They are backtracking because of the size of the backlash. Google will keep trying to kill adblockers that don't exempt Google's ads, until they get away with it quietly. I know this was not a mistake because they used the exact same single-use-only rejection to kill AdNauseam, a less popular ad-blocker I use: https://adnauseam.io/free-adnauseam.html
Also, they then doubled down and blocked manual installation of AdNauseam, which is an overstep even if they were somehow justified in the ban.
AdNauseum wasn't targeted because it was small it was targeted because it abused ad networks instead of blocking them. I'm not saying blocking the extension was right or wrong I'm just pointing out you're conveniently dropping details that don't fit your narrative.
> Also, they then doubled down and blocked manual installation of AdNauseam, which is an overstep even if they were somehow justified in the ban.
No they didn't. Again I'm not saying I agree or disagree with your stance on AdNauseam being blocked from the store but your wording conveniently drops details that don't fit your narrative. Chrome won't load any packaged extension that isn't in the store but it loads unpacked extensions regardless when you click the developer mode toggle. When installed manually with the steps on https://github.com/dhowe/AdNauseam/wiki/Install-AdNauseam-on... the extension loads fine.
> AdNauseum wasn't targeted because it was small it was targeted because it abused ad networks instead of blocking them.
Well, maybe. The stated reason for both of the bans was the single-use-only policy, which is clearly BS. The fact that AdNauseam is more damaging for Google certainly wouldn't help its case, but the fact that Google has now gone after uBlock as well indicates they don't make much of a distinction between the two. The point of my comment is not so much to relitigate the AdNauseam ban, but to argue that both bans were not errant mistakes but deliberate moves.
> Chrome won't load any packaged extension that isn't in the store but it loads unpacked extensions regardless when you click the developer mode toggle.
It looks like you're right, and I was not aware of this; I thought the packed extension blocking was specific to AdNauseam. The page I linked is being somewhat disingenuous on this point. Unfortunately, it's too late for me to edit my comment now.
The top story on HN and multiple subreddits for most of a Saturday, with a pretty big point count, and it looked like it was picked up by several tech news sites. All it takes is for them to slip it under the radar once.
Simeon/dotproto: after you’ve talked with the review team and anyone else involved, how about posting a detailed postmortem explaining what happened and why? The actual explanation can't be any worse than what everyone will assume if no explanation is published.
It could be a Chrome blog post or a submission to HN and Reddit r/chrome.
> The actual explanation can't be any worse than what everyone will assume if no explanation is published.
Sure it can. I mean the best case scenario is them confirming, yet again, they plan to neuter ad blockers in forthcoming updates and getting more bad press around that. The worst case is all of the backlash for banning ad blockers comes out at once while when blockers are still at peak ability/usage instead of when they have been slowly chipped away at.
Attention goes away quicker if they don't say anything at all. The only reason they are saying this much this time is because it's too soon for something like this to happen and it'd generate too much backlash so they are killing the news cycle while it's still just "assumptions on the possibility it'll be removed in the future".
This is only temporary I'm afraid. The writing is on the wall for chrome adblockers. Google can afford to wear us down until there's no one left with the energy for outrage.
Also, they then doubled down and blocked manual installation of AdNauseam, which is an overstep even if they were somehow justified in the ban.