It really is a good one, entertaining and educational

https://youtu.be/XpkNGMSWbYk brings to memory. Not sure why (yes I’m commenting on my comment for dramatic effect)

Sure sounds a bit dodge, but not having an online footprint is a good strategy for some companies.

This comment has been marked as spam

Just out of curiousity have you ever seen liquid sold at $65/10ml? I usually pay 50-100x less than that

Firefox safe browsing API is also from Google

It is, however it doesn’t send data to google. Browser receives the list of all unsafe pages and checks against it locally

To be clear Google has no direct way to force FF to do shit. The reason Google is implementing v3 is to disrupt adblocking (by dropping v2 APIs) the reason Mozilla is supporting v3 is to make life easier for extension Devs. They don’t have to comply with same restrictions

Implemeting support for v3 is not the same as dropping web request blocking API from v2… Google pays to Mozilla for service they provide having them as default search engine - it’s not a sponsorship…

Saying that, I’ve done some more recent research and Google has already softened their stance on requests blocking with current manifesto proposal of up to 5k dynamic rules with a proposal to extend up to 30k being popular.Sources: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-filtering-in-manifest-v3/ proposal: https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/319#issuecomment-1682073791

What is the point of your comment? Everybody and their grandmother (including the bycicles and the EU) understands the point of Google’s changes. There’s no need to prove shit. Chrome is a choice, doesn’t come on any platforms as default (that support extensions). Personally I changed back to FF when they first announced these changes a few years back.

Almost as if zeroing is a sensitive process that should be done slowly 🤔