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

Privacy

34102 readers
670 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

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.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TeoTwawki@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

Lets break the near monopoly they have and give what google wants the finger.

https://duckduckgo.com/windows

You know how nearly every browser is now based on chromium? And firefox when its not chromium, ~~and even forefox adopted the extension limitations of chrome~~? Well I hear Duckduckgo's new browser something new finally instead of based off an existing browser.

It doesn't have extensions yet but those are coming and adblock is baked in.

Ed: my 1st downvotes of my time on the fediverse. <3 you to folks.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] yaycupcake@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years 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.

[–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago

Firefox gang come on!

[–] arc@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

I find it hard to see how they could protect content from ad blockers without also crippling pages that self modify their own content. Perhaps they could put headers akin to content security policy that forbids external modification. Assuming a browser were to honour that header I could see bad publicity and a lot of people just moving to another browser which doesn't. Additionally, ad blockers aren't the only things that modify pages - breaking accessibility add ons could be more negative publicity (just like with Reddit).

I think browsers would be best off to let websites develop countermeasures if they're so sore about ad blockers. Perhaps they could use "self healing" Javascript libraries that put back content which is removed. Or they could just refuse to work if they detect an ad blocker, e.g. they stick some canaries in the DOM or along blocked paths to see if an ad blocker is present.

[–] sol@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 years ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Makes me want to donate to Firefox, not the Mozilla Foundation. To Firefox.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 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 (1 replies)
[–] perestroika@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

If they overcome / disable ad blocking, they will lose browser market share - and people don't design websites for marginal browsers with exotic features.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 2 years ago (1 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.

[–] scorpiosrevenge@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Once you get to that point it's gonna get back to dark web or some other nonstandard communication form to bypass the traditional http/https protocols for "web browsing".

[–] darthfabulous42069@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

🤔 People could just make a new protocol and build a separate internet from the ground up.

But they'd have to do it on free Linux computers, because the ones with Windows and Mac OSes (and the specially made chips) can be accessed directly by those companies. In principle, they can see into everyone's hard drives and add or delete shit to their whims. So a way around that would have to be found too. Scary...

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›