The new MV3 architecture reflects Google’s avowed desire to make browser extensions more performant, private, and secure. But the internet giant’s attempt to do so has been bitterly contested by makers of privacy-protecting and content-blocking extensions, who have argued that the Chocolate Factory’s new software architecture will lead to less effective privacy and content-filtering extensions.

For users of uBlock Origin, which runs on Manifest V2, “options” means using the less capable uBlock Origin Lite, which supports Manifest V3.

  • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Ah compile… guess I’ll stick with regular Firefox. There are some magiks I don’t tamper with.

        • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s really nice. It’s compatible with all Linux distros and it provides some configurable sandboxing via bubblewrap that you don’t get with other repos. The sandboxing is easilly configurable using a GUI like Flatseal.

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

            Interesting, thanks for the insight. One of these days I’ll spin up a VM to play around with it.

            • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m guessing you don’t already use Linux? Just keep in mind that with a VM, the GPU has to be emulated (except for edge cases, like passing through a hardware GPU or going headless), which will heavilly impact performance. There is also the option of dipping your toe using a live USB stick (basically every distro has this as an option), but that has its own performance penalty due to running off of a USB stick.

              I’d recommend actually installing it to try it out to get the full performance of your hardware, and to make sure that everything you have is compatible (most hardware is compatible out of the box)

              • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                I finally got back on the horse a few months ago after about a 10 year hiatus from the Linux world, and I am just cautious about what I install because I’ve borked many distro installs over the years. Since my DD is also for work, and I don’t have the downtime to troubleshoot or reinstall because I went on a package install spree without doing my due diligence on what the packages I’m installing are actually doing, I’d rather take Flatpak for a spin through an Arch VM just to get a feel for it and any kinks I might encounter.

                A lot has changed in the past decade, and while I’m amazed at the stability these days, I still err on the side of caution, and also don’t want to fill up my install with a bunch of random stuff I don’t actually need. Same reason I’m also cautious about using AUR. I know dependency hell has very much improved, but call it PTSD for lack of a better term.

                • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I’d recommend NixOS if it weren’t for the hell that is the Nix language itself. It completely solves dependency hell, and everything is able to be reverted with a simple reboot or by modifying a config file and running one command.

                  If you are trying to learn something new that might be a bit of a headache, I’d recommend it. I’ve been daily driving it for a few years now. It’s also compatible with flatpaks.

                  If you’re not comfortable with Terminal and configuration files, I’d recommend staying away.

                  • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    It’s all good. I was on Arch way back when and that’s what I’m back on now, if not for anything but familiarity. I was moderately seasoned at one point and I’ll get back, just time in the saddle.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      I mean, if you’re intimidated by compiling you probably shouldn’t be using Arch to begin with.

      (I’m hoping that you didn’t understand the “on AUR” part of the comment as well as the “dependencies” part, and actually use a more reasonable distro that isn’t subject to the issue @bobs_monkey is complaining about.)

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago
          • Arch is a Linux distribution that intentionally requires a bunch of relatively-complicated manual steps to install, so “I use Arch BTW” has become a meme among people who want to brag about how ‘l33t’ they are.

          • AUR is Arch’s package manager.

          • A package manager is a software database that lets you easily install apps with a single command (e.g. [tool-name] install [app-name]) along with all the software libraries they depend on (i.e. their ‘dependencies’), such that you only need one copy of each library no matter how many apps use it.

          (Without a package manager, there are two other ways installing apps can work: either an app can come with its own copy of all its dependencies, which means it takes up a lot of disk space unnecessarily, or the user can be responsible for installing all the dependencies separately, which is a gigantic pain in the ass. Windows takes the former approach, while Linux, before package managers were invented, tended to do the latter because open-source software was distributed mostly as source code you had to compile and link yourself.)