this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
640 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59402 readers
3333 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Google Chrome will limit ad blockers starting June 2024::The "Manifest V3" rollout is back after letting tensions cool for a year.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 70 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Free ad for Firefox. Funny enough can't be blocked by ad blockers.

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago (7 children)

How long until Google starts paying sites to require chrome? The already tried rolling that concept out a few months ago. They only stopped because of the backlash that was publicly associated with it. They already pay major phone manufacturers to have google as their default or only search option.

So who's going to stop them when we start finding that major popular sites suddenly don't work on firefox?

[–] kzhe@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago

Hopefully the EU

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People could start configuring their sites to ban Google Chrome. Give a scary message that says something like "Google Chrome is not allowed on this site for your protection. Google Chrome has severe vulnerabilities that allow for easy infection. An autistic teenager was falsely convicted of selling CP after being infected and now must register for life."

People would switch away from Google Chrome incredibly fast if website owners started posting that.

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I like the way you think, but that sounds like a lawsuit with one of the richest companies on the planet behind the prosecution. Could work for sites based outside of US jurisdiction.

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can't sue millions of people.

It could also be made very hard for them to win. All someone has to do is make a site making that claim and their ability to win will be gone. Any defendant can claim they read that site.

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They don't sue millions of people. They sue one person and make an example out of them and the chilling effect does the rest. That's how this kind of thing goes.

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 1 points 1 year ago

That's only if everyone else complies.

Plenty of organizations would likely jump in. Someone could make a site alleging the bad thing that happened as the result of Google Chrome and that pretty much tanks the entire case. It would be very hard to prove reckless disregard for the truth when there's a website that alleges the claim. Furthermore, someone could simply write the code and distribute it, and every site displaying it would have grounds for displaying it.

All someone really has to do is find one thing that could potentially be a vulnerability in Google Chrome and they have grounds for making a scary notice about it.

[–] yoshisaur@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If that does happen, can’t we just spoof our user agent to be chrome?

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Their web integrity API they were planning was specifically to prevent that.

[–] yoshisaur@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I had no idea… didn’t that end up being canceled at some point or am I mistaken?

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

As it is customary, companies drop bomb shells to gauge their user base reaction. They pull back if the reaction is too strong and slowly reintroduce it piece by piece when the things have cooled down a bit.

The moment they announced their intention to DRM the web meant that they will try to push however they can.

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

With something like that, it's usually just rebranded and pushed out after backlash calms down.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

I think there are more reliable ways to identify your browser. The user-agent is self reported, so not reliable. It's just the simplest option that's usually good enough unless you're doing something malicious.

[–] AWittyUsername@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

They won't pay them it will be smarter than that. Possibly with proprietary APIs that only work on chrome etc. some sites already don't work on Firefox.

They'll also further enshitifiy their own services on non chrome browsers.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 year ago

Then we'll develop add-ons that make the sites pretend Firefox is Chrome. It may not be perfect for a while, but it'll still block ads.

[–] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

Sounds like they will create a non-corporate version of the internet by accident. Sound good to me, but I feel like it won't fly in EU to well.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

When sites see the drop off of users.

Also, Chromite exists.