#Ad Blocker Google Chrome

[wasabikitcat]

community college is so funny because half of the teachers are like "For this class you need to use lockdown browser for all quizzes and tests. You need to buy this 70 dollar textbook, and all papers turned in must be in APA format with a title page even if they're only 500 words long. I will not accept late assignments. Also you have a minimum of 4 assignments a week." and the other half are like "you don't need proctoring for the final exam I trust you. here's a download link to a pirated copy of the textbook. as long as your writing is coherent and demonstrates an understanding of the material I literally could not care less what format you use. I can't figure out how canvas works so I'm not giving you due dates, just make sure it's turned in before the grading period ends. your only weekly assignment is a forum post with a minimum of 100 words."

[fluttershywheresheshouldntbe]

fluttershy hanging out with Winston Overwatch

SPIN!!

[izzyspussy]

explain to me why there were NINE ads on one 40 minute youtube video

[merelygifted]

If Google really wants more secure extensions, why not just police the store better?

Ron Amadeo    -  9/30/2022, 12:55 PM

Google's journey toward Chrome's "Manifest V3" has been happening for four years now, and if the company's new timeline holds up, we'll all be forced to switch to it in year 5. "Manifest V3" is the rather unintuitive name for the next version of Chrome's extension platform. The update is controversial because it makes ad blockers less effective under the guise of protecting privacy and security, and Google just so happens to be the world's largest advertising company.

Google's latest blog post details the new timeline for the transition to Manifest V3, which involves ending support for older extensions running on Manifest V2 and forcing everyone onto the new platform. Starting in January 2023 with Chrome version 112, Google "may run experiments to turn off support for Manifest V2 extensions in Canary, Dev, and Beta channels." Starting in June 2023 and Chrome 115, Google "may run experiments to turn off support for Manifest V2 extensions in all channels, including stable channel." Also starting in June, the Chrome Web Store will stop accepting Manifest V2 extensions, and they'll be hidden from view. In January 2024, Manifest V2 extensions will be removed from the store entirely.

Google says Manifest V3 is "one of the most significant shifts in the extensions platform since it launched a decade ago." The company claims that the more limited platform is meant to bring "enhancements in security, privacy, and performance." Privacy groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) dispute this description and say that if Google really cared about the security of the extension store, it could just police the store more actively using actual humans instead of limiting the capabilities of all extensions.  ...

[ainyan]

Google is actively blocking Captcha on Firefox

Firefox users have noticed that captchas - both the picture kind and the click the box kind - are not resolving on Firefox. Tests on Chromium based browsers show that it works perfectly fine on them. It is also known that Chrome will be disabling all ad-blockers in June when it moves to Manifest v3, which will greatly limit what extensions can do.

If you use Firefox, there is an extension called User-Agent Switcher and it allows you to change your browser's UA to Chrome. This will allow you to bypass reCaptcha/Captcha blocks set up by Google and make them function properly.

It could be a code snafu on Google's part - but given how predatory they have been acting lately, I'm going to guess not. Don't get locked out of your websites or feel forced to use Chrome again just to browse.

UPDATE: This has been fixed as of 5/4/2024 and no longer affects Firefox. It was a bug in the most recent update of the Captcha code. Hopefully it won't happen again!

[zibaldone-di-pensieri]

Any good adblocker as chrome extensions working for real?

[tevruden]

You Have until June To Dump Chrome

Google has announced that starting in June 2024, ad blockers such as uBlock Origin will be disabled in Chrome 127 and later with the rollout of Manifest V3 (#Mv3).

Firefox is RIGHT there

[questionablespecies]

When Google forces me to switch to Firefox because of that whatever June 2024 blocking of ad blockers thing, then I'll switch for good (if it happens).

Otherwise.... I have literally tried to switch to Firefox before in the past but 😐 I can't even do a clean escape because it literally does not have an extension that my friends and I use to watch movies together (so I would literally have to go back and forth with chrome anyway).

Plus, I don't like change. Doesn't matter how "simple" it is.

So once Google actually forces me out then I'll go.

[needtricks-blog]

Preventing Google Chrome's Targeted Ads from Accessing Your Browser History

Targeted advertising has become a ubiquitous part of our online experience. When you use a browser like Google Chrome, it collects data from your browsing history to display personalized ads. While this can be convenient at times, it often raises concerns about privacy and the security of your personal information (Google Chrome’s Targeted Ads). In this comprehensive guide, we will explore how to…

[popguard]

Pop Up Blocker Chrome Extension

It is the Pop Up Blocker Chrome Extension. Websites earn money from ads, but these ads are frustrating when any ad pops up whilst surfing on the web. PopGuard Chrome Extension assists you in blocking unwanted ads and popups.

[traegorn]

Want to keep using Ad Blockers? Stop Using Chrome, Switch to Firefox.

So with the rollout of Manifest V3, Google Chrome is pretty much crippling all ad blockers on Chrome. Effectively, ad blockers can no longer update their lists without fully updating their plugins. It's pretty shitty.

And you may be asking yourself -- what can I do? The answer is simple:

Switch to Firefox. Now.

Now I've been a Firefox evangelist for a long time, I know, but it's a free, open source browser made by a nonprofit org. It's literally the most ethically developed any software could possibly be. It's on every major desktop platform, and it's just... good.

Why would you use a browser made by a corporation that literally removed "Don't be evil" from their mission instead of this? I know that, like, a long ass time ago Chrome was faster, but that's not remotely true anymore. Heck, on Mac Chrome eats way more RAM than Firefox. It's ridiculous.

That's not even mentioning the fact that the amount of Chromium engine browsers out there is kind of ruining the web. Mozilla has their own rendering engine built on open web standards, and diversity in rendering engines helps everyone.

So yeah. If you're using a computer, go get Firefox. They have an Android version too. (They sorta have an iOS app -- but that uses Webkit because of Apple's limitations on third party browser engines -- but it will let you access your sync'd Firefox passwords).

Make your life better.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Don’t Be Evil

Tonight (November 22), I'll be joined by Vass Bednar at the Toronto Metro Reference Library for a talk about my new novel, The Lost Cause, a preapocalyptic tale of hope in the climate emergency.

My latest Locus Magazine column is "Don't Be Evil," a consideration of the forces that led to the Great Enshittening, the dizzying, rapid transformation of formerly useful services went from indispensable to unusable to actively harmful:

https://locusmag.com/2023/11/commentary-by-cory-doctorow-dont-be-evil/

While some services have fallen harder and/or faster, they're all falling. When a whole cohort of services all turn sour in the same way, at the same time, it's obvious that something is happening systemically.

After all, these companies are still being led by the same people. The leaders who presided over a period in which these companies made good and useful services are also presiding over these services' decay. What factors are leading to a pandemic of rapid-onset enshittification?

Recall that enshittification is a three-stage process: first surpluses are allocated to users until they are locked in. Then they are withdrawn and given to business-customers until they are locked in. Then all the value is harvested for the company's shareholders, leaving just enough residual value in the service to keep both end-users and business-customers glued to the platform.

We can think of each step in that enshittification process as the outcome of an argument. At some product planning meeting, one person will propose doing something to materially worsen the service to the company's advantage, and at the expense of end-users or business-customers.

Think of Youtube's decay. Over the past year, Google has:

Dramatically increased the cost of ad-free Youtube subscriptions;

Dramatically increased the number of ads shown to non-subscribers;

Dramatically decreased the amount of money paid to Youtube creators;

Added aggressive anti-adblock;

Then, this week, Google started adding a five-second blanking interval for non-Chrome users who have adblockers installed:

https://www.404media.co/youtube-says-new-5-second-video-load-delay-is-supposed-to-punish-ad-blockers-not-firefox-users/

These all smack of Jenga blocks that different product managers are removing in pursuit of their "key performance indicators" (KPIs):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/28/microincentives-and-enshittification/

We can think of each of these steps as the outcome of an argument. Someone proposes a Youtube subscription price-hike, and other internal stakeholders object. These objections fall into two categories:

We shouldn't do this because it will make the product worse; and/or

We shouldn't do this because it will reduce the company's earnings.

Lots of googlers sincerely care about product quality. People like doing a good job, and they take pride in making good things. Many have sacrificed something that mattered in the service of making the product better. It's bad enough to miss your kid's school play so you can meet a work deadline – but imagine making that sacrifice and then having the excellent work you put in deliberately degraded.

I have been around Google's orbit since its early days, going to the odd company Christmas party in the early 2000s and giving talks at Google offices in cities all over the world. I've known hundreds of skilled googlers who passionately cared about making the best products they could.

For most of Google's history, those googlers won the argument. But they didn't do so merely by appealing to their colleagues' professional pride in a job well-done. For most of Google's history, the winning argument was a combination of "doing this bad thing would make me sad," and "doing this bad thing will make Google poorer."

Companies are disciplined by three forces:

Competition (the fear of losing business to a rival);

Regulation (the fear of legal penalties that would exceed the expected profits from a given course of action);

Self-help (the fear that customers or users will change their behavior, say, by installing an ad-blocker).

The ability of googlers to win enshittification arguments by appealing to the company's bottom line was a function of one or more of these three disciplining factors. The weakening of each of these factors is the reason that every tech company is sliding into enshittification at once.

For example, when Google contemplates raising the price of a Youtube subscription, the dissent might say, "Well, this will reduce viewership and might shift viewers to rivals like Tiktok" (competition). But the price-hiking side can counter, "No, because we have a giant archive, we control 90% of searches, we are embedded in the workflow of vloggers and other creators who automatically stream and archive to Youtube, and Youtube comes pre-installed on every Android device." Even if the company leaks a few viewers to Tiktok, it will still make more money in aggregate. Prices go up.

When Google contemplates increasing the number of ads shown to nonsubscribers, the dissent might say, "This will incentivize more users to install ad-blockers, and then we'll see no ad-revenue from them." The pro-ad side can counter, "No, because most Youtube viewing is in-app, and reverse-engineering the Youtube app to add an ad-blocker is a felony under Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. As to non-app viewers: we control the majority of browser installations and have Chrome progressively less hospitable to ad-blocking."

When Google contemplates adding anti-adblock to its web viewers, the dissent might say, "Processing users' data in order to ad-block them will violate Europe's GDPR." The anti-adblock side can counter, "But we maintain the fiction that our EU corporate headquarters is in the corporate crime-haven of Ireland, where the privacy regulator systematically underenforces the GDPR. We can expect a very long tenure of anti-adblock before we are investigated, and we might win the investigation. Even if we are punished, the expected fine is less than the additional ad-revenue we stand to make."

When Google contemplates stealing performers' wages through opaque reshufflings of its revenue-sharing system, the dissent might say, "Our best performers have options, they can go to Twitch or Tiktok." To which the pro-wage-theft side can counter, "But they have no way of taking their viewers with them. There's no way for them to offer their viewers on Youtube a tool that alerts them whenever they post a new video to a rival platform. Their archives are on Youtube, and if they move them to another platform, there's no way redirect users searching for those videos to their new homes. What's more, any attempt to unilaterally extract their users' contact info, or redirect searchers or create a multiplatform client, violates some mix of our terms of service, our rights under DMCA 1201, etc."

It's not just Google. For every giant platform, the threats of competition, regulation and self-help have been in steady decline for years, as acquisitions, underenforcement of privacy/labor/consumer law, and an increase in IP protection for incumbents have all mounted:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

When internal factions at tech companies argue about whether to make their services worse, there's a heavy weight tilting the scales towards enshittification. The lack of competition, an increase in switching costs for users and business-customers, and broad powers to prevent users from modifying the service for themselves all mean that even when a product gets worse, profits can still go up.

This is the culprit: monopoly, and its handmaiden, regulatory capture. That's why today's antimonopoly movement – and the cases against all the tech giants – are so important. The old, good internet was built by flawed tech companies whose internal ranks included the same amoral enshittifiers who are gobbling up the platforms' seed corn today. The thing that stood in their way before wasn't merely the moral character of colleagues who shrank away from these cynical maneuvers: it was the economic penalties that befell those who enshittified too rashly.

Incentives matter. Money talks and bullshit walks. Enshittification isn't due to the moral failings of individuals in tech companies. It's possible to have a good internet run by flawed people. But to get that new, good internet, we have to support technologists of good will and character by terrorizing their venal and cynical colleagues by hitting them where they live: in their paychecks.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/22/who-wins-the-argument/#corporations-are-people-my-friend

[merelygifted]

A new report claims that Chrome has the most vulnerabilities of any web browser

Are you a big fan of Google Chrome? You might want to rethink that loyalty, because it turns out Google’s browser may actually be putting your security at risk. A new report claims that Google’s browser is currently the most vulnerable one on the market — with 303 individual security flaws and a cumulative total of 3,159.

This report comes from Atlas VPN (via Apple Insider (opens in new tab)), using data from the VuIDB vulnerability database, and covers the periods of January 1 to October 5 of 2022. But not only does the data claim Google has the most vulnerabilities, both currently and of cumulatively, it’s also the only major browser with vulnerabilities that were discovered in October 2022.

Mozilla Firefox has reportedly picked up 117 vulnerabilities so far, for an all-time total of 2,361, while 103 have been discovered in Microsoft Edge. While Edge’s vulnerability count is low, it’s also noted as being 61% higher than 2021. The browser has also only had 806 documented vulnerabilities since it was released, making the sudden increase particularly worrying.

Meanwhile, Apple’s Safari browser has 26 documented vulnerabilities this year, with an all-time total of 1,139 — which was noted as “some of the lowest vulnerability in years.” That said Opera has logged in zero vulnerabilities so far this year, with only 344 total documented issues.

It’s not clear whether this is because Opera is more secure than its rivals, or if its popularity is so small nobody’s looking for issues. According to StatCounter (opens in new tab), Opera had 2.25% of the browser market share in September 2022. That’s even less than Samsung Internet, which had 2.75% in the same period.  ...

...  It’s worth mentioning that Chrome, Edge and Opera are all Chromium-based browsers, and would presumably share some of the same issues. That makes Opera’s zero vulnerability count all the more suspicious. Though it doesn’t discount the possibility that the Opera’s team is just really good at what they do.  ...

...  Apple’s low vulnerability count makes Google’s look pretty poor by comparison. Especially since vulnerabilities were discovered so recently. With that in mind it might be enough to make you pull the trigger and switch to a different browser.

Just be aware that these counts are not a definitive list. It relies on people actually looking for, and finding vulnerabilities in the first place and doesn’t include any security holes that are hiding away. No matter which browser you use, it’s important to make a habit of keeping it updated; that way problems can be fixed as they’re found.

[lawofcollage]

PSA: Telling Google AI To Go Fuck Itself

So we all know Google is shoving AI down our throats, recently, right? And we didn't ask

On top of the fact that generative AI is SUPER fucking bad for the environment (1) (2) (3)(4)

There's no official way to turn off Google's AI shit, BUT if you use Ublock to block ads (and it's generally recommended by the FBI you should use an ad blocker in this day and age) THERE IS

This reddit post from their subreddit explains the filter you need to use to stop seeing this shit at the very least

go forth and tell google ai to fuck off

P.S. Also, Ublock is capable of blocking youtube ads. You're welcome :)

(also, while you're at it, you should take the time to consider switching browsers. i'm personally a fan of firefox and have been using it for well over a decade at this point as i've never been much of a chrome person)

[maypop-the-dragon]

PSA: Free Software

Reading this may really save your time, privacy, and money! Reblog or share to spread awareness!

Folks often use software that’s expensive and sometimes even inferior because they don’t know there are alternatives. So to those unfamiliar: basically, free and open-source (FOSS) or "libre" software is free to use and anyone can access the original code to make their own version or work on fixing problems.

That does not mean anyone can randomly add a virus and give it to everyone—any respectable libre project has checks in place to make sure changes to the official version are good! Libre software is typically developed by communities who really care about the quality of the software as a goal in itself.

There are libre alternatives to many well-known programs that do everything an average user needs (find out more under the cut!) for free with no DRM, license keys, or subscriptions.

Using libre software when possible is an easy way to fight against and free yourself from corporate greed while actually being more convenient in many cases! If you need an app to do something, perhaps try searching online for things like:

foss [whatever it is]

libre [whatever it is]

open source [whatever it is]

Feel free to recommend more libre software in the tags, replies, comments, or whatever you freaks like to do!

Some Libre Software I Personally Enjoy…

LibreOffice

LibreOffice is an office suite, much like Microsoft Office. It includes equivalents for apps like Word, Excel, and Powerpoint, which can view and edit files created for those apps.

I can't say I've used it much myself yet. I do not personally like using office software except when I have to for school.

OpenShot

OpenShot Video Editor is, as the name suggests, a video editing program. It has industry-standard features like splicing, layering, transitions, and greenscreen.

I've only made one video with it so far, but I'm already very happy with it. I had already paid for a video editor (Cyberlink PowerDirector Pro), but I needed to reinstall it and I didn't remember how. Out of desperation, I searched up "FOSS video editor" and I'm so glad I did. There's no launcher, there's no promotion of other apps and asset packs—it's just a video editor with a normal installer.

GIMP

GNU Image Manipulation Program is an image editor, much like Photoshop. Originally created for Linux but also available for Windows and MacOS, it provides plenty of functionality for editing images. It is a bit unintuitive to learn at first, though.

I've used it to create and modify images for years, including logos, really bad traceover art, and Minecraft textures. It doesn't have certain advanced tech like AI paint-in, but it has served my purposes well and it might just work for yours!

(Be sure to go to Windows > Dockable Dialogs > Colors. I have no idea why that's not enabled by default.)

Audacity

Audacity is an audio editing program. It can record, load, splice, and layer audio files and apply effects to them.

Audacity is another program I've used for a long time. It is not designed to compose music, but it is great for podcasts, simple edits, and loading legacy MS Paint to hear cool noises.

7-Zip

7-Zip is a file manager and archive tool. It supports many archive types including ZIP, RAR, TAR, and its own format, 7Z. It can view and modify the contents of archives, encrypt and decrypt archives, and all that good stuff.

Personally, I use 7-Zip to look inside JAR files for Minecraft reasons. I must admit that its UI is ugly.

Firefox

Firefox is an internet browser, much like Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, or Safari. While browsers are free, many of them include tracking or other anti-consumer practices. For example, Google plans to release an update to Chromium (the base that most browsers are built from these days) that makes ad blockers less effective by removing the APIs they currently rely on.

Aside from fighting monopolies, benefits include: support for animated themes (the one in the picture is Purple Night Theme), good ad blockers forever, an (albeit hidden) compact UI option (available on about:config), and a cute fox icon.

uBlock Origin

As far as I know, uBlock Origin is one of the best ad blockers there is.

I was on a sketchy website with my brother, and he was using Opera GX's ad blocker. Much of the time when he clicked on anything, it would take us to a random sponsored page. I suggested that he try uBlock Origin, and with uBlock Origin, that didn't happen anymore.

Linux

Linux is a kernel, but the term is often used to refer to operating systems (much like Windows or MacOS) built on it. There are many different Linux-based operating systems (or "distros") to choose from, but apps made for Linux usually work on most popular distros. You can also use many normally Windows-only apps on Linux through compatibility layers like WINE.

I don't have all four of these, so the images are from Wikipedia. I tried to show a variety of Linux distros made for different kinds of users.

If you want to replace your operating system, I recommend being very careful because you can end up breaking things. Many computer manufacturers don't care about supporting Linux, meaning that things may not work (Nvidia graphic cards notoriously have issues on Linux, for example).

Personally, I tried installing Pop!_OS on a laptop, and the sound output mysteriously doesn't work. I may try switching to Arch Linux, since it is extremely customizable and I might be able to experiment until I find a configuration where the audio works.

Many Linux distros offer "Live USB" functionality, which works as both a demo and an installer. You should thoroughly test your distro on a Live USB session before you actually install it to be absolutely sure that everything works. Even if it seems fine, you should probably look into dual-booting with your existing operating system, just in case you need it for some reason.

Happy computering!