if they outright forced us to stop day one thered be outrage, so they instead ease us in. first a popup, then a timed popup, slowly leading to their actual goal but without the outrage
if they outright forced us to stop day one thered be outrage, so they instead ease us in. first a popup, then a timed popup, slowly leading to their actual goal but without the outrage
Relevant link: https://interpeer.io/blog/2023/07/google-vs-the-open-web/
Bottom line: Google want to introduce a live certification process for web clients so that webservers can potentially discriminate against specific configurations.
@Shaul@lemmy.ca
And how much power does Google have to force that on websites that reject it and users who use Lbrewolf or IceCat?
All the power that an advertisement network can buy. Especially youtube since it’s owned by google. And advertisers will be happy to have a way of forcing site visitors to run ads/malware or else they will not get served the content.
It’s similar to certain bank apps refusing to function on Android devices with an unlocked bootloader: you want the convenience of an e-banking application (/ad-driven corporate website)? – Your device (/web browser) “security” must be verified by the “authority” who actually owns your operating system, else you won’t. Everyone* will “be loving” their secure devices, because they “just work”.
*who is a potential
customerbuyer and therefore relevantGoogle is trying to use their dominance to actually own the www. The comment/issue section of the github site of the proposal is quite enlightening, if you have the time … especially their reactions on the general dismissal and condemnation of the proposal as unethical.