Google gets its way... or FLoC by another name...

[daemonspudguy]

Those two concepts aren't contradictory. They won't have problems for now, but might (keyword is might) in the future. It's also worth noting that Firefox users (such as myself) will have exactly 0 issues because Mozilla has explicitly stated they won't even be deprecating Manifest V2.

[moonbat]

With Google's rabid release schedule, changes to the browser will lead to divergence over time and it will get harder for Blink based browsers to keep up. Something's gotta give eventually.

[daemonspudguy]

You are aware that Chrome and Chromium aren't the same thing, right? Chrome is quite different to Chromium. Certain restrictions that apply to Chrome don't to Chromium. Unless Google plans on nuking the Chromium source tree of anything resembling Manifest V2 and forces all forks to do the same (somehow) then it ain't gonna be that much of a problem for users of Brave or Vivaldi. I also specifically chose Brave and Vivaldi because both web browsers include, as a core feature, a content blocker. So it would be absurd for them to remove any support for ad blocking when that's part of both browsers' reasons for existing.

[moonbat]

You are aware that Chrome and Chromium aren't the same thing, right?

Duh.

Unless Google plans on nuking the Chromium source tree of anything resembling Manifest V2

Why would they keep it around when it's been deprecated? It's been several years since backward compatibility has gone the way of the dodo for big tech. And the privacy darling Mozilla already did the same with XUL XPCOM in the codebase, which is why Pale Moon had to be hurriedly rebased from version 52. So there's no reason for Google to continue keeping around v2.

forces all forks to do the same

They will eventually have to as the codebase continues to diverge and Google continues to 'move fast and break things' (mostly the latter) with draft specs that get pushed first into the Chromium codebase. It's similar to what the Seamonkey project is facing now as Mozilla diverges further from the original application platform code that underpinned Firefox, Thunderbird and Seamonkey.

Brave has its own separate built in adblocker that isn't dependent on upstream code, so that's the way for other browsers to go as well.

[daemonspudguy]

Manifest V2 won't be deprecated for all uses until at least 2025. So that's the first year Google can start removing support for Manifest V2 from the Chromium project. The day will come, but it won't be for a while. Hell, Firefox Developer Edition could be coerced into running legacy extensions until last year.

[moonbat]

Hell, Firefox Developer Edition could be coerced into running legacy extensions until last year.

You mean the kind that still run on Pale Moon?

[gepus]

That's just not possible to enforce for many extensions that need current and updated information on an hourly or so basis.

That was also my understanding. Delaying extension updates would make little sense.
But what if Google imposes for ad blockers to update their filter lists only through Google servers?
Basically the end for ad blockers by other means for Chrome. Unthinkable? Future will tell.

[gepus]

Brave has its own separate built in adblocker that isn't dependent on upstream code, so that's the way for other browsers to go as well.

Allegedly quite poor compared to uBO. Many Brave users prefer to disable the built-in ad blocker and are using uBO instead.

[moonbat]

Allegedly quite poor compared to uBO. Many Brave users prefer to disable the built-in ad blocker and are using uBO instead.

Exactly, but their fanboys will keep talking about it as a bonus over vanilla Chrome, which it is. It is very primitive by comparison, and no wonder - adblocking is best left to an extension developer who can focus exclusively on it instead of being distracted from the core browser.