Out of curiosity - have you tried any of the fully Mv3 compatible adblockers yet?

I’m not using any chrome browsers.

and… it just works. Still blocks ads as well as uBlock ever did.

so your benchmark is what you see? that’s far too little in my opinion. I want to block tracking more than ads. but Mv3 blockers don’t have the capabilities for that anymore. Mv3 is useless for that, google knows full well what they have done.

I can’t find them now, but I saw some articles saying that actually Mv3 offers some new tools that help achieve adblock goals easier than Mv2 allowed.

I highly doubt there’s any truth in that. Mv2 blockers can do whatever they want with any asset that gets loaded.
ok, no, there’s an exception. on chrome, Mv2 blockers could not filter traffic at browser startup (when previous tabs are automatically loaded), but that’s a chrome defect and this was not an issue on Firefox for a very long time (if ever)

some wiki article s from the developer:

• https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-Google-Chrome’s-“This-extension-may-soon-no-longer-be-supported”
• https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)

all up to date chromium browsers support Mv3.

if you meant Mv2, I doubt they will be able to keep up with the support for long. for now it’s very easy, because all the code is still there in the engine (recently you could still reenable it even in google chrome), but once chromium starts to refactor code, to make it simpler or more modern, those changes will not be done with kerping Mv2 support in mind, and fork devs will have an increasingly harder time to patch back support for it (safely!) as time goes on.

panic about the change from Mv2 to Mv3, and also a lot of misinformation. It’s correct that Mv3 adblocker are somewhat less effective (independent tests don’t show much difference, but in change offer a way better security).

what do those test measure? only what is visible, that is percentage of ads hidden? or does it take into account all the tracking shit regular ublock origin can thwart? I don’t buy that it’s “somewhat” less effective, and neither that it is more secure.

Mv2 will disappear sooner or later,

that’s not a problem with browsers like firefox, where the webrequest api was kept for Mv3.

Only problem exist for uBO,

there are plenty of other addons that make use of the webrequest API, they are just not so well known that half of the average desktop users know it. those are affected too.

due to it’s specific structure need to be practically remade from scratch to be compatible with Mv3,

that’s false. ublock simply cannot do lots of things with Mv3 that it can with Mv2. lite is lite for a reason, and not because in short time thats all he could put together.

then your quote just brings up google propaganda. restrictions of useful features are dressed up as “security”, just like google does it again but now with android with a different approach.

I was answering forking and how realistic it is. You’re changing the conversation into specifics around chrome.

I’m not changing anything. they are powerless. if google decides to change chrome for the worse in a more significant way than UI design, they cannot avoid accepting that change.

and what can they do against the manifest v3 migration? they cannot afford to keep maintaining the code for mv2 addons. it is an important topic for efficient content blocking.

its funny you bring up edge as an alternative. brave too has opt-out telemetry and other shenanigans.

the “supposedly” fascist guy: has an opinion wants to get rid of people not like him and who did not do any wrong

So when they do just fork it?

say the same for chrome, and think again if you mean it seriously.