Re: Chrome's next update will kill adblockers

Nuno Silva <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2026-06-20, Retrograde wrote:
> 
>> From the «Raspberry Pi still works» department:
>> Feed: Slashdot
>> Title: Google Chrome's Next Update Will Mark the End of Popular Ad
>> Blockers
>> Author: BeauHD
>> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2026 21:00:00 +0000
>> Link:
>> https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/06/15/205219/google-chromes-next-update-will-mark-the-end-of-popular-ad-blockers?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed
>>
>> Google is removing Chrome's last remaining workarounds for Manifest V2
>> extensions, effectively ending support for legacy ad blockers such as
>> the original uBlock Origin. 9to5Google reports: CyberNews points out a
>> Chromium commit that removes support for the
>> "kExtensionManifestV2Disabled" flag, which is referred to as "dead code"
>> seeing as Chrome no longer supports Manifest V2 extensions. This removal
>> acts as the final stop for many Manifest V2-based ad blocker extensions
>> that were still in use today -- the flag was effectively a loophole to
>> continue using these extensions. A Googler on the commit explains: "MV2
>> extensions are no longer allowed in any supported version of Chrome, and
>> we are removing support for them and the associated functionality. We
>> won't be able to provide / maintain this functionality indefinitely due
>> to the complexity and tech debt, as well as the security risks it
>> entails (we've actually found a number of bugs that are specific to MV2
>> lately). Of course, other browsers can continue supporting these if they
>> so desire." This will also impact other Chromium-based browsers, though
>> the comment notes that "other browsers can continue supporting these if
>> they so desire." Neowin points out that Microsoft Edge and Opera are
>> likely to follow suit. Chrome 150, set to be released later this month,
>> will remove this flag, while other leftover bits of Manifest V2 will be
>> removed in the v151 release.
> 
> Removing a feature from Chromium because it's not intended to be
> supported in Chrome, now that's brilliant :-P

An advertising company (remember, modern Google is the same company 
that was once known as "Doubleclick") that makes a browser is cutting 
of the ability of "browser makers" to provide effective ad blockers?  
Hmm, I wonder /why/ they would do a thing like that.

> Aaaanyway, there are other browsers out there, some which even support
> non-webext extensions.

But, somehow, the users need to be convinced to switch.  Even on tech 
sites like Hacker News nearly every comment thread from some news site 
has one or more comments from users complaining about "all the ads" on 
the linked site getting in the way.  If you'd think there would be a 
group that knows about and actually uses adblockers, it would be the 
Hacker News readership, but no, there are a huge number of folks who 
arguably *should* know that just don't know there is an alternative.  
Extend that to the "average joe" who thinks "the internet" lives inside 
the little "IE" icon on their winblows desktop and you can see what 
keeps Chrome entrenched.