this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
663 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
59427 readers
4563 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Can I just add a different perspective on this?
My dad is really old (like early baby-boomers), and I am basically the in-family tech support when the home computer starts acting strange.
Well, right after google rolled out this update, my dad clicked on what he thought was an online shopping link. It was actually an ad for a toolbar add-on. ~~Queue~~ Cue like 6+ hours trying to uninstall that add-on and the bundled software.
I never had to worry about that in the past with him because I had u-block origin installed. Now I need to find something else that can run quietly in the background. And probably a better antivirus.
Nooooo, but MV3 is all about security!
This is how I know this is bullshit. I was reading the article and thinking "So, let me get this straight. The ads aren't the security risk. It's the ad blockers!"
Sure. Pull the other one.
Is there any organization out there that could actually promote an "Acceptable ad standard"? Like, maybe even something within web specs?
A long time ago, ads were slightly irritating, rarely useful, and considered a necessary evil for gently monetizing the web. We've had this slow evolution to draconian tracking nightmares that are genuinely dangerous and often written by malicious untraceable actors. I almost feel like we could pressure back towards decent ads if there was some standard by which they only received basic info about the user, showed basic info about a product, didn't pollute the experience or ruin accessibility, and were registered to businesses by physical address with legal accountability for things like false advertising.
That is...perhaps a vain hope though. It's just hard to picture futures where all websites run off of donations or subscriptions, because advertising is fucking hell now.
You mean like https://acceptableads.com/ which is only supported so far by Adblock Plus (and its parent company)?
The problem is until there is some kind of penalty for being too annoying or too resource consuming, it will always be a race to the bottom with more, worse ads. As people add ad blockers to their browsers, the user pool that isn't running them begins to dry up and more ads are needed to keep the same revenue. This results in even more people blocking them.
Two of the things I had hope for on the privacy side was Mozilla's Privacy-Preserving Attribution for ad attribution and Google's Privacy Sandbox collection of features for targeting like the Topics API. Both would have been better for privacy than the current system of granular, individual user tracking across sites.
If those two get wide enough adoption, regulation could be put in place to limit the old methods as there would be a better replacement available without killing the whole current ad supported economy of most sites. I get that strictly speaking from a privacy perspective 'more anonymous/private tracking' < 'no tracking' but I really don't want perfect to be the enemy of better.
Acceptable Ads is bullshit on many levels:
uBlock Origin, or at least uBlock Origin Lite on Chromium-like browsers, are must-haves.
The best browser you can set up for a family member, IMO, is Firefox. Disable Telemetry (which should rid them of Mozilla's own ad scheme too), install uBlock Origin, remind them to never call or trust any other tech support people who reach out to them, and maybe walk them through some scam baiting videos.
I'm still evaluating which Chrome-likes are best at actual ad blocking, and the landscape is grim.
Google would never push this because it would cost them money in the short term, eg, next quarter.
They can't have that.
I think you mean cue, not queue.
Yep thanks
Buy a Raspberry PI, install PiHole or AdGuard, change router DNS, and you are good to go. Yes, not perfect, but doesn't rely on a browser extension that can go extinct next time the browser decides it is time for a change.
.... or use Firefox and migrate their bookmarks.
That's what I ended up doing. It was a weird conversation though, telling him that if it seemed like some website wasn't working, try it on chrome and it just might work
You're awesome!
I recently switched back to Firefox, and almost immediately ran into an issue where I couldn't log into Dropbox. It took me far longer than I'd like to admit, to realize that ~~Firefox was the problem~~ it wasn't working because Dropbox doesn't properly support Firefox. I popped into edge and logged in immediately no problem.
I'm still gonna stick with Firefox, but it's annoying that it doesn't work all the time.
Edit: what's with the down votes? I like Firefox, I'm using Firefox, but I won't deny that I ran into issues with it 🤷♂️
Edit 2: I realize now that the tone of my message sounds like I'm blaming Firefox. That was not my intention. It's a complicated issue and they are getting a rough deal. Not their fault. I've struck out the offending line.
Uhh, that doesn't seem normal at all. Is this a default config? Any extensions in use?
Fresh install of Windows 10, fresh install of Firefox, fresh install of Dropbox.
I was trying to log into Dropbox to authenticate the app, but every time I got to the part where I had to enter my 2fa it would say it was expired. I grew concerned that I was hacked and it was changed, but trying it on my old computer it worked fine.
Then I said fine, I had accidentally paired my Dropbox account with my Google account years ago, so I guess I'll use that. So I logged into Google, and then clicked sign in with my Google account, and I got stuck in a loop where the page was refreshing everything few seconds.
The page would load, it would say "signing you in with your Google account", then it would say at the top in red letters something like "sorry, you haven't signed in recently enough to do that, please log in", and the entire page would refresh and start the loop over, "signing you in with your Google account" etc etc. I left it go through several cycles, it was never gonna work.
It was about then that I guessed that Firefox might be the problem, and it was 🤷♂️
The only non standard thing about my config, is that Windows is inside of a VM. That could very well be it too? But edge was also in that same VM, and it worked. I only used edge because I'm trying to keep the VM light, so I didn't install chrome for a one off thing.
I don't know why I got down voted in my earlier comment, I'm not pooping on Firefox. I honestly want it to work, and am still going to use it. But the facts are facts, I literally just ran into this issue yesterday 🤷♂️
The 2FA thing sounds like it's all on the Dropbox side if you are just entering a code you got from an authenticator app. The Google login issue may be a real issue -- did the Google login specifically work on another browser?
This is part of Googles strategy. Ever since the Chromium engine took off enough and everyone else fell behind they began introducing more and more changes that merely benefits them, with less public debate or proper communication (or even adherence to common standards). Last thing I remember, aside of manifest v3, was them killing off JPEG XL as it was a competitor to webp and webm (which they control). JPEG XL was actively worked on and would've probably turned out better before they killed it without any previous notice.
Given Googles dominant market position, their influence and everyone wanting to cut corners wherever possible sometimes Firefox support is just ignored.
tl;dr It's not Firefox' fault. It's Google's sabotage.
Ah I see, it sounds like I'm saying it's Firefox fault. No I definitely agree, chromium is the largest market share, and gets the most support, and doesn't always follow standards, so some websites will have compatibility issues if they don't specifically focus on Firefox support.
It's just a sucky situation.
Or just do what I do. Use Firefox and only keep Chromium around for those few sites that work better in Chromium.
so what you're saying is; this will bring old-school computer repair shops back? i'm sort of in favor of that 😂
You could leverage Kitbogas software in relation to scam/sketchy download protection.
https://www.seraphsecure.com/
Paid and closed source with a proprietary license.