Ad blockers or not – your choice matters
I'm not a highly technical person but I really do like the Vivaldi browser and was disappointed to hear about Google's decision to end support for ad blockers. I understand that Vivaldi may have some options to make it still possible for its users to browse the web they want to, but I am concerned still and am wondering if it makes sense to switch now to a browser that isn't based on Chrome so that I won't have to rush to do it later. This is so disappointing.
Research Shows Publishers Benefit Little From Tracking Ads
This thread may see more incoming users now it is linked in the Register
stardepp last edited by
Chrom* Canary 80 starts now its changes with Manifest V3 related to filtering requests
Time to break out the champagne as we all become executives
RogerWilco last edited by
Yes, I think it would be highly appreciated by the current Vivaldi users if an official statement by Vivaldi on this matter were to be published.
I imagine that a browser crippled in such a way that e.g. R. Gorhill's extensions (uBlock Origin, uMatrix) could not function properly any more would resemble a car with two wheels removed and might lead to users switching to more or less the only truly viable alternative these days.
m.e. last edited by
I freaking love Vivaldi! Thank you for your work.
If the lack of an adblocker in a desktop browser is already a real scourge, not only to avoid nuisance ads, but can also lead to security and privacy problems, worse still on the mobile, where ads and trackers are not only a risk for privacy and security, but they can also terribly slow down browsing on low-end smartphones (mine). I have this problem and I have to navigate with the help of Blokada, because if not, some pages open at the speed of the last century with a modem of 56.
zvaranka last edited by
I buyed the lifetime version of Adguard, since that time there is no ad on neither my devices.
Priest72 last edited by
I use ublock origin which blocks just about everything.From my understanding google is not actually blocking adblock extensions but merely putting a cap on the amount of filters which can be used in extensions like ublock for instance.
JohnConnorBear last edited by
Sorry if somebody have already written this but I can't read all the comments now.
I think this whole topic is flawed by huge disinformation. It is not about "blocking ads". The point is since the very beginning Web pages were a sort of "recommendation" and the browser, the "client agent", could decide how to manipulate them.
The user was in control of the browser and this is or should be the very concept of Vivaldi, BTW. Being in control of the browser, IF the browser is designed to allow the user to be in control, you can decide what and how about EVERYTHING, not just "ads".
When somebody publishes a Web page, whatever content it includes, the content is "shared" and from that point on, it gets "owned" by everybody who gets it. Once you "own" a content, you can manipulate it as you prefer. Yes, licensing and right management features, pretty much pointless from a technical point of view, since any input becomes an output, whatever you place in between.
The shift Google is promoting, besides the technical details, moves from the idea that the "user" MUST be confined, limited, restricted by the tools. The "user agent" must become "Google agent" and you must do only what Google allows you, in the way Google planned for you.
Speaking of Vivaldi, whatever big change Google makes on Chromium, the alternative is to cope with it or to fork. Everybody knows forking is a dangerous slope because it becomes increasingly difficult to keep the codebase in sync with updates. The "Vivaldi store" thing is the last issue to worry about.
Google counts on this, otherwise they would be much more careful with changes. First, they don't fear the competition, since there isn't any. Then they do know nobody has got the power to seriously fork their browser and keep it running. Here we are again with a big corporation abusing of its dominant position over the "market". Maybe in the next 20 years some EU commission would give them a fine.