Sorry, but I just can’t take this person seriously:
“If I go to court, I win. There is no other outcome. Google has lost, because they cheated intentionally. And this is already a CRIMINAL‑LAW category, committed against millions of users.”
Like, part of me understands being frustrated, but they are so incredibly ignorant, arrogant and annoying.
Yep, many piracy advocates are suddenly appalled by piracy. Truth is I don’t think many of them ever actually formed a real opinion.
I agree. Most actual technical professionals agree. AI has long existed in some form before tech bros in silicon valley turned it into a SaaS. It’s just the fediverse is filled with a bunch of anarchists obsessed with Loli anime, and to them chaos and a return to medieval age is their best chance of living out their child loving fantasies.
The US government is finally learning it’s capitalist system can’t compete with China in terms of AI. Someone finally got through to them capitalism will cause America to lose the AI race. Too little too late. Why they still call everyone communist and socialist, turns out they’re doing the same except it’s corporations that are allowed to be socialists and communists.
Don’t underestimate the cult. Its users parrot corporate PR scripts verbatim. “Yes we love the walled garden and developer fees. It ensures Apple is doing everything it can to keep me safe.”
KeePass honestly sucks for the most part. I love local vault and hope something better comes along, but KeePass UI constantly gives me issues. I’ve tried KeePassXC and that is what I use still, but being limited to opening a single entry at a time. Additional properties are a pain. It’s author not even understanding the need for using the desktop session for the CLI (requires passing password via the terminal to or having separate key file). KeeShare not working on Android. So many things that Bitwarden/Vaultwarden solves much better and quicker. Sad that Bitwarden/Vaultwarden didn’t make a local SQLite client that doesn’t rely on a server.
Clearly you’re the one struggling with coping.here
No, they’re intrinsically less secure.
GrapheneOS disagrees with you:
https://grapheneos.org/usage#web-browsing
I agree however that Chromium has some issues still. I have personally managed to crash my browser when calling the Mojo APIs via JavaScript. However, it wasn’t related to security. As GrapheneOS notes, no other browser engine provides the same levels of sandboxing. Recognizing the effectiveness of Chrome’s sandbox, Microsoft began evolving Windows kernel access control to formalize and harden these techniques at the OS level. The upcoming Windows Updates implements this in its new ProcessContainer support.
Blaming process isolation and IPC for memory bugs like Use-After-Free and dangling pointers fundamentally confuses language-level C++ problems with OS containment architecture. Memory corruption exists across all C++ engines (Gecko, WebKit, Blink); isolation is what prevents those bugs from compromising the host OS.
Handing third-party extensions blanket permissions to inspect and modify live plaintext traffic across all tabs creates a massive MITM exfiltration surface. Moving rule matching to declarativeNetRequest enforces least privilege by executing filters in the native engine without exposing sensitive network payloads to extension code.
webRequestBlocking is not deleted in MV3. The synchronous blocking engine still exists in Chromium. If an extension is installed via local policy or the Windows Registry (ExtensionInstallForcelist), full programmatic webRequestBlocking executes in Manifest V3 just as it did in MV2.
You can’t claim to be “semi-technical” while simultaneously refusing to look at technical facts and dismissing platform mechanics as “empty yapping.” How a browser engine executes extensions is inherently technical. Claiming you want facts while ignoring the architecture just means you’d rather stick with an emotional narrative than understand how the software actually works.
Chrome MV2 never supported some features people claim were lost: Features like in-flight response body rewriting and pre-socket IP filtering were Firefox-exclusive APIs (filterResponseData). Chrome MV2 never had them, so MV3 did not take them away.
webRequestBlocking is not dead in MV3. Google did not delete the synchronous blocking engine from Chromium. It requires installing via policy now. If an extension is provisioned via local policy, full programmatic webRequestBlocking runs in MV3 just as it did in MV2.
Everyday ad blocking works normally. For standard Web Store installs, uBlock Origin Lite compiles the standard filter lists (EasyList, EasyPrivacy, uBO filters) into native browser rules. Banners, trackers, and video ads are blocked.
The original claim was that “Chrome users don’t know what an ad-free web looks like.” That is provably false. If you want to understand the issue as a “semi-technical” user, you have to separate actual browser engine mechanics from internet hyperbole.
This is extremely funny that you’re trying to insult me, based on your feelings and not facts.
My only participation in this thread was that UBO Lite creator disagrees with you, which he publicly stated, but you felt… Offended? (No idea) - and decided to insult me rather than to deal with facts.
There is a word for people like you.
Troll.
Citing gorhill’s disclaimer that uBOL isn’t a 1:1 clone of uBO doesn’t prove Chrome is “ad-infested”—it conflates advanced power-user filtering with everyday ad blocking. Many limitation were Firefox-exclusive APIs that Chrome MV2 never supported in the first place.
Under the hood, standard filter lists compile directly into native C++ evaluation via declarativeNetRequest, while cosmetic element hiding and anti-adblock defusers run through the scripting and userScripts APIs. Furthermore, synchronous webRequestBlocking is still built into the Chromium engine for policy installs. Pointing out the architectural reality of how these APIs actually execute isn’t trolling; it’s addressing technical mechanics rather than hyperbole.
Some of those limitations were never supported in Chrome to begin with. MV3 still supports webRequestBlocking at the engine level but it is gated behind enterprise policy (ExtensionInstallForcelist in the Windows Registry, macOS MDM, or Linux managed policy JSON). If an extension with webRequestBlocking is installed via policy, it restores programmatic interception.
First, I don’t care if they agree with me or not. It is an open source project. They said from they never intended to try to make a 1:1 extension with UBO. They clearly lay out the positives of MV3 as well, and the scripts permission feature is a relatively new addition. You or anyone can contribute or fork it you want to add something.
I have spent enough time working on MV3 to know Chromium has solved a lot of the challenges. If you want to have a technical discussion about the APIs and differences or how you might do something with MV3, then let’s have the discussion. I never tried to claim MV3 is perfect.
I just have little patience for essentially non-technical cultists who go around spreading misinformation while acting like they know way more than they do. Prove it then… 99% of people like you never actually want to have a real technical discussion, because you spread your opinions based on feelings and not facts.
Not really. UBlock Origin Lite works really well. They even added content scripts recently. From a technical perspective MV3 offers more security by default.
Not true. UBlock Origin Lite works just fine. They even recently added the ability to use content scripts so there is almost no difference between it and the original UBlock. Manifest 3 has had and still has some challenges, but you’re being so hyperbolic that I can’t take anything people like you say seriously. Might as well say… “I hate Chrome so much that I’ll make up random lies to prove how bad it is!”
Make city councilmembers scared again
In my blue state district, Democrats voted for the genocidal incumbent who receives big money from AIPAC and that voted to fund ICE. It’s amazing how the media can shift everyone’s attention to a very small handful of elections, and then also use those elections to make people think progressives are winning big while also labeling them all DSA. You have much to learn my friend about the games being played and that will be played.
I live in a so-called “progressive” blue state. Multiple red states have better privacy laws similar to California’s CCPA, more consumer protections, etc. Anyone can call themselves a progressive and that word in itself means almost nothing… heck, they give countless handouts here to Amazon and Microsoft, and a large number of people that claim to be progressives work for those same companies while living in gentrified neighborhoods where they make being homeless essentially illegal now.
I can’t even read a lot of news lately cause first thing I’m presented with is a full screen notice demanding I click “agree” to some obscure legal agreement.
At what point do we stop voting for the people putting up the flock cameras, and start voting for those that have comprehensive plans to address real issues?
Ah yea, I remember what it was like to see all those “we stand with Ukraine banners,” and the weird ones about antisemitism, but almost never the anti-apartheid and anti-genocide ones against actual Nazis. Yet here is another Ed Sheeran supposedly fighting the Nazis by being silent against the Nazis. Wonder what else you’ll find about him.