So, I see this as a logistical decision more than a true technical barrier although that said, Firefox plugins on Android kind of suck: some kind of UI api policing makes them pretty awful.
What am I missing here? For all the ones I want and google doesn't, like adguard and archive.is there are ones which would be perfectly cromulent including ones authored by google.
The one that truly matters works flawlessly on mobile, and I couldn't live without it: uBlock Origin.
So we can deduce that it's a business decision by Google to prevent ad blockers.
Chrome's market share sure doesn't seem to suffer from them blocking extensions such as ad blockers on desktop either. Most users don't care about the feature and those that do rarely consider alternatives. There's no pressure frkm consumers to implement features like these and a lot of risk if they get the UX wrong.
If you want addons, you can always stick with Firefox. The entire addon store has been opened up, unlike before where you had to hack together addon lists to install addons Mozilla didn't whitelist. The ones I use all work fine these days, including the more complex ones such as consent-o-matic.
There's also Kiwi, which is Chromium based I believe. Even comes with dev tools if that's what you want. Probably a great deal for people who use tablets with keyboards as portable dev environments.
[1] https://www.pcworld.com/article/2423294/google-is-killing-on...