Personal attacks, which this crosses into, are not acceptable on HN. If you feel that another commenter is abusing HN, please let us know at hn@ycombinator.com so we can look into it. Casting aspersions on another user simply for disagreeing is not ok, so please don't do this again.
p.s. What you said about "every single one" of devrand's comments is far from accurate. It's not ok to haul in someone's comment history as ammunition in an argument, and even worse when what you say is not true.
> Following the publication of this study, Google engineers made it official on a Google Groups posting hours later, announcing a relaxation of the Manifest V3 changes that would have impacted ad blockers.
There is no backtracking or lying here. The thread states:
> there are currently no planned changes to the observational capabilities of webRequest (i.e., anything that does not modify the request).
This was the plan in the earlier thread as well. The API wasn't going away, they were just removing blocking and modifying.
The article also goes hard on how they clarified that "they never intended to prevent or break content blocking". Again, they never said they wanted to limit this, they were just "moving fast and breaking things" by requiring the content blocker extensions to move to a new API. The original thread mentioned uBO because it was going to be the main source of discussion due to it having 50k+ rules already.
What are you talking about when you say "they never said they wanted to limit this"?
This whole scandal was because the DeclarativeNetRequest API was limiting request access. That's the MAIN REASON the uBlock Origin author complained about.
