We’ve been anticipating it for years,1 and it’s finally happening. Google is finally killing uBlock Origin – with a note on their web store stating that the extension will soon no longer be available because it “doesn’t follow the best practices for Chrome extensions”.2 Daly Barnett. “Chrome Users Beware: Manifest V3 is Deceitful and Threatening.” EFF, December 9, 2021. ↩ Lawrence Abrams. “Google warns uBlock Origin and other extensions may be disabled soon.” Bleeping Computer, October 13, 2024. ↩

We’ve been anticipating it for years,1 and it’s finally happening. Google is finally killing uBlock Origin – with a note on their web store stating that the …

  • wellheh@lemmy.sdf.org
    2·
    29 days ago

    I’m not the person who you’re replying to (just another reader) but I felt misled after reading the clarification here in the forums that the source IS available for the adblock portion. I was under the impression (from your article) that the users could not inspect the code at all because of the same wording the person calls out. If they (and obviously others like myself) were misled by the writing, would it not be better just to fix it instead of arguing?

    • yoasif@fedia.ioOP
      12·
      29 days ago

      You really felt misled that it was harder to inspect? What makes you think I have the expertise to inspect this? I’m not even a user and I wouldn’t know where to start to find the ad blocker within that tarball. Would you?

      In any case, I clarified why it was harder to inspect - to me it felt obvious that being closed source made it harder to investigate. The fact that it is also shared source really has no bearing to the general observation, especially since we’re talking about a 2GB tarball where I don’t even know where to start. And I’m a pretty technical person.

      How would a user easily investigate this vs. an open source browser?