this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
324 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59446 readers
3620 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
 

Note: Original report by Bloomberg, article by Reuters proxied by Neuters to bypass paywall.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] normalexit@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago

This seems like a sensible consumer protection to not let the ad company control the biggest web browser. I won't hold my breath, but I'm glad they are trying something.

AWS should also be split from Amazon.

[–] NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.org 1 points 46 minutes ago (1 children)

Chrome isn't even developed by anyone but Google.

Oh, the DOJ is ran by idiots, my bad.

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 38 minutes ago

What? The fact it's owned & developed by Google is the whole point

This is how the DOJ is planning to approach dismantling Google's illegal monopoly, by breaking chrome - the world's most used browser - away from them

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

They are going to ask a judge like they have no fucking balls.

[–] vortexal@sopuli.xyz 30 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

If this happens, I'd be interested in seeing how this effects ChromeOS. I don't use it but my mom does.

Also, if you're confused as to why ChromeOS would be effected, while it's based on Gentoo Linux, ChromeOS uses a modified version of Chrome as it's Desktop Environment.

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

Yes I would like to know what that means for ChromeOS and Chromebooks. If the new "Chrome" company got ChromeOS also that would be huge. But if that is not a requirement Google could just put another Chromium browser in ChromeOS. They could also continue to sell Chromebooks but based on a ChromiumOS fork.

[–] Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Its based on debian now :(

Depending on what version

[–] vortexal@sopuli.xyz 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

According to Wikipedia, it's still based on Gentoo, it just uses Debian for running Linux applications in Crostini.

[–] Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago

Oh go figure, my bad :P

[–] Rogue@feddit.uk 73 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Google will bribe trump and this'll be undone immediately

[–] 0xb@lemm.ee 17 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

That would be the logical thing according to common sense and probably according to pichai a few weeks ago, but trump just nominated an anti big tech and musk friend to the FCC. musk is behind almost everybody in ai and autonomous cars so he'll definitely push to hamper all competitors.

Sure, we don't know how far would they go or how long will musk keep having white house influence and I personally think breaking up google is now off the table, but I don't think they will get off the hook too easily.

So surely a very big bribe.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 58 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

Google is such a good company, one the best. Everybody says it. I was just talking to John Google the other day, and he tells me, no really he did, he tells me we're going to do amazing things together. Oogles of googles. That's what we'll sell. Everybody will know about google by this time next year. It's true.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

You forgot the unrelated rant in the middle about toasters being too dark these days or some shit.

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 33 minutes ago* (last edited 33 minutes ago)

And a series of words that sounds kinda like a complex sentence when you listen to it, but actually means nothing whatsoever

And he says to me... a very smart guy, Mark, he's really doing... he's really got to show... when he does things he really does them, you know, like he really does, very impressive, very modern

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

He also didn't say his name three times in 10 seconds. Then sort of fade off and vaguely look off into the distance.

They said to me Donald, Donald, they said Donald, they do amazing things, real bigly things, my father, my father, said to me Donald, they do big things Google land. Really good things.......... Yeah.......... Big things...........................

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

........I mean, you do you buddy.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 15 points 8 hours ago

God damnit.

[–] barkingspiders@infosec.pub 92 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Lit. It's a good ask although it's not clear what separation means here. Not going to hold my breath, the big corpos seem to usually win these kind of games.

[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 49 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Chrome is now owned by a separate conpany with the same major stock holders.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 32 points 10 hours ago

It's like they're a company pretending to be another company, disguised as another company. Tropic Thunder all the way down.

[–] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 52 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Chrome is now owned by a company, owned by a company, owned by another company, that is owned by Google.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 44 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

And even in the case where there is actual separation, and competition, it will only be temporary!

see history of telco consolidation after a monopoly breakup in 1984

[–] Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 hours ago

Why doesn’t this have sprint?

[–] ColdWater@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 hours ago

LoL they won't, even if they buy it for 1 trillion dollar

[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 42 points 11 hours ago (3 children)
[–] Twitches@lemm.ee 17 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

If you're talking about edge browser, edge is chrome.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 9 points 10 hours ago (4 children)

What's to stop them just making another browser?

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

What’s to stop them just making another browser?

Nothing. Chromium is open source. So they could just fork it and declare a new "official" google browser and it would be a lot like Chrome.

I'm not sure why the govt thinks forcing google to give up a particular fork/branch of an open source browser is all that meaningful. It might make more sense if Chrome was a closed source one of a kind browser.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 hours ago

I’ve worked in the aftermath of DoJ agreements like this one. The DoJ is not stupid (or at least didn’t used to be) and will have stipulations about removing Google employees from governance/write permissions to the project, with follow up check-ins every few months to make sure any shenanigans aren’t occurring.

..none of that matters though now that the DoJ is going to be dissolved.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That's exactly what I was thinking. It also makes Chrome essentially worthless to anyone except Google.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe as a whole package, but node.js servers are ubiquitous and have a ton of stakeholders that have nothing to do with web browsers.

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

What does Chrome have to do with a node.js server?

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Same JS engine, same maintainers, same iron-grip control by Google.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

I've got no idea what you're talking about here.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Not needed. Internet Explorer existed for years after the 90s. It wasn't killed by the courts. It was killed by the fact that it's only function was to install a better browser on first boot.

[–] cdf12345@lemm.ee 8 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I think you are severely underestimating how many people don’t even understand the difference between windows, explorer, a web browser and even the Internet itself during the 90’s well into the 2000’s even 2010’s.

That’s who kept IE alive

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

No offense but it was the US Government. Most of their websites were coded for it, and quite a few of them didn't work properly or reliably in other browsers as a result. This was true up until it was sunsetted and they were forced to update to edge and some of the websites still haven't been properly moved over to chromium. When the pandemic hit and the Armed forces had to setup remote work for thousands of people Microsoft basically built them a fork of Teams. The US Government is kind of running hand in hand with Microsoft on a lot of stuff if you just hazard a cursory look.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 10 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

With blackjack and hookers?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›