With Google and Meta's cooperation and support?

Why is a Chrome browser with an in built ad blocker a threat to Firefox with an ad blocker as an extension?

I have ublock origin on Brave, though? Firefox doesn't have any Edge over Brave on the extension scene. In fact, there's probably more useful extensions on the old Chrome ecosystem. I remember actually biting the bullet and switching through needing the Airtable extension, which wasn't available on ff.

On the other hand, what's the argument against consumer browsers having in-built ad-blocking? As a gateway to the internet, surely some type of gatekeeping and safety is expected? Firefox being too arrogant to listen to the market for 20 years, in exchange for '''community initiatives''' is just sad.

ah yes the browser that uses your pc to mine crypto is the answer.

Seriously? Wow, can you show me how to cash in? I did wonder why my cpu usage was lower than firefox.

Brave has never mined crypto, only given you an extension to have a built in crypto wallet that you can disable with 2 clicks.

What would it even mean for the ublock origin runtime framework aka firefox to be equipped with an adblocker?!

He said basically nothing on this topic in the interview. I guess he's trying to express that they are using open source blocklists in their test harnesses and they may or may not use them in release?

Nothing he said ruled this out, but I think it would be a stupid waste of resources and a slap in the face if they didn't work with gorhill on this.

My feeling is that the point of these consolidations is to centralise the ecosystem of their browser and open up revenue streams. The first does make sense from a user friendliness perspective, new users don't automatically know they should be using uBlock Origin and Mullvad VPN for the best experience. The latter is obviously questionable and undermines the whole ecosystem.

My most pessimistic prediction would be that they don't work with gorhill because he's committed to providing adblock for free, they waste a bunch of resources building an engine from scratch, then they charge a subscription for access to 'premium' up-to-date lists which are really just aggregated open source lists.

I think it is not surprising. Adblocker can be a great source of revenue if managed correctly - ad companies will pay to be allowed to show unobstructive and less intrusive ads.

We had less intrusive ads. Google AdSense was originally text-only and small-sized ads. What happened? It became far too lucrative to switch to the annoying ads by taking advantage of their trusting user base. Ad companies have only one service: make money. They will all do the same thing when able to.

Why would anyone want to use an ad blocker made by a company funded primarily by the largest ad company on the planet?

too little too late.

Andreas already said it in the latest video: ladybird has a basic and fast Implementation for content blocking in the pre-alpha version.

Mozilla just shows a disconnect from reality if they start working on it now, in 2026. But this is nothing new, they had a disconnect from their users for years... reflected in their market share.

I didn't watch the video, but reading the title, I can only say:

Oh, so this is their plan to dump extensions manifest v2!