uBlock Origin is no longer available on the Chrome Store

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Immediate impact and temporary workarounds

  • Many report Chrome auto‑disabling uBlock Origin after recent updates because it’s a Manifest V2 extension; some see it forcibly re‑disabled after manual re‑enable.
  • A minority still have it running (Chrome, Edge, Chromium forks), often via:
    • Enterprise policies / registry flags (e.g., ExtensionManifestV2Availability=2) to keep MV2 alive until mid‑2025.
    • Forcibly installing via “external extensions” or DOM hacks to re‑enable the “Add to Chrome” button.
  • Other MV2 tools (uMatrix, ClearURLs, some userscripts managers, niche extensions) are also affected.

uBlock Origin Lite & Manifest V3 capabilities

  • uBlock Origin Lite (uBOL) is MV3‑compatible and still in the Web Store; several users say it blocks “all” or “most” ads, including YouTube, especially in “complete/optimal” mode.
  • Key limitations vs classic uBO (per linked FAQ and user reports):
    • No (or reduced) support for custom filters, dynamic rules, element picker/zapper, and advanced scriptlets; weaker against anti‑adblock and site breakage.
    • Uses MV3 declarativeNetRequest: static rulesets instead of code that inspects/rewrites each request.
  • Disagreement over MV3:
    • Critics: static rules are easier to evade; caps on rulesets; Google can indirectly weaken blocking over time; adblocking cat‑and‑mouse becomes much harder.
    • Defenders: MV3 still blocks requests (not just hides elements), allows remote list updates, improves security and performance by removing powerful APIs misused by malicious extensions.

Browser choices & migration patterns

  • Large contingent is abandoning Chrome entirely:
    • Firefox (and forks like LibreWolf, Zen, Mullvad Browser) + full uBO is the dominant recommendation, including on Android; some use multiple Firefox profiles or containers for “work vs personal.”
    • Brave is frequently suggested for non‑technical users wanting a Chrome‑like UI with built‑in, MV2‑independent adblocking; critics cite crypto, telemetry, and past controversies.
    • Other mentions: Safari with content blockers (AdGuard, Wipr, 1Blocker, Wipr 2), Orion (Mac/iOS), Vivaldi, ungoogled‑Chromium, DNS‑based services (Pi‑hole, NextDNS).
  • Some keep Chrome/Chromium only for Google products (Cloud Console, BigQuery, YouTube, GSuite) that are slow or broken in Firefox.

Perceptions of Google’s motives & antitrust context

  • Widely viewed as an ad‑revenue move dressed up as “privacy” and “performance”; many call out the “user security” narrative as gaslighting.
  • Others frame it as logically consistent: an ad‑funded free product removing an extension that undermines its business.
  • Strong sentiment that Chrome has become an “ad delivery client,” not a user agent; multiple users say this confirms abusive monopoly power.
  • Several tie this to ongoing DOJ antitrust action and proposals to force Google to divest Chrome (and other units), though outcomes are seen as uncertain and politicized.

Mozilla/Firefox: opportunity and skepticism

  • Many see a “huge opportunity” for Firefox as the last major engine with full extension power; praise for uBO working best there and for features like containers and offline translation.
  • At the same time, Mozilla receives heavy criticism:
    • Dependence on Google search money; fear it acts as Google’s antitrust fig leaf.
    • CEO compensation, side bets (VPN, AI, past blockchain experiments), and ad/telemetry initiatives seen as betraying “privacy” branding.
    • Debate over whether donations could realistically fund a browser at Firefox’s scale.
  • Nonetheless, Firefox (and forks stripping telemetry) is still widely considered the least‑bad mainstream option.

Non‑extension adblocking and its limits

  • DNS‑level solutions (Pi‑hole, NextDNS) are recommended as a second layer or for whole‑device blocking, but:
    • They can’t handle first‑party ads or DOM‑level tricks well.
    • They miss per‑element cosmetic cleanup and script‑level anti‑adblock bypasses (YouTube is a recurring example).
  • Some users increasingly use frontends or native apps (FreeTube, mpv + ytdl, Invidious/Piped) to avoid YouTube’s web UI entirely.

Developer & compatibility issues

  • Multiple reports that major web apps (Google Cloud Console, BigQuery Studio, some Microsoft and media services) are sluggish or broken on Firefox, nudging people back to Chrome/Chromium for work.
  • Web devs note trade‑offs: Firefox has superior HTML/CSS tooling in some respects, but Chrome still has PWA support and certain ergonomics they miss.
  • Concern that as Chrome dominance grows, fewer sites will test seriously on Firefox, reinforcing a Blink monoculture.

Ethics, user agency, and the future web

  • Strong feelings that browsers should obey the user, not the site or the ad network; Manifest V3 is seen by many as removing agency from the “user agent.”
  • Others argue powerful extensions were a genuine security risk, especially for non‑technical users fooled into installing hijacking spyware.
  • Broader lament about “enshittification” of the web: heavier ad/tracking loads, anti‑user design, and a shift back to centralized control reminiscent of mainframes.
  • A minority question the ethics of adblocking itself and note that if users refuse both ads and payments, only giant ad‑funded platforms can survive—further entrenching the current power structure.