I’m sure they’d love to include a blocker in Chrome that blocks all the competitive ad networks.

But then they'd be one antitrust investigation away from losing it all.

Why waste effort on something that's a rounding error at best?

It is because of such effort that they are rounding errors: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/04/google-loses-ad-...

What do you think uBlock Lite is for? They'll continue to cripple it until it is unable to block YouTube ads while still being able to block everything else.

If they'd ever allow such a thing to exist.

Financial incentives, while a large motivator for companies, are frequently not the exclusive one.

Google for quite a few years was seen as a good steward of the free and open Internet.

To assert people shouldn't feel betrayed because "it's a company" fundamentally ignores why people had different expectations for Google to begin with.

When, 2001? By the time Chrome came out it had been clear that was not true for awhile.

Up until roughly 2010 Google was a pretty consistent advocate and activist for the open Internet.

Because it was in their financial interest to do so. Their business is dependent on the internet after all.

The problem is that people are quick to assume a company is being altruistic just because the financial incentives happen to align with their own incentives.

"That's just how they make their money," is a common and terrible excuse.

It's not making an excuse on the part of Google, it's pointing out the naivety of expecting otherwise from Google.

Firefox still allows uBlock origin, and even on mobile.

One's expectations aren't in any way relevant in considering wether something is an asshole move or not.

Calling company strategy an "asshole move" is anthropomorphizing a lawnmower.

This is a parallel argument to the whole "to big to fail" nonsense and not really in line with the famous comparison of a single person to a machine. Company strategies are typically created by small groups of people who - especially in this case - know exactly what the impact and longer-reach implications of their decisions will be. It is entirely reasonable to hold the people of any organization accountable for the policies they enact via that organization.

Company strategies are created by individual humans being assholes. Don't make excuses for them.

Being an asshole is incentivized by the system. If you don't want companies to behave like assholes, change the system to one that punishes that.

The first step in disincentivizing being an asshole is pointing out that someone is being an asshole.

It's still people who make up a company

That strategy did not come into existence through some abstract entity

Firefox has had poor stewardship for quite a few years now with an uncertain future.

Even moreso - uBlock Origin doesn't block the modern equivalent of pop-up ads unless you manually block elements. Even then - half the time the block isn't even saved and needs to be redone every page visit.

> needs to be redone every page visit

Have you got an example of that?

Explanations are not excuses.