this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
423 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

34894 readers
928 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0x1C3B00DA@fedia.io 99 points 7 months ago (4 children)

It's funny how this comes after Chrome's switch to Manifest V3, which makes ad blocking not possible on Chrome and was purely for security reasons and not for disabling ad blockers. Now that Chrome users can't block ads on the first-party site, they're going after third-party clients. Such coincidental timing.

[–] lightnegative@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago

"security reasons" is the classic cop-out for making users lives more miserable.

Like what are you gonna do, argue that you don't care about security?

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Has that actually rolled out yet? I thought it was only announced and planned for late this year.

[–] Dymonika@beehaw.org -4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

was purely for security reasons and not for disabling ad blockers.

I had not heard of Manifest v3 and actually can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. I guess you are.

[–] macaroni1556@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They're not being sarcastic, they are repeating Google's (bs) justification

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

They are being sarcastic, with the emphasis on "purely", while saying Google's justification. It's exactly to point out it's bs.

[–] 0x1C3B00DA@fedia.io 5 points 7 months ago

yes exactly what sneezycat said. I was being sarcastic and pointing out that Manifest V3 was always a crackdown on ad blocking and nothing else.

[–] macaroni1556@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Sure, I guess I maintain its that's not what sarcasm is but we do agree on the point

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

If it is not sarcasm then the justification is not bs. And OP agrees it is sarcasm.