this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
149 points (98.7% liked)

Privacy

31263 readers
559 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 4 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 42 points 1 year ago (16 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 19 points 1 year ago (3 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 15 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 13 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.

[–] Kichae@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

And one of the primary reasons they never had to make a profit was that, so long as interest rates were functionally zero, it didn't really cost the investor class much of anything to park money in a money losing operation while waiting for it to become sellable.

With interest rates back to pre-2008 levels, though, there's a price to money again. And a real opportunity cost. So, compete with bonds or watch your investors walk.

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

It's like in Silicon Valley when the VC tells them they don't need to be profitable they just need to market, then as soon as he dips below technically being a billionaire he demands that they focus on being profitable immediately

[–] ddnomad@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 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.

[–] i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We're on Lemmy. We're already winning!

[–] demystify@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We may win a battle or few, but not the war.

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago

Then i'll scrape the songs i currently watch on youtube with jdownload and stop using the page otherwise.

All they do is make the internet less attractive. Now that works to increase profits for a while, but eventually the content creators withdraw, the platforms become worse and eventually uncool and people stop using it, or use it less. Facebook is on a decline in western countries. We went through multiple video snippet apps already and tiktok and instagram too will be declining eventually.

We dont have to win the war because the war will never end. We just gotta make the best out of the battlefields we win.

[–] dontblink@feddit.it 3 points 1 year ago

But a small minority of really determined people is enough to change the world 🙌

I love to see how people nowadays find easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.. That's how they've been brainwashing us till now.

[–] borlax@lemmy.borlax.com 3 points 1 year ago

You'll finish your enshittification and you'll like it!

[–] fearout@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I know, right? It’s so weird. In every single instance of some bullshit happening it’s easy to brush it off as incompetence or an attempt at profit maximization, but overall it feels a lot like some kind of targeted disassembly of whatever made the internet great and facilitated open discussions.

[–] Cube6392@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I don't think it's coordinated, I think it all starts from the same root cause: Silicon Valley Bank failed. These companies all need to do something they've really not done much of in the past: turn a profit. But these companies are not run by the business geniuses we were once convinced were running the show. Most of them live so far removed from a normal persons life that they don't understand what motivates us, what we want in a platform, and as soon as we provide feedback after they've already made a decision, they decide it's because we don't understand the squeeze they're under to make money.

  • Twitter: Elon Musk thinks he could make more money from subscriptions than advertisements. The whole thing's a disaster because that's really dumb. This case may be a little different though because there's some evidence Musk just wanted more people to see his tweets and to pay people to be his friend
  • Reddit: Spez fails to see that he has multiple revenue sources available to him so long as he keeps his users around. Somewhere, there was the right balance of charging for the API at a reasonable price, performing better market research on his user base to provide a better ad platform, and keeping the Reddit coin system in place as the base liked it because the user base paid more for that than most similar online payment schemes.
  • Google: this is the scary one. This is the one that seems like they know exactly what they're doing. They're ramping up their enshittification following the fall of SVB, but the way they're doing it is both malicious and a minor enough inconvenience that the majority of their users will stay. And they're doing it in small quiet ways. A little bit of tweaking how YouTube bans users here. A little bit of RFCs about DRM on the web there. Some PRs to chromium and android no one will notice. All to squeeze more ads into peoples online experiences. Their search product has been utter shit for about 6 years now, but people still prefer it over Bing or DuckDuckGo (which is a wrapper for Bing). They've learned the following lesson: if you're big enough, the citizens of the web will let you do it
[–] fearout@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

That's a good write up, thanks. I don't claim it's coordinated, just that it feels more and more that way.

Also, I switched to DDG a year or so ago and I haven't heard that it was a wrapper for Bing. So I went to google it (I can't not use this verb when talking about online searches, lol), and it seems like it's not really the case. It gets some results from bing and utilises their ads to make profit, but it seems like it's a small part of their output. Is that incorrect? Do you have some more info about it being a wrapper? I'm kinda curious now

[–] TheHighRoad@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I 100% would have signed up for Reddit Premium and payed monthly for Sync access if they had allowed me to hand them the money. Oh well ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frevaljee@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Google has already been a worthless pos for years. Impossible to get relevant results, even with operators. You just get ads and irrelevant SEO sites. And adding "reddit" at the end of the query will probably not work so well in the future either, seeing how that site has also gone to shit.

And they have already tried monopolising the entire internet with their amp bullshit.

So this is just in line with their vision of making the whole internet into a pile of burning shit under their total control.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sijt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

and now Google of all companies wants to lock down the whole internet?

Of all the companies, Google always seemed the most likely, both to want to and to be successful. They’ve tried before, sometimes in small ways, sometimes in larger more obvious ways (AMP, the implementation of content filtering in Chrome etc.).

They’re the world’s largest advertising and data harvesting company. It’s their business. Of course they want to lock the internet down to serve their goals of learning as much about you as possible and using that data to shove ads in your face.

Whenever using any Google/Alphabet product you have to ask yourself, “am I ok with this thing I’m about to use being built by the world’s largest advertising company?”. The answer should be “no” more than it is “yes”, particularly for things that have access to lots of your data, like web browsers, phones, home speakers etc.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Kaltovar@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I literally swapped to Librewolf before the Rossman video was done. I was on Brave Browser before, but it's based on Chromium. Fuck Chromium and fuck Google. Fuck this shitty amoeba that tries to spread into and control everything.

I will post stupid shit on my federated forum and you will fucking live with it Google. Fuck you. Burn. It's time to break up the internet monopolies and do some trust busting. Someone pull FDR's rotten corpse out of the grave and put it back to work.

[–] HR_Pufnstuf@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] andruid@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I do have some concerns over DoH for this reason. Centralizing it gives it more value to be extracted once it becomes THE standard.

Mind you from a tech stand point DoQ is just awesome on paper, I just wish it was more decentralized.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (45 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

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.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I was just thinking that I'm sure Google will lobby the US government to get this model enforced as law, making it illegal for anyone to create workarounds, or alternative browsers. And the US legislative government being what it is, will hand Google whatever legislation it wants to turn their nightmare into a reality.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (43 replies)
[–] jflorez@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago (3 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 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mrmanager@lemmy.today 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And we saw this was going to happen at least 5 years ago. But since the majority don't care, we get what we deserve I guess.

Let's just hope this doesn't go through.

[–] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is exactly the kind of thing that demostrates why DRM shouldn't be part of the web standards. It's very existence is abuse and this use even more so.

DRM needs to be illegal.

[–] HR_Pufnstuf@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Laws are written by the rich. Want to stop things like this, eat the rich.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ItzLiftin@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Companies like google should really not have so much power. I have stopped using chrome 1 year ago, and i am thinking about switching to a browser that doesn´t use chromium.

[–] NixDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I switched to Firefox years ago and don't regret it. There are some sites that don't play nice with FF, but for the most part it works better than chrome.

[–] Aasikki@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

And it's 100% not firefox's fault that some sites don't work on it. It's the fault of google coming up with propietary shit and lazy devs not bothering to test and optimize it for Firefox.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ComeHereOrIHookYou@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 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 (1 replies)
[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Inb4 you can only browse the internet with Chromium.

[–] BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 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 6 points 1 year ago

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 (2 replies)
[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 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 (2 replies)
[–] Star@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I ditched Chrome about a year ago for Edge and just recently switched to Firefox, shouldn't really be concerning as long as there are alternatives.

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