this is false. and instead of just claiming so, here is proof: there are built-in (but disabled by default) blocklists specialized for cookie prompts and such

Let me rephrase then: cookie prompt blocking capabilities are not tied to the Manifest version (clearly, as exemplified by things like Ghostery). uBO could easily switch to Mv3 and still do those things.

and as I said, uBO is not just an ad blocker, so saying xy ad blocker can replace it well is false.

But we’re discussing the ad-blocking features, because these are the ones affected by Mv3, no?

All these other features exist and are perfectly fine in other extensions.

except that not really. Because again, the required browser APIs were removed, and even before that, privacy badger was not so effective

Define “not so effective”. What’s “effectiveness” in this case?

everything is effected that:

• needs to block network requests, including loading of certain site scripts
• depends on an up to date list of things to block

OK, but again: what’s the difference for the end-user? Does it impact resources utilisation? Website loading times? Reactivity? I don’t see a difference in how my uBO browser behaves vs how my Ghostery browser behaves, so what am I losing because of the Mv3 switch?