this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
1494 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

34870 readers
80 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Google does not and cannot have any control over any Chromium forks

That is not true. I remember several chromium-based browser developers saying for several changes made by google to chromium that they can't afford the maintenance burden to reverse it.

One instance of that happening is switching the addon framework to manifest v3, which severely degrades the functionality of browser firewalls, like uBlock Origin, by restricting (for "security reasons", apparently) the amount of network filters they can apply (and maybe with other changes too, I don't remember it exactly).

But there were also other instances of this happening, which I don't remember right now. Maybe also when they released the first version with FLoC.

And then I think these 2 (anti)features (even any of them alone) also qualify for invasions of privacy, and they are present in most of the chromium based browsers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I remember several chromium-based browser developers saying for several changes made by google to chromium that they can't afford the maintenance burden to reverse it.

...reverse what?

manifest v3

uBlock already solved this issue and still for other browsers it was never a problem in the first place, because they have domain-blocking built into the browser itself.

Know why? Because. They're. Not. Chrome.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

...reverse what?

"several changes made by google to chromium"

uBlock already solved this issue

No, they don't. They released a lite version that will attempt to do it's thing in the limited environment of up to date chromium browsers.
(Edit: here are the differences between the normal and this lite version as explained by the developer: https://libreddit.pussthecat.org/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1067als/eli5_ublock_lite_vs_ublock_origin/j3h00xj/?context=3)

And then here is something new that shows how google can not only easily control chroimum based browsers, but basically every other one too, by creating their own definition of "open web":
Their vision: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/blob/main/explainer.md
Users thoughts: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues
A specific issue (there are more) where the standpoint of googlers (you are dumb! (does not explain why)) and the users (we don't want this!) can be clearly seen: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues/36
Discussion on lemmy: https://lemmy.blackeco.com/post/25574