I like that Ars tries to defend ad blocking, but please, prepare better, maybe talk to actual developers and avoid false accusations.
It’s completely okay to criticize Google for doing really controversial (to say the least) stuff like getting rid of blocking webRequest, but criticizing them for prohibiting inclusion of remote JS in the extension is simply bad work.
They could do a minimal fact check, remote JS was never allowed in Mozilla Addons store. A bit more research and they’ll learn that cosmetic filters updates do not require an extension update. A little bit more research and one can learn about the no-review-fast-track that Chrome WebStore plans to implement next year.
It’s completely okay to criticize Google for doing really controversial (to say the least) stuff like getting rid of blocking webRequest, but criticizing them for prohibiting inclusion of remote JS in the extension is simply bad work.
They could do a minimal fact check, remote JS was never allowed in Mozilla Addons store. A bit more research and they’ll learn that cosmetic filters updates do not require an extension update. A little bit more research and one can learn about the no-review-fast-track that Chrome WebStore plans to implement next year.