Clearly, Google is serious about trying to oust ad blockers from its browser, or at least those extensions with fuller (V2) levels of functionality. One of the crucial twists with V3 is that it prevents the use of remotely hosted code – as a security measure – but this also means ad blockers can’t update their filter lists without going through Google’s review process. What does that mean? Way slower updates for said filters, which hampers the ability of the ad-blocking extension to keep up with the necessary changes to stay effective.

(This isn’t just about browsers, either, as the war on advert dodgers extends to YouTube, too, as we’ve seen in recent months).

At any rate, Google is playing with fire here somewhat – or Firefox, perhaps we should say – as this may be the shove some folks need to get them considering another of the best web browsers out there aside from Chrome. Mozilla, the maker of Firefox, has vowed to maintain support for V2 extensions, while introducing support for V3 alongside to give folks a choice (now there’s a radical idea).

  • Grangle1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    28 days ago

    A great privacy focused client for YouTube is FreeTube. Uses a native API or Invidious for playback, and you can download and share videos from it. Doesn’t give any identifying info to Google/YouTube and I’ve never once dealt with an ad. For mobile, Grayjay and NewPipe are similar apps.

    • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      The downloading on freetube is so bad as to be functionally broken, and based on what reading I did to try to get it good, it sounds like it’s gonna stay how it is forever.

      Basically it should be considered a lie to advertise freetube as having a working download function, even if it can technically do it. I wish it were better because it’s a neat little program for viewing without mucking up recommendations!