• Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          At large organizations you’re generally not allowed to download much of anything without it passing through IT security and management first. If it’s a no, it will probably stay a no.

        • takeda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah. What company wouldn’t allow it?

          When I was working for an ad exchange, everyone had adblock installed in their browsers, I found that quite ironic.

          • micka190@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah. What company wouldn’t allow it?

            My IT department uninstalled it from my work laptop, and told me not to reinstall it because - and I quote: “The only browser IT officially supports is Google Chrome.”

            What makes this doubly stupid is that I’m a web developer. I literally can’t test my stuff on another browser…

          • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I would argue it’s a security issue not to have any ad blocking. Many scams online start with popups or fake ads.

            So if you get the opportunity to talk to IT that’s what I would mention.

            • Pregnenolone@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              A good IT is blocking ads at a company-level. Browser extensions wouldn’t matter, and in fact, shouldn’t be allowed for the same reason.

    • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Is there any firefox based browser on android where I can have easy gestures for the arrow buttons? All the firefox versions I can find require me to do this in two clicks which for the way I browse is a pain in the arse. Can I fix this somehow?

  • Nanook@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Google is not an IT company. It’s an advertising company. Surprised Pikachu, it blocks ad blockers.

      • Nanook@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yeah it’s always been an ad company. And you are correct, blocking apps is new, welcome to the last stage in the ad-blocking arms race. Glad I degoogled my digital life a decade ago.

        • JimBarbecue@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Hey, can you tell a little bit about your stack, what apps and services do you use? Also on phone? I guess in a decade you could work that out pretty well.

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes, but enshittification doesn’t happen all at once. And this is a textbook example of the actual meaning of enshittification.

  • jk1006@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I am from Germany and it is just sad how many people use these apps from shit companies without thinking, when suitable alternatives exist everywhere. Just use Firefox, it will work for 99,9% without any flaw. I would love to ditch WhatsApp, but could only convinge a few people to change to Signal. It is as easy as downloading a new app to prevent supporting Meta, but that’s too much effort for many :-(

    • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      it will work for 99,9% without any flaw

      Unfortunately not anymore.

      And it doesn’t help, that Mozilla is also slowly turning towards enshittification… (since they fired all servo devs…)

    • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Missing critical features:

      Filter lists only update with the extension, you cannot update them dynamically

      No making your own filters and thus no element picker for blocking annoyances on a webpage (a feature so good apple literally baked it into safari)

      No support for external lists (which means if you back up your own filters into a list you cannot easily reimport)

      No changing behavior on a per site basis

      A number of other features as well that are more strictly power user features but still really handy like dynamic filtering and strict blocking domains.

      If you have the option stop using chrome and edge, they are some of the worst options you could choose. Even outside of adblock and manifest v3 chrome is horrendous for data harvesting bullshit and edge isn’t great. If you don’t have the option because of an overzealous it dept or whatever and are forced to use it ubo lite is your best option probably and my heart goes out to you

      • Pamasich@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m a bit confused as an Adblock Plus user, why did the ublock dev drop those features? ABP uses manifest v3 too and it still has all of those. So it’s clearly not about them being impossible.

          • Pamasich@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Probably because of the Adblock Plus mention. It’s mired in controversy because of its acceptable ads toggle and requiring ad giants to pay for it. So I can imagine people downvoting comments that put it in a positive light compared to other adblockers.

            • ripcord@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              You may be right, but whether you hate ABP specifically or not should be irrelevant to the question. The question was why other extensions - like Adblock - can have those feature but uBlock Lite can’t. What’s different?

              I’d also like to know, personally. I’d wondered the same thing.

          • 11111one11111@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I wish more people were like you. Not everyone can keep up with everyone’s beefs (this one not so much) but it really grinds my gears when I see seemingly polite, on topic, engaging or contributing comments with no replies but still geyting down voted. Especially on a forum as thirsty as Lemmy users are for more user involvement.

            It makes me think there are too many people in the world conditioned to be preset to hate thst the fact a person doesn’t know they’re supposed to hate something is enough grounds to be shunned and hated on. Lol. It’s cool to see someone jump in and say:Hey homie, we don’t hate you we hate a person who is unrelated to the topic of the thread or the context of your comment but we do hate them enough to hate on you

            Edit: the parenthesis comment was meant to imply hating Trump monkeys is glaringly obvious. My comment was about lemmy etiquette and wasn’t about why or why not OP was getting downvoted.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Any Chromium-based browser will be in the same boat sooner or later. None of them have the resources to continue to support v2 long-term, or to support their own extension stores.

      At this point the only viable alternative is Firefox and its dirivatives.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is 100000% a reason to split Chrome and the ad sales part of Google into different companies.

      It won’t solve the problem but the pressures end up being orders of magnitude different.

  • g4nd41ph@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I swapped to Chrome years ago because YouTube stopped working right on Firefox.

    I’ve started the process of swapping back to Firefox after 10 years with Chrome over this.

      • g4nd41ph@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Something was going wrong with video playback. Unfortunately, this was about 10 years ago so I don’t remember many specifics about what the problem was.

        • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’ve exclusively used firefox to watch youtube on Arch and Ubuntu for years, never had a problem so far for what it’s worth. I keep a laptop in the livingroom with Arch specifically to have adblocking and piping the video out to the TV. The youtube apps are terrible on the Roku last I remember, haven’t tried it in forever but I think the main reason was I didn’t want to see ads anymore.

  • knexcar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is probably the single thing that got me to switch to Firefox. Privacy whatever, I don’t care about my data or the morality of my tech company or whatever, but mess with my adblocker and goodbye.

        • Nexz@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Awww, but understandable. Can I see your bank statements for the last 12 months?

              • knexcar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Yes, when it comes to sharing sensitive information publicly, I do care about privacy. Especially bank information - a regular bank statement could probably be exploited for identity theft - but it’s also nice to keep at least a little plausible deniability about who I am IRL (for employers and such).

                When it comes to websites and browsers aggregating browsing history to use for advertising - which is what I was referring to in my original comment - no I don’t care.

                • Nexz@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I was just being a keyboard warrior. I can imagine your stance, however it is important to be at least aware of it. As long it’s a conscious choice! Problem with big ad parties these days is that it’s so complex, it’s hard to make a properly informed decision about it. My comment about bank statements is just taking it to the extreme to make a point - no offence intended of course.