329
What can we do to keep the web open?
(mastodon.social)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
329 points (98.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43944 readers
621 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I wouldn't count on that. Web devs aren't going to push for this, it'll be the suits that have some dumb automated "security" tool tell them they need to enable it or they'll get hacked.
There will always be a cat and mouse game where some people figure out clever ways around this, but I wouldn't count on it being as easy as installing an addon. Sites could start requiring a specific attester that requires that you run their rootkit malware to spy on your entire OS and only supports a few popular OSes. Thanks to projects like TPM, your own hardware could be working against you.
As usual, Stallman predicted the world that large companies would like to drag us into: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
Exactly right, gonna be some big corpo push that it has to get done because "1% of our userbase is getting around the ads, that's 1% of our profit we need!!". And as a web dev, sure I could say I refuse. and then get demoted, fired, and they'll get someone else to do it anyway.
The saving grace is that this will be expensive to do, and Google has proven time and time again that their tech isn't trustworthy or long-term to most companies. If this does get through, that's how I'd pitch it to my company. Google gets ideas, gets bored of them, throws them away or changes them so drastically that we have to redo all the work anyway, so it's not worth doing any time soon. A great case of this is AMP, and while there are some pages that did switch to AMP, the vast majority of sites didn't bother with it. Not worth the investment. Granted this is different because its ads, and we should by no means rely on this and give up the fight.
First line in the sand is to say this goes against the web's foundations directly and that Google is actively trying to monopolize the internet.
That's a great way to push back internally. "Oh you know Google, always killing things. Why should we waste the effort? This'll just end up on https://killedbygoogle.com/"
That's how I'd approach it. All of their programs are just hell to maintain, and one that actively blocks users will be worse. Even simple things like Google Tag Manager or Google Analytics for some reason still need someone touching the code at least once a year