jorpy laforge

how many years of lost productivity and set backs in open web standards because of their internet explorer nonsense and you’re saying it wasn’t a successful execution of this strategy? i think they won and set back the open web by years.

one point about the mit license is that it’s not copyleft because mit license does not protect derivative works. that is why they fought so hard against gpl licensed works and even forbade the gpl3 license on codeplex. mit license is no threat because it can be incorporated into closed source products.

with github, i don’t think they are going to pull a musk or a spez, they are going to wield their influence carefully to frame the conversation and tools around open software to work in their favor as they have always tried to do. i do agree that they seem less outwardly aggressive than back in the day, though.

as far as facebook in the fediverse, they will have the ability to inflict significant, if not fatal, damage, just like ms did to open web with ie and just like google did with xmpp with gchat. that’s something worth discussing.

sorry to be so direct, but if anyone is parroting anything, it’s you with the “they would never do that thing they always do, i’m super reasonable” position. EEE is literally covered in the first leaked Halloween document as a strategy to displace open standards.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents#Documents_I_and_II

this is a strategy microsoft has consistently used for years and continues to use to this day. hell, they are embracing and extending javascript right now with typescript.

it’s an interesting development that will have a direct impact on lemmy since mastodon and lemmy users can interact with each other.

time will tell how closely they follow microsoft’s old “embrace, extend, extinguish” game plan for combatting open standards. who knows? maybe they will be good faith actors in this new space, or won’t be able to gain enough user share to truly do nasty stuff.

it breaks the social contract of tolerance and seeks to end discourse by killing the participants when escalated to its final form. hate groups are no more participants in discourse than fire is an architectural style for building a house.

we don’t have to take seriously the folks that suggest “let’s set it on fire” when discussing whether we want to build a victorian or modern style home because they are not serious people and their poor ideas have been proven idiotic too many times to count.

he’s referring to the fact that almost all browsers use chrome’s rendering engine and google is abusing its position of leadership by making unnecessary api changes that make adblocking extensions all but impossible to implement.

if you want to still be able to block ads on the web in the years to come, switch to a non-chrome web browser to limit google’s power and ability to abuse its position.

i think as of now, they have delayed the sabotage, but it’s coming.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/12/chrome-delays-plan-to-limit-ad-blockers-new-timeline-coming-in-march/

i don’t disagree with your point, but want to add that twitter did take some minor damage from their changes. notably, npr still won’t post to twitter and i’m sure there are many dead accounts like that.

i imagine the platform is damaged from stunts like this in terms of quality content and posts, but probably not enough to make much of a difference for most users. and honestly, media has never been able to help themselves with twitter - i can’t imagine news media will ever stop with the low effort “let’s see what idiots on twitter are saying!” obsession that gained critical mass in the 2008 election.

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/12/1169269161/npr-leaves-twitter-government-funded-media-label

i’m also joining the first comment train, choo choo!