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
[–] 42 points 3 years ago (15 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 years 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

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 years 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
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Elon Musk wanted to drive Twitter into the dirt once he was forced to buy it. Criticism, jet tracking, rejection of fascist-adjacent opinions that are “logical” but only if you’re a heartless engineering robot.

    His hubris forced him into buying it, but once he had to, he might as well destroy it. How else do you think he got the Saudis in on it for another billion?

    I laughed about this theory at first, just memeing it like “ha could you even imagine?” But every single day it seems more and more like he does the worst thing possible to “monetize” and then gripes about it like the only reason his brilliance isn’t working is because big mean liberal woke mind virus society is trying to do cancel culture because they’re just jealous he’s rich.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    It can be a combo of several objectives:

    • make a shitload of money
    • stop people from realising we're making a shitload of money off of their backs
    • keep people poor so that even if they do realise there's nothing they can do about it
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (9 replies)
    [–] 10 points 3 years ago (39 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

  • source
  • hideshow 40 child comments
  • load more comments (38 replies)
    [–] 9 points 3 years ago (2 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

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    So soon we’ll need uBlock Origin FitGirl Edition?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Inb4 you can only browse the internet with Chromium.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    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).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    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.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    Fuck DRMs and fuck these turds

    And they went ahead and blocked comments now - "An owner of this repository has limited the ability to comment to users that have contributed to this repository in the past."

    Fucking cowards

    EDIT: I went ahead and reported the distro as malware. Also, it feels like the internet is about to split in a open internet (basically just like tor) and a corporate internet where if you don't pay the big tech you can't access anything.

  • source
  • [+] 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Google is hindrance to open web, like IE7 was with ActiveX.

    Only difference is that IE7 wanted developers to develop for IE7, while Google also want to fully control the web and bend it according to its needs

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    And there’s zero chance of some other company dethroning Chrome like IE was. The only way that happens is with government intervention to protect the free market.

    But of course antitrust enforcement is dead in this country, so that’s not happening. Just look at the obviously anticompetitive Activision acquisition that went through recently. Too many politicians slept through their economics classes, and they think that giant corporations are good for consumers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • Ben Wiser (Google) Borbala Benko (Google) Philipp Pfeiffenberger (Google) Sergey Kataev (Google)

    Congratulations, guys. You are now internet pariahs. Your unrepentantly mercenary lack of engineering ethics is now recorded for all eternity. You have nobody but yourselves to blame.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    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.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (4 children)

    I reported him on github, for all the good that will do.

    fucking shills

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›