this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
2028 points (99.3% liked)

Privacy

31833 readers
138 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

And since you won't be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is... interesting to say the least.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee 438 points 1 year ago (32 children)

What the fuck is happening to the internet recently?

Twitter and Reddit CEOs completely losing their minds, and now Google of all companies wants to lock down the whole internet?

This isn't even close to being okay. It's 100% bullshit.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 226 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Interest rates going up means investors are demanding more profit so all the tricks web companies have held off on till now are coming out.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 171 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A lot of them never had to make a profit before.

Rich idiots threw money at anything because while a million dollars is more than the vast amount of us will ever have, to them it's like buying a lotto scratcher.

The underlying issue is wealth imbalance.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 71 points 1 year ago

That wealth imbalance also pushes companies to force dumb shit like this on thier customers.

If Google were to just come out with a $10 a month plan that removed all the sleazy ways they try and profit from you, the overwhemling response would be "Oh great yet another subscription", because these subscriptions have become a significant chunk of people's income each month.

But what if greedy neoliberals hadn't been pocketing our pay rises for $20 years and that subscription was functionally $1? Most people would be happy to blow $20 supporting 20 different content providers.

Unfortunately, their greed is insatiable. There's always a room of executives doing their grubby little sums. "If people have $1, they probably have $2. We could double our profits! Then double our salaries!".

Inflation just means "If rich people find out you've got more money, they'll fuck you out of that too".

The $1 will never be enough. They'll keep charging more and more until people have nothing left to hand over. Then they'll figure out more ways to squeeze a profit out of you. Manipulating you with ads, selling your private data, turning your body into expensive dogfood -- whatever makes them a few more cents.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ddnomad@infosec.pub 96 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

The enshittification of the internet shall continue.

We will fight and we will lose, as depressing as it sounds. The vast majority of people just don’t and won’t care.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)
[–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 284 points 1 year ago (76 children)

One comment mentions possible incompability with article 22 of the GDPR, and I sure hope the EU will stand their ground on this.

I can only imagine noyb letting all hell break loose. We need more people like him, dissecting corporations legal bs to find every last little thing we can possibly hold against them.

Obligatory use Firefox

[–] AmbroisindeMontaigu@kbin.social 41 points 1 year ago

Let's hope there's already a law that the EU can find to apply (since they already don't like the non-EU dominance of big tech), or that they make one in time.

load more comments (75 replies)
[–] jflorez@sh.itjust.works 196 points 1 year ago (7 children)

This is the result of the world blindly using Chrome and other Chromium based browsers. Now with effectively full control over the browser that more than 90% of the world uses Google can force its will on the internet

[–] whereisk@lemmy.world 80 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Given that Firefox is now faster than Chrome I see no reason to remain.

[–] ExFed@lemm.ee 41 points 1 year ago

Momentum. And it's likely most people won't be about to tell, or regularly run comparisons to find out for themselves. Theres enough value added to Chrome that people kind of assume it's "the best" ... It took me years to convince my boss to switch, but the one thing that did it for him was just that the PDF viewer is better in Firefox.

People have weird preferences that don't always line up with what software developers expect.

[–] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 42 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wait, is Google in the process of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish on the free internet?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 154 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Inb4 you can only browse the internet with Chromium.

[–] BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com 131 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

Well, the engineers say it themselves: nothing would prevent websites developers to prevent access from browsers that do not support this "Web DRM".

My biggest fear though is that it becomes a standard which all browsers will have to support to stay relevant. And with Google building the engine used by the vast majority of browsers, they can force this upon other browser engines (ie. Safari and Firefox).

[–] sab@kbin.social 159 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's such a potent example why everyone who cares need to stop using Chromium based browsers before it's too late. Stunts like this would be much harder to pull if there wasn't a de facto browser monopoly.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] xmax3@sh.itjust.works 147 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I would stop visiting any website that implements this. Simple as that. I will step away (will try at least) from any system that doesn't respect my privacy or myself. Like I ditched Facebook, Reddit and others.

load more comments (6 replies)

Ben Wiser (Google) Borbala Benko (Google) Philipp Pfeiffenberger (Google) Sergey Kataev (Google)

Congratulations, guys. You are now internet pariahs. Your unrepentantly mercenary lack of engineering ethics is now recorded for all eternity. You have nobody but yourselves to blame.

[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 132 points 1 year ago (6 children)

That's a good way for me to never visit your website again. Honestly, this kinda sounds like the death of the internet if I'm being honest. This would transform it from a free medium into a full blown corporate dystopia. It's really scary to see the digital (corporate) development over the past couple decades. Would be really cool if we don't move further towards some cyberpunk like future where megacorps control everything.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 115 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Fuck DRMs and fuck these turds

And they went ahead and blocked comments now - "An owner of this repository has limited the ability to comment to users that have contributed to this repository in the past."

Fucking cowards

EDIT: I went ahead and reported the distro as malware. Also, it feels like the internet is about to split in a open internet (basically just like tor) and a corporate internet where if you don't pay the big tech you can't access anything.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Platform27@lemmy.ml 92 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So soon we’ll need uBlock Origin FitGirl Edition?

[–] 100thCatMarch@kbin.cafe 56 points 1 year ago

Hopefully we won't have to deal with a uBlock Origin Empress Edition

[–] zarathustra0@lemmy.world 91 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ComeHereOrIHookYou@lemmy.world 84 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Just this week or was it last week, I made a comment on some post that putting privacy aside, we should still be encouraging people to use Firefox instead of any chromium browsers to break control. It is good to see that right now I am just given a very good example why Chromium being a monopoly allows Google to control the spec (even if other companies are on board)

https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/pull/124/commits/7cd99782c90bab4104725e821d11b18bc2107218

This PR nails it

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 84 points 1 year ago (14 children)

How can the smartest people be so dumb?

Please, please, PLEASE.. if you care about a healthy open internet, donate to Mozilla, Thunderbird, and/or the EFF, at the minimum, if you're able to.

I liked to subscribe to Youtube Premium to support my favourite channels but this kinda stuff turns me off.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] kool_newt@lemm.ee 80 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All this enshittification lately really inspires me to de-google.

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (44 children)

You don't have to look at reducing your Google use as a monumental effort. You can slowly transfer, minimise the number of services you use.

Simple - Switch your default search provider to Duck Duck Go.

Easy - Switch to Firefox

Mid - export your documents from Google Drive

Complex - Transfer your primary email to another provider.

load more comments (44 replies)
[–] BranBucket@lemmy.world 80 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (17 children)

This may honestly be it for me.

I quit playing games because of all the greed and hype, I went back to piracy when streaming started to fracture and greed set in, I left non-federated social media because of the enshittifaction and invasiveness, and I go to fairly extensive lengths to block ads and protect my privacy as much as possible...

And instead of moving to any number of fair, non-exploitive business models, they're just going to force ads down my throat like that episode of black mirror.

If this goes through I'll be sorely tempted to wipe everything I can and start over as best I can. Only interact with the Internet when I need to.

You'll find me paying cash at the local used bookstore, at least until all the major publishers make that illegal.

EDIT: It's honestly depressing, I genuinely enjoy technology and the internet, but when companies like Google are able to force garbage like this it just sucks all the joy out of it for me.

It's like everying is becoming a shitty mobile game. Do the toolsheds that develop Candy Crush clones not think we can understand why in app currencies are sold in bundles of 100 but every thing we purchase with them requires amounts that end with a five? Does Google not think we know the real motivation behind a system that strives to prove ads were delivered to your browser either?

I know a lot of people may not see the real driver here, but I'm tired of being underestimated and infantalized by a bunch of dorks trapped in a corporate echo chamber. I think I'd prefer it if they just straight up said they're going to sacrifice our privacy and user experience for a quick bump in stock value.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] nonearther@lemmy.ml 75 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Google is hindrance to open web, like IE7 was with ActiveX.

Only difference is that IE7 wanted developers to develop for IE7, while Google also want to fully control the web and bend it according to its needs

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] LaggyKar@programming.dev 70 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

It doesn't seem to be targeting ad-blockers in particular (or other page customizing extensions), although that may result eventually. What it does do is let webpages restrict what web browsers and operating systems you are allowed to use, just like how SafetyNet on Android lets apps restrict you to using an OS signed by Google. That could end up with web pages forcing you to use a web browser and OS the big players like Google, Microsoft and Apple, blocking any less restrictive or less used competors like Firefox and Linux, thus creating a cryptographically enforced oligopoly. And even if they signed e.g. Firefox, it would only be certain builds of it. That would make it impossible to make a truly open-source browser that can access pages using this API. Quite concerning.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] AndreTelevise@lemmy.world 70 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (13 children)

I already replaced my search engine, my social media and my Reddit.

Do you want me to replace my email too, Google?

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 68 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Having thought about it for a bit, it's possible for this proposal to be abused by authoritarian governments.

Suppose a government—say, Wadiya—mandated that all websites allowed on the Wadiyan Internet must ensure that visitors are using a list of verified browsers. This list is provided by the Wadiyan government, and includes: Wadiya On-Line, Wadiya Explorer, and WadiyaScape Navigator. All three of those browsers are developed in cooperation with the Wadiyan government.

Each of those browsers also happen to send a list of visited URLs to a Wadiyan government agency, and routinely scan the hard drive for material deemed "anti-social."

Because the attestations are cryptographically verified, citizens would not be able to fake the browser environment. They couldn't just download Firefox and install an extension to pretend to be Wadiya Explorer; they would actually have to install the spyware browser to be able to browse websites available on the Wadiyan Internet.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Saneless@lemmy.world 67 points 1 year ago

They've really strongly adopted their new "Do only evil" mantra

[–] yaycupcake@lemmy.blahaj.zone 63 points 1 year ago

This is super fucked up. I use Stylus extensively to customize the UI on so many sites. Not even for adblocking or that kind of thing, but for accessibility. I actually learned to code many years ago specifically so I could write my own userstyles so that popular websites would be more accessible for me. This is not just predatory on an ads and money level but on an accessibility level too.

[–] Skates@feddit.nl 63 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

I reported him on github, for all the good that will do.

fucking shills

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I hate the fact that one of the biggest and richest corporations in the world, is just a massive ad spamming dumpster fire. Imagine the good a powerful company like this could do, if 90% of their effort wasn't put into cramming ever more ads into people's eyeballs.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] dunestorm@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Ads have already been proven to be an extremely ineffective marketing strategy; now Google wants to force them down our throats even more? Fuck off

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tenth@lemmy.ml 51 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Can someone give me an easy to understand example of what they are proposing? Assume that I don’t allow them to install any software/tool that helps them track me/my device.

I saw this comment and found it helpful but its still not clear to me

At its core, it establishes software components called "attesters" that decide whether your device and/or browser is "trustworthy" enough - as defined by the website you are trying to visit. Websites can enforce which "attesters" users must accept, simply by denying everybody access who refuses to bow down to this regime; or who uses attesters that are deemed "inappropriate"; or who is on a platform that does not provide any attesters the website finds "acceptable".

In short: it is specifically designed to destroy the open web by denying you the right to use whatever browser you want to use, on whatever operating system. It is next-level "DRM", introduced by affiliates of a company that already has monopolized the browser market. And the creators of this "proposal" absolutely know what they are attempting here.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] sol@thelemmy.club 49 points 1 year ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Kushia@lemmy.ml 49 points 1 year ago

Google saw the enshitening of the web and went "hold my beer, I'll show you how it's done!".

[–] ruination@discuss.tchncs.de 49 points 1 year ago

And they try to demonise Tor and I2P... At this rate, the dark web would soon be the only place to go.

[–] LegionElite@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I'm using a VPN right now and Google keeps doing the captcha request thing and loops as if it's broken. Never had this problem before.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] uncapybarable@lemmy.ml 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Big fan of the "how dare you don't use professional language" vibe coming from the folks clinically discussing how to ruin what little remains of the open web.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] skillissuer@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

yet another reason to bash AMP

[–] BudgieMania@kbin.social 40 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Non-goals [...] Enforce or interfere with browser functionality, including plugins and extensions. [...]

But guys they gave their pinky promise it's totally fine

let's just allow them to irreversibly make this change so that there is nothing preventing them from applying this totally Non-Goals in the future what could happen

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›