hoverzoom
webextensions
hoverzoom | webextensions | |
---|---|---|
26 | 37 | |
1,059 | 561 | |
- | 1.2% | |
8.9 | 8.3 | |
4 days ago | 7 days ago | |
JavaScript | Bikeshed | |
MIT License | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
hoverzoom
-
Browser extensions are underrated: the promise of hackable software
I will leave this as a gallery of emails with offers to buy extension hoverzoom: https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670
Sidenote: The "collaboration" offers come from time to time even to non-extensions projects, if they are reasonably widely used. E.g. simple tools (rather widely used suite of android apps recently sold).
-
Chrome's next weapon in the War on Ad Blockers: Slower extension updates
> Manifest V3 will stop this by limiting what Google describes "remotely hosted code." All updates, even to benign things like a filtering list, will need to happen through full extension updates through the Chrome Web Store. They will all be subject to Chrome Web Store reviews process, and that comes with a significant time delay.
So the author can't think of any other reason for this change other than to "slow down ad blocker updates"
Well how about stuff like this: https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670
Where an extension dev details offers to "monetize" his app and basically perform a bait and switch and make it malicious.
- A Browser Extension developer on the temptations for monetization
-
Browser extensions spy on you, even if its developers don't
These type of offers are actually quite common. See this[0] and the discussion[1]. I try to stick with only the most popular of extensions in the hope that any malicious changes would be widespread news, but it is still a gamble.
[0] https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37066680
- Many temptations of an open-source Chrome extension developer
-
Uninstall the NightOwl macOS app now
As a maintainer of a semi-popular chrome extension[1], I receive so many buy-out offers that I started publicly collecting them[2] for everyone to see.
[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hover-zoom%20/pccc...
[2] https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/discussions/670
- Hover zoom+ issues on reddit videos?
-
Imagus is now malware?
Also, here's a open source alternative.
-
Hover Zoom + is just better
I don't want to download a sieve from a russian forum. Hover Zoom+ is working fine.
-
How to check Twitch streams quickly with Hover Zoom+
Hover Zoom+: https://github.com/extesy/hoverzoom/ (this is the open source one, not the old one with malware)
webextensions
- Show HN: I made a CLI tool to create web extensions with no build configuration
-
Chrome's next weapon in the War on Ad Blockers: Slower extension updates
I've edited my comment to also include a link to the Chrome docs, but that FAQ entry also has the link to an issue in the webextensions repository indicating it's a limitation of MV3: https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/112
-
There are no strings on me
Google outlawing dynamic code in Web Extensions/mv3 is a travesty of high order. There's no place I want to be able to be more alive than my agents. Yet my agents must all be dead. For shame, ye villains.
https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/139
This post definitely was quite a technical explanation. The opening framing, to me, means the world.
-
Chrome Users Beware: Manifest V3 Is Deceitful and Threatening – EFF
The other big change of mv3 that gets no coverage but which is dear to me is that mv3 outlaws any kind of dynamic code. The whole app has to be statically defined. This makes it much easier to know what's running, since an extension can no longer go pull in extra code, but it greatly reduces what you can do as an extension too. Extensions have to have all behaviors predefined. I can't dial home & load my behaviors. Here's the issue, https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/139
For a while it meant that userscripts didn't have any way to run. So Google introduced a new API for user scripting. But those extensions only run in "developer" mode. I'm guessing that means when devtools are open?
I agree a lot with your premise. It sure seems like Google is targeting everyone with these changes, but that better real affordances & escape hatches need to be builtin to not maim the lives of power users. It took a long long time to come up with a userscript solution, and it seems like an awful doesnt-work-for-me workaround (I use userscripts not to dev but to modify everyday experiences). Chrome just hasn't been taking their obligation to user agency seriously.
-
Firefox users may import Chrome extensions now
> the extension APIs are standardised enough that this is actually possible a lot of the time
A bit off topic, but as a co-chair of the WebExtensions Community Group[1] (WECG) I'm a bit touchy about the calling WebExtensions "standardized." A few years back the Browser Extensions Community Group[2] created a spec for WebExtensions, but it never reached a state that we'd normally refer to as a web standard. (Technically W3C community groups can only produce "Reports" and these documents are not on the standards track.[3])
FWIW, I'm very bullish about specifying and (hopefully) standardizing the WebExtensions platform. I'm especially excited about having a good chunk of dedicated time to sit with browser folks at TPAC 2023[4] and try to work out some open questions about where we're going and how we're going to get there.
[1]: https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/
-
uBlock Origin Lite now available on Firefox
While I was trying to find out what Firefox's limits are I came across this interesting issue on the W3C's webextensions repo: https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/319
4 days ago the Chromium developers proposed upping the limit for certain types of declarativeNetRequest rules based on data AdGuard provided on real world rule lists.
-
Google's trying to DRM the internet, and we have to make sure they fail
Manifest v3 is used for Chrome's extensions system. The proposal appears to limit what extensions have access to, and what they can do in Chrome. It is proposed as a W3C standard by Google. It is being tracked at the W3C at https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/44.
-
Manifest V2 Chrome Extension Phaseout Delayed Until 2024
Google is not even close to finishing MV3: "On the userScripts API, the proposal has been merged into the WECG but the engineering work has not started yet." https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/blob/f8f430f1904c2a6fa8...
MV2 is sticking around until at least 2024.
-
Here’s what’s going on in the world of extensions
Some, but not all, limitations are highlighted in this thread: https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/72
- Firefox 109.0 released
What are some alternatives?
sydent - Sydent: Reference Matrix Identity Server
AdNauseam - AdNauseam: Fight back against advertising surveillance
screenity - The free and privacy-friendly screen recorder with no limits 🎥
graphql-jit - GraphQL execution using a JIT compiler
yi-note - YiNote browser extension - online video note taking tool
nyxt - Nyxt - the hacker's browser.
vertical-tabs-chrome-extension - A chrome extension that presents your tabs vertically. Problem solved.
h264ify - A Chrome extension that makes YouTube stream H.264 videos instead of VP8/VP9 videos
ExtPay - The JavaScript library for ExtensionPay.com — payments for your browser extensions, no server needed.
SingleFile-MV3 - SingleFile version compatible with Manifest V3. The future, right now!
discord-api-docs - Official Discord API Documentation
obelisk - Go package and CLI tool for saving web page as single HTML file