...reverse what?

"several changes made by google to chromium"

uBlock already solved this issue

No, they don't. They released a lite version that will attempt to do it's thing in the limited environment of up to date chromium browsers.
(Edit: here are the differences between the normal and this lite version as explained by the developer: https://libreddit.pussthecat.org/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1067als/eli5_ublock_lite_vs_ublock_origin/j3h00xj/?context=3)

And then here is something new that shows how google can not only easily control chroimum based browsers, but basically every other one too, by creating their own definition of "open web":
Their vision: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/blob/main/explainer.md
Users thoughts: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues
A specific issue (there are more) where the standpoint of googlers (you are dumb! (does not explain why)) and the users (we don't want this!) can be clearly seen: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues/36
Discussion on lemmy: https://lemmy.blackeco.com/post/25574

If you really want to see it, you may try loading it up in archive.org or achive.today. The bonus is that the webpage now has been archived and anyone can find it if it disappears.

Also, if you install uBlock Origin, it might be able to automatically hide these access blocker things. Actually, it is totally able, the only question is if you have a block list enabled that tells it how to do so

Edit: just noticed after sending that this is a 2 years old post. Sorry! How did this get into my subscriptions feed?

Google does not and cannot have any control over any Chromium forks

That is not true. I remember several chromium-based browser developers saying for several changes made by google to chromium that they can't afford the maintenance burden to reverse it.

One instance of that happening is switching the addon framework to manifest v3, which severely degrades the functionality of browser firewalls, like uBlock Origin, by restricting (for "security reasons", apparently) the amount of network filters they can apply (and maybe with other changes too, I don't remember it exactly).

But there were also other instances of this happening, which I don't remember right now. Maybe also when they released the first version with FLoC.

And then I think these 2 (anti)features (even any of them alone) also qualify for invasions of privacy, and they are present in most of the chromium based browsers.

How did you follow it? Tried with pasting its name in multiple formats, but wasnt able to follow the account, let alone view it

because they are a lot more polished and feature complete. I come from boost, and use liftoff now, and I like it a lot, but there are still several things I don't like. I loved boost for its look and features, including the tons of settings that I set once and was perfect until the end.

PeerTube is one of them, but usually you will find it under any other name like TILVids and Kraut.Zone, as the developers dont have an open instance. But be aware that since its much more resource intensive to host a video platform, there may be fewer of them, and also the content format seems to work out less in this world for now.

That's interesting, for me it opens android's "which app to open this with" menu, and there if I select jerboa it open the post.

What happens for you?

I've read this from someone on reddit a few days ago, but I think it's true: reddit-archive like read-only lemmy instances should be set up. The data is available, see the-eye.eu/redarcs

r/DataHoarder also has some more info on this with tooling in a pinned post. They didn't private the sub, it's only read-only so it's still readable

https://beehaw.org/post/460701

I would think a lot of full-time content creators would be pissed by not having ads.

One I follow recently disabled viewing twitch VODs (stream recordings) without a subscription. The reason is that even though twitch has ads on streams, it doesnt on VODs. They instead record the streams manually and upload them to youtube.

And if you know them, you cant say they are greedy (at least about this one, I dont know generally). They hold non-english streams with sub 500 viewers, so of course they reach a smaller audience, and they are doing it full time, in a country that was hit very hard in inflation, and which also killed the tax form which was the go-to solution for anyone self-employed, resulting in their income taxes multiplying by ~3-4 times, and by looking at the numbers, they still dont have a dream paycheck, or anywhere near to it. If you watch the streams (and know the language, haha), you know they are not there to get rich, but to build a community, which they involve a lot in behind-the-scenes and life related things.

I have no idea what are the circumstances with twitch streamers in other countries with a better economy, but I can see that for instance this one needs that money if they want to continue.

Maybe they saw that Twitter didnt feel any change, and that Reddit is still confident after the backlash, and thought this is the time.. but then they realized they arent as brave as their creators are angry already. I guess you can play with people's hobbies, but not with their livelihood

I think its fine here too, twitch for the most part is a game streaming platform.

First I've read about this from a content creator I follow through Nitter. They were immediately talking with their content creator peers that this change kills almost all sponsor deals. The one I am following is doing test-streams to youtube, and they were half-joking about speeding up tests :D

But to get back to topic, this one has it in burned in banner form, but I think it is fine because they do it in a non-obtrusive way. I have twitch ads blocked for privacy reasons, so at least this is a way - however small it is - in which I can support them, with helping them to such deals by slightly increasing the view count.

By default it should follow your browser's settings, which may follow your OS settings. Though this won't work if you use Firefox with privacy.resiftFingerprinting turned on. Except if there is a way to set it from ad addon, a userscript, or a userstyle..

Edit: that pref causes automatic theme selection to not work when it is turned on, not when it is off