How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?

barbudo2005

They wouldn’t have to change anything….

But you will agree with me that there are areas for improvement at the very least, such as accepting all the list types that uBO accepts.

luetage

@barbudo2005 Yeah, sure, but you can get by perfectly fine without it. People are currently panicking over nothing though. What I do agree with is that steps need to be taken to prevent an exodus from Vivaldi and potentially bring in users who flee Chrome. The sad thing is nothing but a 1:1 ublock stand in will satisfy this crowd and I don’t see this happening. So there, what now?

barbudo2005

@luetage Said:

...but you can get by perfectly fine without it. People are currently panicking over nothing though.

I am not so clear about that, since the trend that Google is following with YT will not stop increasing on all websites, since Google benefits from ads not only on their sites; therefore it will require a growing power more and more.

Said:

What I do agree with is that steps need to be taken to prevent an exodus from Vivaldi and potentially bring in users who flee Chrome.

Those are exactly the improvements I am referring to.

Said:

The sad thing is nothing but a 1:1 ublock stand in will satisfy this crowd…

Unfortunately a cure for paranoia has not yet been found and there is clearly a lot of it in that crowd.

And I'm not just talking about ads but privacy in general.

ybjrepnfr

@luetage said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

you can get by perfectly fine without it. People are currently panicking over nothing though

well some peeps might be, but others are not being histrionic, but are being rational. notwithstanding how many times some posters wish to say otherwise, static block lists by themselves [aka, vivaldi's native tool, afaict] are not not NOT a match for the lists PLUS user-configurable dynamic filter rules [ie, uBO]. once gargle complete their impending malarkey re mv2/mv3 next year, & chromium-based browsers will only be able to use uBOL not uBO, users choosing to retain those browsers will incur a notable degradation [unless they were only using uBO in simple mode, & without cosmetic filtering, element blocking etc].

that's gonna be the final nail in the coffin for many users [albeit still only a global minority overall given the disinterest "ordinary" peeps have for the sort of stuff peeps chew over in this forum] compounding vivaldi's existing inability to:

do cname-uncloaking
allow html5 canvas fingerprint spoofing https://forum.vivaldi.net/post/699024
spoof or block HTTP/2 Fingerprinting https://forum.vivaldi.net/post/718534

@jon

luetage

@ybjrepnfr If you want privacy, use Tor, there is no way around that. Anything else is comparable to using a band aid trying to fix a broken leg.

ybjrepnfr

@luetage i disagree with such a cavalier attitude. if you wish to apply it for yourself, fine, but others will make their own decisions based on their own priorities & needs.

luetage

@ybjrepnfr You can disagree as much as you like, it’s still true.

ybjrepnfr

@luetage you can restate that as much as you like, it's still false.

RasheedHolland

@luetage said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

@RasheedHolland I’m solely using the inbuilt blocker for about half a year now and got no issues and I ran a highly customized ublock prior. They wouldn’t have to change anything and it would be fine for people who know how blocklists work. Problem is people don’t know and want something with aggressive defaults, but that isn’t likely to happen.

I think Vivaldi's current built-in blocker isn't user friendly enough. I would like to see a more advanced interface similar to uBlock and Ghostery for example. And not to forget, I would also like to see uBlock's element picker that let's you remove all kinds of annoying stuff. This isn't implemented in uBlock Lite, and it also doesn't have the matrix where you can allow or block scripts from domainnames. In other words, uBlock Lite isn't good enough, so if it won't be improved, then Vivaldi's built-in blocker should become even better.

barbudo2005

@RasheedHolland Said:

I would also like to see uBlock's element picker that let's you remove all kinds of annoying stuff.

This function can be replaced by using the Stylus extension and selecting the item with Inspect of Developers Tools.

Selector
{display: none !important;}

RasheedHolland

@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

@RasheedHolland Said:

I would also like to see uBlock's element picker that let's you remove all kinds of annoying stuff.

This function can be replaced by using the Stylus extension and selecting the item with Inspect of Developers Tools.
Selector
{display: none !important;}

I'm sorry but I think you misunderstand. uBlock's element picker works out of the box, not really comparable with Stylus. In fact, I just remembered that Adblock Plus also has an element blocker. And for the record, this feature only hides stuff, so it's not really blocked from loading.

barbudo2005

@RasheedHolland Said:

And for the record, this feature only hides stuff, so it's not really blocked from loading.

What is the practical importance of this, if it is a graphic element? How many milliseconds does it take to load a simple element?

barbudo2005

A question for the Moderators:

Has it been measured what percentage of Vivaldi users use uBO?

Ayespy

@barbudo2005 That is not measurable. Vivaldi can't collect such data - and a survey to try to find it out would not generate meaningful information.

Ayespy

@barbudo2005 The "practical" use is that users don't see stuff they find distracting - unless of course it's an ad that has paid Adblock+ for white-listing.

barbudo2005

@Ayespy

Apparently you did not understand my approach. I meant that one uses the picker element to remove annoying elements over the ads that the adblocker has already removed.

So the important thing is that they are not seen, not that they are not loading.

Catweazle

Until now I don't see any ad with the Vivaldi blocker. Cookies and other crap from Webpages are deleted with the Site Bleacher, even Cookie advices are blocked by the Vivaldi blocker. If I feel to need a Tinfoil hat (never know what else is going to happen to Google), maybe I also activate this one.

barbudo2005

@luetage @Ayespy Said:

That is not measurable.

What do you estimate?

RasheedHolland

@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

@RasheedHolland Said:

And for the record, this feature only hides stuff, so it's not really blocked from loading.

What is the practical importance of this, if it is a graphic element? How many milliseconds does it take to load a simple element?

It has already been answered by someone else, but it's not about speed, it's about blocking annoying stuff. I just wanted to let you know that I know it's not actually being blocked from loading, it's only hidden, which is fine with me.

Ayespy

@barbudo2005 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

@luetage @Ayespy Said:

That is not measurable.

What do you estimate?

Based on no data and a wild-ass guess? Based on mentions of uBO by users in the Forum? More than one percent and less than ten percent.