this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
197 points (91.9% liked)

Technology

58157 readers
4161 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] chitak166@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but google won't sacrifice its monopoly to show people more ads. Hence why they, you know, haven't done it yet.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

In what way are they sacrificing their monopoly? There’s no viable alternative to n YouTube.

They also restricted IE6 when it was far more dominant than Firefox is today (and when YouTube was far less dominant), so it’s not completely unheard of.

[–] Chreutz@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But using the dominance of YouTube to influence the browser market is textbook anticompetitive, painting a huge target on themselves for regulators.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

They can probably find loop holes, like saying they do support many alternative browsers like Edge, Safari, Opera, Vivaldi, Brave, etc. . They just don’t want “insecure” and “outdated” browsers that support terrible stuff like ad blocking, but they can agree to support Firefox if Mozilla takes action to prevent “insecure” extensions like ad blocking.