic to reduce the amount of rules?

[–] Yanqui_UXO@hexbear.net 32 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Firofox pls chomsky-yes-honey

[–] bloup@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

“Could” as if there’s a possibility it will respect your privacy lmfao

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Google... could be a privacy disaster

astronaut-2 astronaut-1

[–] Deregon@jlai.lu 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Google [...] a privacy disaster

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 1 points 2 years ago

Google [...] a privacy disaster

Googles "piracy disaster"

Gets pinged for targeted marketing and also flagged for IP criminal law prosecution capitalist-laugh

[–] mawkishdave@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

With that bs I have been changing everything away from Google. It takes a little work but I am looking the results so far.

[–] MiltownClowns@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It made me install grapheneOS and I actually like my phone again.

[–] MajorHavoc@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Same here. I daresay my phone is now finally again as nice as in the early days of smart phones.

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 years ago

Stop using Chrome then.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 10 points 2 years ago

Google *’s * plan could be a privacy disaster.

I thought it might read better not being so unnecessarily specific.