I’ll keep using Firefox and be extremely vocal about websites that won’t support it. I mean that’s all I can really do.
And hope the EU will oppose it.
EU really is the one doing all the good work. Meanwhile, the US government is useless as a government for its size.
corporate-owned america, baby!
Why aren’t the vaccuous, corporate whore sociopaths defending our freedoms!?!
Maybe if our politicians weren’t fucking 80 years old and actually understood technology even a little bit.
“Here’s our millennial expert on technology to explain it to us. Thank you for being here.”
“No problem.”
“WHAT”
… they’d know what exact nasty deeds they’re being paid for? How does that help you?
First of all, you need accountable politicians that serve their nation. Age, while it’s important, is not of prime importance.
Basically they have made themselves kings and everyone else are peasants. Now they are dividing the land between them.
Why would they? It’s FrEE maRKeT. Google can point to Edge and Safari as proof that they don’t have a monopoly on browsers, so no anti-trust issue there no sireee. The fact that Edge is based on Chromium does not factor into this (in fact the EU loves it, just look at what they did to “liberalize” the electricity market, aside from some extremely anecdotal stories, it’s all companies whose only job is to build a website and the fiscal “infrastructure” to buy energy from state-controlled producers to resell it at a markup using state-controlled energy distributors, but hey there is a private middleman so it’s liberal and the innovation/investment dividends will pay out any year now… any year…).
The concept of the WWW being supported by free, standard, interoperable protocols was never codified into law. Despite how much good it has done so many industries to have a common free interoperable tech stack, it doesn’t have to be this way; the French Minitel was a walled garden built by France Telecom, and that was 100% legal, because interoperability is not a legal requirement. The Apple Store and Game Consoles work under the same principle, you basically can’t sell anything on there without abiding by some asinine rules (Apple has had some issues but IIRC that has to do with them abusing their monopoly position to extract 30 % of all sales, not with the fact that they have an exclusive App Store to begin with).
Also this whole bullshit is not new and was never legally challenged because there is no case. For years you could not even browse instagram in your browser because they “only supported the mobile app”, which was a blatant way to force you into a walled garden where they can force you to watch as many ads as they want and where scraping is much harder.
I expect we’ll lose about 90% of the web within five years as this becomes normalized.
It will primarily be the seo driven AI crap driven ripoff regurgitated shitfest that’s arisen in the last 5 years tho.
I’ll be waiting for a search engine to arise that only shows user controllable presentation and will use that.
A way to filter out the corporate trash will make the human web better, not worse.
Check out Kagi. It’s a subscription search service since they don’t show you ads, but that also means they don’t track you at all (no search history, for example). They also let you influence the priorities of the sites you see in the results or even completely block them, and the results are usually better than Google with less bullshit – or even at worst as good as Google. Some people seem to be skeptical about paying for a search engine, but everybody wanting shit for free is what got us into this fucking mess in the first place
I second this, was about to recommend Kagi, auto filters listicles, fantastic for actually finding information written by real people on blogs and things that aren’t SEO spam
Quick bangs alone almost make it worth it for me. The functionality exists in other browsers but it’s not synced, so being universal in the search engine itself is a giant usability improvement for me. Especially when using in conjunction with Orion.
I’m pretty satisfied with Kagi after using it for a bit over two months.
I expect we’ll lose about 90% of the web within five years
Which part? I feel it will be part I don’t even want. I might be forced to use that part for work, but that will be nice filter.
I was thinking that “they” ( governments and big corporations) should have their own internet which is clean and ordered and “safe” and leave us on other part. This might be a way to achieve that.
Yeah, this is pretty much my take.
The web sites that are interested in this tool never wanted to be actual web sites. They wanted to be closed client-server systems with proprietary, opaque protocols… HTTP was just a convenient implementation to leverage.
What WEI does is basically allow all of these wanna-be walled gardens to become actual walled gardens.
They never wanted to be interoperable in the first place, so what are we losing? Good riddance.
Maybe with this in place, we’ll be able to start rebuilding the interoperable web that we had before VC money took it over.
We just need a compelling business model for it. “Free” ad-supported is toxic for open discourse, and now it’s functionally deprecated on the open web. I think that’s a good thing, but good changes are not necessarily easy to endure.
I’m not sure how we’ll do it. Attention tokens and all that crypto stuff seems like garbage, but having a thousand different subscriptions to get past paywalls is not great either.
You might want to recommend forks of Firefox too. Part of the reason Chrome/Chromium is dominant is because of its forks, and a fork of Firefox might appeal to someone more than the main browser. I use Pulse, but Waterfox is also solid from what I’ve heard.
Is Brave safe from these shenanigans? Asking for a friend.
Brave is built on Chromium. So, by default, no they are not safe from this. Without extra effort, Brave will have this feature. I don’t know if its feasible but there’s a chance the Brave devs can remove the code from their distribution, but that’s the best case scenario and just puts them in the same position as Firefox: they get locked out because they refuse to implement the spec.
I have to imagine they will strip it because if they don’t, it’ll be dead to all of their users.
It may be dead to its users anyway depending on how forceful Google is with this. If Brave doesn’t work on 98.8% of all websites with advertising or indeed on 49.5% of all websites (approximately Google’s ad network’s reach), it becomes as niche as lynx.
Yeah Brave would probably be fucked then. If you can’t have privacy anyway, might as well use Chrome.
Brave is a re-skin of Chromium.
Don’tbe evil.Be Evil, Do Ads
Can you explain this to a layman what this does?
It’s DRM, but for the whole web.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/07/googles-web-integrity-api-sounds-like-drm-for-the-web/
So is the only way around it to not use Chromium-based browsers? Or does it pollute everything??
That will work until websites start requiring it. At that point browsers like Firefox have to either capitulate and implement Google’s DRM or become unusable for the majority of websites.
And then we’ll have a web where the corporations have complete control over what you can view and how. Ad blocking and anti-tracking will be things of the past, and corporate websites will have a unique key from your browser to help them track you around the web. And no more hiding your identity behind anonymous browsers over Tor or VPNs.
So we found out about this about 4 days ago, and when people objected they shut down people’s ability to log issues or comment on the GitHub repo. And now they’re already cramming it into their browser. This is strong evidence that Google knows it’s unpopular and tried to keep it under wraps as long as possible so they could get it into the browser before people had time to react.
Let them require it. Search engines like DDG should really begin maintaining their own index, and they should exclude sites that use the tech from the index.
I can also see Apple taking a stand against this. They have a competing (and much more reasonable) implementation that respects user privacy.
Search engines like DDG should really begin maintaining their own index, and they should exclude sites that use the tech from the index.
If this gets implemented, it would ruin the ability for competitor search engines (such as DDG) to exist. If Google convinces site operators to require attestation, then suddenly automated crawlers and indexers will not function. Google could say to site operators that if they wish to run ads via Google’s ad network they must require attestation; then, any third-party search indexer or crawler would be blocked from those sites. Google’s ad network is used on about 98.8% of all sites which have advertising, and about 49.5% of all websites.
Even if the effects didn’t go this far (which I agree they quite probably will), it wouldn’t be feasible for other search engines to just exclude sites that implemented Google’s DRM. If Google makes it attractive enough to the owners of major sites to implement this (and it will be attractive if it ensures they get ad views), then no one will use a search engine that omits all the most popular websites. The same goes for non-Google browsers. This is really a shocking attempt by Google to use its own browser’s popularity to seize an effective monopoly of the web.
The idea is that service providers would only trust chromium browsers
No. The only way “around it” is to give up and use Chrome.
Everything else will have to dance to Google’s tune to access any website that implements this, and that will at very least include Google’s own websites.
Web dev here. It enforces the original markup and code from a server to be the markup and code that the browser interprets and executes, preventing any post-loading modifications.
That sounds a bit dry, but the implications are huge. It means:
- ad blockers won’t work (the main reason for Google’s ploy)
- many, if not most, other browser extensions won’t work (eg.: accessibility, theming, anti-malware)
- people are going to start running into a lot of scam ads that ad blockers would otherwise prevent
- malicious websites will be able to operate with impunity since you cannot run security extensions to prevent them
- web developers are going to be crippled for lack of debugging ability
These are just a few things off the top of my head. There are endless and very dangerous implications to WEI. This is very, very bad for the web and antithesis of how it’s supposed to be.
TBL is probably experiencing a sudden disturbance in the force.
Wouldn’t it be possible to create some kind of “post-browser” that takes input from the web browser and displays it after passing it through ad blockers and whatever else?
Such an abstraction, while unnecessary, should be possible, providing that Google doesn’t forcibly prevent access to the final markup that coalesces (ie.: view source and web dev tools)
The only acceptable browser would obviously be ones that restrict that access, how else are they going to force people to see all their ads?
Would this impact web proxies at all? If so, that would entail a pretty huge security change for a lot of corporations.
If it’s something like a proxy server that pre-modifies the markup/code, then yes, I can see WEI interfering with that.
It’s a way to disable ad blockers.
Presently web servers send data to your browser, which can arrange the content however you wish, because it’s your browser on your device. Excluding content you don’t like is fairly trivial.
This drm stuff will basically make the browser refuse to display anything unless the whole page is unaltered.
Does unaltered include things like colorblind extension that change colors to more easily differentiate between some red/green for example? Or stuff like reddit enhancement suite? Sounds like a good way to kill other possible useful extensions.
That’s exactly what it will do. Don’t believe the bullshit in their “non-goals” section, they don’t give a fuck. If accessibility extensions happen to continue working (at least temporarily), it will be by accident, because they for damn sure aren’t going to spend even a second on compatibility.
Shit man, this would ruin even the small internet. I won’t even be able to cheat on dragcave. And most of what I was doing was keeping a tally of my collection since the site doesn’t do that. But there’s no way page modifications wouldn’t be caught and punished no matter what they actually do.
deleted by creator
If this becomes heavily used, I will probably go back to reading books for entertainment instead of browsing the web.
deleted by creator
My books aren’t digital at all. How can they have DRM?
Sad but true 😢
deleted by creator
So basically, anyone consuming the internet in any shape or form other than the intended by corporate owners is automatically dead in the water.
Man, I can’t go back to ad-full, sponsor-skipless youtube… It’s too awful.
edge users
Edge is Chromium
deleted by creator
Imagine you’re a builder and you build a store (website). People can come into your store through the door or window. WEI will make sure you come through the door just as the builder intended.
At face value, that sounds fine, but now imagine that builder puts a maze (all of the ads littered on a webpage) on the other side of the door. It’s a pain in the ass to get through and someone (adblock) has told you about the window that lets you skip the maze. You can get what you want and the store gets to sell a thing. Everyone’s happy except the maze builder (Google), so they’re trying to force the entire world to go through the maze.
It may be the last few years of the free web because of Google. Their goals are clear.
Please switch to Firefox, another search engine and another email provider…
I’ve long been trying to de-googlify myself, but it’s certainly ramped up this year.
Been trying out Kagi and just set up proton mail account. Not sure what I’ll land on in the end but it’s nice trying out newer services.
It is hard when you have a business. You really have to actively try to stay away from them. They control so much business infrastructure.
I know my business partner (god bless him, great friend but…) is super into big tech and every new product they offer. So it’s a bit of an uphill battle.
And I’m lucky. I own my own firm. Most people don’t have such a luxury.
Google server infrastructure products are almost universally worse than Amazon’s. The interfaces, APIs, and documentation look like they were designed by people who don’t understand humanity.
At least they’re not as bad as Microsoft. Azure is a goddamn dog with fleas.
I am fortunate enough to have never had MS servers forced upon me.
Most importantly, they are designed by people that don’t use them. Amazon uses AWS themselves, Google doesn’t use GCP.
It’s not too hard. The most important things are web search and email. I still use Google Maps. But I don’t want my private emails and searches at a company who is user hostile and preditory.
I quite disagree, it is very hard. Sure, switching search engine takes all of two seconds, and email can be had from many vendors free and commercial.
But calendaring! A calendar that is at least somewhat integrated with am email client, supports more than one actual calendar, and has real-world capability to share them with others - “if you succeed in this, two me how.”
My calendaring needs might be less restrictive than yours, but Proton offers a nice calendar that from what I understand offers at least some integration with their e-mail client. Have you checked it out?
I use Nextcloud self-maintained on a VPS myself for all my calendaring needs, which is basically keeping track of appointments, syncing via WebDAV to my phone, as well as sharing some sub-calendars with other people. Setting up a Nextcloud-server is admittedly a bit more hassle than just signing up for a service, but also here there are options of making it a bit easier than hosting yourself.
I find Google Maps by far the hardest service to rid myself off, followed by Gmail (the time it takes!!! Been using Proton for two years, still not completely rid of my Gmail-account). I’m slowly getting used to using OSM-based map services more and more.
CalDav? Integrated in nextcloud. Or Mailcow. Why does it needs to be integrated with e-mail? Thunderbird is able to add all invitations or reminders into my CalDav Account.
The Fastmail calendar is pretty good. Just a random page about them: https://www.fastmail.com/blog/shared-calendars/
Fastmail
Ohh, this does indeed look quite fantastic. I am certainly going to look more into this. Thank you!
_Edit: Ah, but $50/user/year. For the whole family that adds up real fast. Still, nice tip.
I found out about Kagi from another Lemmy user and I’ve been really impressed. I feel like I’m getting better results than Google. I’m using their Personalized Results feature and it helps a ton!
Ohnonono Well time to burn down google I guess ¯\(ツ)/¯
deleted by creator
Fuck you Google.
this is a userbase killer right here
If manifest 3 didn’t change egoogke chrome share I doubt this will.
Manifest 3 didn’t create noticable chnages for the average user. Not yet anyway.
The idea is these changes are never a full at first. The internet will not break tomorrow because of integrity checking.
But it will in a few years. And people will be upset then. When it’s far too late.
hey everyone a friendly reminder that alternatives exist, and just drop this shit fast and move to better alternatives. In this case firefox.
The problems start to happen when buisnesses adopt this en masse. Expect all banks to implement this for example. You can use Firefox all you want, but then you won’t be able to do online banking.
Standards are really fucking important to help people stay functional in a society. This is one area that the ANCAP mindset just gets it totally wrong, unless you like the idea of being a hermit.
Anyway, we are already seeing some websites basically reject browsers like Firefox because they basically give the consumer too much protection and freedom. Arguably we’ve seen this before, but this may be a new tier of corporate lockout of open standards as consumer protection gets thrown in the trash. Thanks America.
This needs to be pinned at the top of every single threat about this. Far too many people are just saying “Well I’ll just keep using Firefox”. They do not understand the gravity of the issue.
I don’t think that checks out.
Firefox only exists because it’s primarily funded by Google. It’s funded by Google to ensure they actually have some competition and avoid becoming a Monopoly.
If they kill Firefox or otherwise make it unusable they’ll be shooting themselves in the foot.
However, if it ends up being a bad experience that no one wants to use, well that’s not on them and they have no responsibility to fix it.
What will likely happen is Firefox will also adopt this DRM.
Mozilla does not exist because of Google. Google doesn’t have controlling power over Mozilla, nor do they have power over the many forks. It’s hilarious that you think a company would give a shit about being a monopoly; that’s what they strive for. This stupid take has been going around for years, and I’m sad to see it spread to Lemmy.
The issue isn’t that we have no alternative, it’s that this feature will basically eliminate those alternatives sadly. You can read more about it here if you haven’t, but it’s bad.
For sure, I agree and it’s bad. But frankly unsurprising. This is the trajectory of the internet: greater control.
We’ve become too dependent on centralized tech companies and erred in allowing tech companies to change, define, and control the internet in the first place.
Alternatives must be promoted in mass scale.
When websites start blocking clients that don’t implement the wei handshake, you’ll be forced to use one that does if you want to visit those sites. Firefox will either adopt it or become a second rate browser.
For now, Mozilla’s official stance is to oppose this proposal: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/852#issuecomment-1648820747
I wish that this kind of thing would generate enough outrage to increase Firefox’ market share considerably (from the <3% it is today), and in that way deter websites from adopting it since they would block a larger share of users. Unfortunately, I think that might be too naive of me…
You require Chrome or a Chromium based browser to view this comment.
Websites should be able to block me. I can just go elsewhere.
May be a bit problematic with banks, insurances and maybe government institutions…
it will truly be messed up if essential websites block user access because of this
Most banking apps don’t work on rooted Android phones. It’s not the same, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume that at least these companies would force their customers to use specific software…
As pointed out above, individual use of Firefox doesn’t really do that much. Especially when Firefox already doesn’t work properly for some sites. Plus, lots of people (myself included) need to use Chrome for work. This shit sucks.
Have you used Firefox recently? I haven’t had even one instance of a website not working simply because of Firefox.
I’m do not experience any of these improper working sites. My daily driver is Librewolf, where this sometimes occur, but when it does, I just switch to vanilla Firefox, and everything is fine.
for work purposes, ok fine. but personal purposes i’d try and steer clear as much as i can.
My general point is we should use alternatives whenever possible to discourage this kind of centralized power developing in the first place.
As an aside, I know we’re not supposed to care about Reddit, but the lack of this news getting any attention over there is just depressing. Hell the Firefox sub hasn’t had any posts in days apparently.
People that care about this stuff are probably already jumped ship.
That’s because the firefox sub moved to Lemmy…
Could there be lawsuits over this?
If there will be, google is powerful than most governments. They know there will be some lawsuit and they are prepared for it. Its just cost of doing business.
Google isn’t more powerful than any governments it’s just the USA that allows them to have power.
No they aren’t, the US just makes them look that way. I’m sure many european countries will object to and fight this.
Not directly but this could be an antitrust case in some places.
Reasonable people will disagree… but no, probably not. This is a feature which websites can choose to use in the same way that websites can choose to use notifications. Even if you dislike the fact that web browsers provide the option, it’s the website itself that’s actively choosing to impose on you.
Now, the counterpoint to this argument is that the feature in question will most likely further strengthen Google’s position as the market leader and lock out new independent browsers. This is certainly true and similar logic has indeed been employed in cases like the Microsoft antitrust case. With that being said, Google still has that extra layer of abstraction sitting between it and the actual mechanism of action (i.e.: independent website owners who want DRM). Think of it like the Uber of anti-trust law.
Feels so good to see Google getting called out for this in the GitHub comments
Does it? It’s making me depressed.
Because every last single thing said in those comments will be ignored. I sincerely doubt they’re even reading them.
They know what they’re doing. They know what people will say. They’re going to do it anyway.
Gross.
Fuck this is trash. DRM for the web. I wish people would understand websites like kbin are not free and that if you use a website you need to pay to keep it alive. But no one wants to pay for anything on the internet, and so we have ads. Ads will for sure kill the internet.
The fact that people feel entitled to free content online really activates my almonds. They’ll whine and moan about enshittification and how eg. news is just clickbait now, and then promptly shit their pants when someone suggests they actually pay for things since they clearly don’t want ads either
Surely you can reverse that and point out corporations whining and moaning about people expecting free content when they’re barely paying their employees enough to afford to pay their bills.
The problem starts with corporate greed, hoarding revenue by keeping employee’s salaries to the minimum acceptable, providing as little functionality as possible to reduce overheads, double dipping by selling a product/subscription and then selling their customer’s data, and then complaining they aren’t getting more money for what little they are doing.
Then inevitably a little guy like Kbin comes along and suffers because the internet is filled with soulless, ultra-capitalist corpo scumbags.
Surely you can reverse that and point out corporations whining and moaning about people expecting free content when they’re barely paying their employees enough to afford to pay their bills.
Those are separate issues
They are absolutely not separate issues. How can I be expected to shell out $15 per month for 10 different content subscriptions if I can only just afford to put food on my table?
Doesn’t mean that content producers and the people running services don’t need to eat too. Sure, many if not all big corporations are terrible, but not all online content is provided by them.
But a massive amount of them are. Small and solo creators on Youtube or Twitch need to conform to the rules of Google and Amazon, and even medium size creators are influenced and coerced by the precedents and market trends set by the much larger corporations.
And it doesn’t matter if not all content is provided by large corporations, those large corporations employ the most people, and dictate in a lot of ways, the rules of the employment market. It’s due to their habits and practices that wages are artificially low and expenses are inflated for record profits.
Until corporate greed is managed properly, consumers will always struggle to have enough expendable income to pay content creators, and therefore will always be searching for free content.
Oh yeah, no disagreement there; the source of all these problems is ultimately an economic system designed by and for sociopaths. But, be that as it may, the fact that even the people who could afford to pay for services simply don’t, and many run adblockers too and rarely turn them off for eg. news sites even if the ads they run aren’t extremely distracting. For example when ABP introduced a whitelist for “non-annoying” ads, it didn’t exactly go down well and people said they had “sold out.”
Big corporations can get fucked for all I care, but as I said, the ones not working for them and running services or news media or whatever also need to eat, and peoples’ reticience to pay for things in one way or another has directly led to those big companies taking over more and more of the field and WEI is an outgrowth of that.
Can someone ELI5 how this could prevent a fork of Chromium from just not playing nice and telling the website “yeah yeah, it’s all untempered *wink wink*” and then still remove/alter stuff as it pleases?
Edit: ok I think I got it … it’s basically the server that decides if it trusts the judgment of the client or not. Can’t wait to see that cat-and-mouse game going on 🙄
Yeah, I can imagine a fork of chromium existing that takes all the data and does the rendering pipeline “”“normally”“”, but then on the side does something completely different and shows THAT to the user, while giving the server an idea that nothing is wrong and what it is doing is just normal chromium stuff.
But such an idea will be done entirely by enthusiasts, slowly, on an obscure basis. For the majority of users, that will never even be a conceivable notion of something they can do with the internet. Itll never be something you see on a top, mainstream browser.
In other words, Google wins.
it’s basically the server that decides if it trusts the judgment of the client or not. Can’t wait to see that cat-and-mouse game going on
This is partially correct. The server will check that you have a valid token issued by a trusted third party, who will almost certainly be Google, Microsoft, or Apple. When you connect to the web page, your browser will give this token to the server and say “hey look I’m legit.” The token will have enough information on it to identify that it is relevant (being provided by a client that matches the hardware it is meant to verify) as well as a cryptographic signature that verifies it is in fact from the trusted third party. So it’s less the server trusting the judgement of the client than it is the server trusting the judgement of whatever third party is attesting to your system.
Pardon my ignorance but Can someone explain what google is trying to do?
Pardon formatting, on mobile. Its a form of device authentication. Apple does this with safari already BTW, and it can reduce things like captcha because the authentication is done on the backend when a request hits a server. While still an issue in concept with Apple doing it, chromium browsers are a much larger market share. In layman’s terms this is basically the company saying, hey you are attempting to visit this site, we need to verify the device (or browser, or add on configuration, or no ad blocker, etc) is ‘authentic’. Which of course is nebulous. It can be whatever the entity in charge of attestation wants it to be.
This sets the precedent that whomever is controlling verification, can deny whomever they see fit. I’m running GrapheneOS on my phone currently, they could deny for that. Or, if you are blocking ads. Maybe you’re not sharing specific information about your device, and they want to harvest that. Too bad, comply or you’re ‘not allowed to do x or y’.
This is the gist. The web should be able to be accessed by anybody. It isn’t for companies to own nor should it be built that way. Web2 is a corporate hellscape.
I suspect “authentic” will mean “pays a license fee to Google.” In this respect it will work like other forms of DRM, and it will have the same effect of excluding new and smaller players from the market. Except in this case the market is the whole of the web.
From my limited understanding as a common pleb, they are inserting DRM into Chromium browsers to prevent ad-blockers.
Internet with no ad-blockers is like a nightmare
Yes, it is a nightmare. The insane volume of ads and clickbait injected into web pages is killing the internet as an information source. Most of the searchable stuff is unusable. Which explains why ChatGPT was so enthusiastically embraced - it’s really just synthesizing content into a readable form that doesn’t require navigating around a jungle of animated gifs and flashing ads. That’s also I think why Lemmy and Mastodon are so refreshing to use, and hopefully will stay that way - although money seems to find a way to ruin everything. Lemmy right now feels a lot like the internet used to be before the big money came along and ruined it with advertising and platform lock-ins.
Living the dream.
To be fair, it is useful for other purposes, but the cost to users is likely to be huge, with ad blocking being one of them. It probably also prevents other things even outside your browser because there’s no point in securing a browser running in an untrusted environment. IIRC there is/was an issue running Netflix on certain Android devices and rooted devices after a similar feature was added to Android.
This would also hurt users that need accessibility extensions so they can properly browse websites that don’t have good accessibility features.
Regulate Big Tech and be done with it.
Or make the internet a public resource. Let the USPS be the ISP
The constitution allows for a nationwide communications network that’s run at low cost for public good. USPS is absolutely legally allowed to run internet service and it’s shame that it hasn’t taken this over yet.
