216
submitted 1 year ago by narwhal@lemmy.ml to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

Basically drm for your browser

Fuck that though

[-] bappity@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

this is the most batshit insane proposal... I hope nobody supports it

[-] sci@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

if google microsoft and apple support it, that already covers over 90% of the market

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Google alone is enough. Biggest browser, search engine, advertiser, OS and some of the biggest sites on the web all owned by them.

[-] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

If they steamroll this thru, youll have an amazing anti trust case

[-] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 year ago

Don't worry, people will certainly make bypasses for that shit

[-] Nindelofocho@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

that’s exactly what people said with manifest V3 then all the sudden they were getting strikes on youtube for having their ad blocker on

[-] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

And how well did that work out? I personally haven't gotten any strike on youtube, using uBlock/mpv on PC, Youtube Revanced on mobile and SmartTube for TV since forever

Also there's this https://invidious.io/. So yeah, it's just the classic cat & mouse game that has been going on for ever since software added drm

[-] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

Google has already lashed out at Invidious though, and they'll keep trying

I agree that in most cases people can find workarounds, but I don't think we should take these things for granted

[-] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago

Google has no ground to stand on against Invidious

They may harass them but it'll be veeery difficult to chase down all instances

[-] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Oh, I'm well aware of that, but I also have little faith in the justice system to recognize this

In any case, it seems like a warning shot from Google and an interest in taking down sites like Invidious

I'm not trying to spread doubt, but I also think complacency is dangerous, especially given the history of corporate giants like Google

[-] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Steamrolling this change Forcing people to have an incredably invasive change to force you to use chrome or use googled android, or use googled chromebooks.

its incredably bright lines it would destablize trust in anything that agrees with it. If the amrican court doesnt prosecute. It will eather show the ignorance/lies in others or destablize amarican trust in the law.

[-] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We're talking about a public and justice system that mostly agreed the Patriot Act was a good idea and that ICE protects us from terrorism

Anyone who hasn't already lost trust in America and our law has been sleeping for decades

[-] spiderman@ani.social 0 points 1 year ago

and what kinda of thing does this protect?

[-] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

I'd guess it's first gonna be used for streaming TV shows and such. After that it'll probably be used for absurd things

[-] spiderman@ani.social 0 points 1 year ago

I'd guess it's first gonna be used for streaming TV shows

I thought they were already being protected by DRM.

[-] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Kinda, but it doesn't work very well. Using video download manager you can download pretty much every video from the web

[-] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Malware, malware encrypts its code so researchers cant crack into it and antivirus cant anilize it. Google is accedentally sponsoring malware

[-] azuth@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Ads. To be precise this on it's own provides a way for servers to be certain of the environment the pages run (browser, plugins, os). Protecting ads or other functions come from servers refusing unattested configurations or configurations they don't like (i.e. running adblock, running firefox, running linux).

[-] spiderman@ani.social 1 points 1 year ago

if chrome fully adapts this, this might well be a full blown commerical by chrome for people to switch to firefox. i have been only using chrome only to run our projects locally and test it out.

[-] baltakatei@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

It should be noted that “being certain of the environment the pages run” requires controlling the client software being executed which requires preventing the user from modifying said executable which requires the browser to either be closed source or, more effectively, controlling the user's hardware via blackbox verification chips (e.g. TPM DRM). It's not just advertisers that would benefit but any website that wants to DRM content.

this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
216 points (98.6% liked)

Firefox

18128 readers
100 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS