Well that's exactly the kind of job that an (opinionated) User Agent should do for you. <aybe configurable, maybe not. You can always change your agent (so, browser) if you don't like its opinion.
I'm not so sure, by this logic we should have ad blocking by default as well, however that's a recipe for getting your browser banned by popular sites.
Ad blocking by default is absolutely the way to go. Spoof the Chrome user agent if this actually becomes a problem (which would help with fingerprinting anyway).
This is a bit like antivirus software authors worrying about being "banned" by the virus creators.
I'm all for that approach, but it opens a serious cat and mouse game where any rendering difference between Firefox and Chrome is quickly turned into a major problem for average users. Firefox would no longer be something you can recommend to your parents as they'd be constantly fighting bans. Ad blocker detection is bad enough as is with the current number of users.
Popup blocking is definitely not standard and expected. There is a 90% chance of every website you visit to show a popup and not be "blocked" by the most privacy-conscious browsers. But. They're technically not "popups", they're just divs overlaying over the content that you were served but can't see. Or they're little slide-banners that nag you about signing up for a newsletter email or agreeing to tracking cookie non-sense. Oh and let's not forget about the popups asking you to allow "notifications" from this site, or to allow "___location info" to be shared.
> that's a recipe for getting your browser banned by popular sites
Good luck with that. They have no choice but to believe whatever data the browser sends them, data that we control. If their precious content leaves their server at all they've already lost.
