Mozilla is such a treasure.
We must plunder the treasure so no one else can have it!
Oh, wait
The treasure is being bankrolled by google, so I mean it’s someone’s Treasure that’s for sure.
Removed by mod
If only Firefox would have a bigger userbase. I still use it, but the vast majority of people is on Chromium.
I switched this week.
I’m switching today. Right now. Because of this post.
^^maybe
EDIT: okay. I think I’ve done it. I’m currently editing this comment from Firefox. I already had Firefox installed. But now I have pinned it to my taskbar. I went to import my bookmarks from chrome, and found that I also had the option of importing other stuff from chrome, too (bookmarks, passwords, history and autofill data). That’s sweet. My bookmark bar has the same bookmarks in the same position. I also installed ublock origin, like someone recommended. And I am going to give it a go. If it all goes smoothly, I will unpin Chrome from the taskbar.Thanks everyone for the encouragement!
Install ublock origin and open YouTube.
You won’t regret it.
DONE!
fantastic. Also, just so you don’t have all that “YoU hAvE tHrEe ViDeOs LeFt” BS copy paste this to the “my filters” tab (go to about:addons, click on uBlock, there dots, “preferences”, then “my filters”) and you should be good to go:
youtube.com##+js(set, yt.config_.openPopupConfig.supportedPopups.adBlockMessageViewModel, false) youtube.com##+js(set, Object.prototype.adBlocksFound, 0) youtube.com##+js(set, ytplayer.config.args.raw_player_response.adPlacements, []) youtube.com##+js(set, Object.prototype.hasAllowedInstreamAd, true)Also here is another that blocks shorts entirely:
www.youtube.com##ytd-guide-renderer a.yt-simple-endpoint path[d^="M10 14.65v-5.3L15 12l-5 2.65zm7.77-4.33"]:upward(ytd-guide-entry-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-mini-guide-renderer a.yt-simple-endpoint path[d^="M10 14.65v-5.3L15 12l-5 2.65zm7.77-4.33"]:upward(ytd-mini-guide-entry-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="home"] .ytd-thumbnail[href^="/shorts/"]:upward(ytd-rich-item-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="subscriptions"] .ytd-thumbnail[href^="/shorts/"]:upward(ytd-grid-video-renderer,ytd-rich-item-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-search .ytd-thumbnail[href^="/shorts/"]:upward(ytd-video-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="subscriptions"] ytd-video-renderer .ytd-thumbnail[href^="/shorts/"]:upward(ytd-item-section-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="trending"] .ytd-thumbnail[href^="/shorts/"]:upward(ytd-video-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-search .ytd-thumbnail[href^="/shorts/"]:upward(ytd-video-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-rich-shelf-renderer[is-shorts] www.youtube.com##ytd-reel-shelf-renderer m.youtube.com##ytm-reel-shelf-renderer m.youtube.com##ytm-pivot-bar-renderer div.pivot-shorts:upward(ytm-pivot-bar-item-renderer) m.youtube.com##ytm-browse ytm-item-section-renderer ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[data-style="SHORTS"]:upward(ytm-video-with-context-renderer) m.youtube.com##ytm-browse ytm-item-section-renderer ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[data-style="SHORTS"]:upward(ytm-compact-video-renderer) m.youtube.com##ytm-search ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[data-style="SHORTS"]:upward(ytm-compact-video-renderer,ytm-video-with-context-renderer) m.youtube.com##ytm-single-column-watch-next-results-renderer ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer span:has-text(/^(0:\d\d|1:0\d)$/):upward(ytm-video-with-context-renderer) youtube.com##ytd-rich-grid-row, #contents.ytd-rich-grid-row:style(display:contents !important;)AND REMEMBER TO CLICK “APPLY CHANGES” BEFORE LEAVING!
And I’m just gonna drop this right here for those who use Twitch
For the first step: Click the Extensions button (puzzle piece icon) on the right side of the toolbar next to the main hamburger menu > right-click uBlock Origin from the drop-down > “Manage extension”
It’ll cost you nothing at all.
And in fact will save you CPU cycles. For a bit, Chrome had a slight performance edge over Firefox. But once Google got the market share, Firefox caught up and got ahead, and Chrome didn’t invest in keeping up, so Firefox is generally faster. The only exception is a few sites (especially Google ones) seem to be heavily optimised for Chrome, but not necessarily as much for Firefox. If you stay away from those sites, Firefox is generally faster.
Plus Chromium is increasingly becoming more hostile to efficient ad blocking add-on implementations - so if you want to block ads (generally recommended due to ad networks doubling as paid malware distribution networks), Firefox or other Gecko-based browsers are generally the best bet.
Wait can you elaborate on that a little bit? Back in the days, Chrome was a resource hog which made me switch to Firefox for a few years. Then I tried a bunch of different browsers and found that my Firefox couldn’t keep up with the performance of Chromium-based browsers, which made me switch to Edge. But now, Firefox has better performance again?
It ebbs and flows over time. All browsers will be attempting to improve performance, but at the same time adding features. More features often impact performance negatively.
Most normal pages are apparently faster in Firefox right now, but Google might make an optimisation effort in chromium that might make Firefox comparatively slower.
The main pages that are still slower in Firefox are Google sites. Google has repeatedly made things on their pages that unfairly favor Chrome. For example at one point they added an invisible frame that had no functionality over the video player on YouTube. They obviously made optimisations in chrome at the same time so they wouldn’t be affected, but Firefox’ hardware acceleration of videos broke, because the video now had additional items over top that it needed to custom handle. This gave chrome a massive performance edge on YouTube, until Firefox started ignoring completely invisible overlays of videos, just like Chrome did
Linux user here, at least on my platform there are chromium alternatives that are far faster, like Brave. uBlock (and now this) are the only reason im still in firefox
If it would help with the transition, Firefox has a first time install option to move over all of your bookmarks. A super cool reason to have a firefox account is the ability to transfer a tab from one device to another. Best part is that Firefox isn’t profit motivated like Chrome so there’s much less bullshit to deal with
Thanks, I’ve done it!
I found out you can import not only bookmarks from Chrome, but also passwords, history and autofill data!
No maybes. Do it.
Please switch
I highly recommend putting your passwords in a paid manager. Bitwarden is awesome. I’m also testing out Protonpass which just came out. If you’re looking to move more services from google to an alternative, give Proton a look. Been running their email, calendar, and VPN and I’ve been pleased. Its still missing a few things but its improving everyday.
same!
Firefox is awesome now. It was great, then it lost out a bit to chrome, but it’s back to being awesome. If anyone’s reading this and isn’t using Firefox, please switch!
And importantly, their import mechanisms are great. A typical user can switch with basically no effort. Next time they ask you for help, switch your parents too, and your siblings, and that neighbour who keeps referring to the internet as “the google”. Set them up with Firefox and ublock origin and they’ll be set.
it’s back to being awesome
What changed?
The person you replied to was mistaken. Firefox isn’t “back to” being awesome because it never stopped being so.
Well… there is a reason why so many folks sswitched to Chrome. Especially back when Chrome was new, Firefox just felt sluggish and slow. Chrome was a new breeze.
It took Firefox a long time to catch up. I’ve been trying semi regularly and just 3 years ago it was “okayish”. Tried it a few days ago again and switched all my devices over.
I don’t know what happened, but I installed it and it just felt snappy and fast. Apart from having some awesome features. Luckily if you don’t really keep bookmarks and such, switching isn’t that hard.
At least with Firefox Quantum (v57) they have tried to continuously bring in optimizations to bump the performance. In the meantime there has been lots of work with WebRender, a newer and more robust Javascript Engine and better CSS engine which made it get faster every update. Being quite fast and snappy isn’t just a placebo since Firefox has lately started to get better Speedometer scores than Chrome
it’s back to being awesome
What changed?
Depends on what you mean by “when”. From my POV for the last few years, it has an amazing plugin ecosystem (almost complete interoperability with Chrome’s), a revamped/minimal UI, performance optimizations, a better DX for web devs than Chrome, and an active R&D (Firefox View, new plugins button, better personalization, etc). I’m missing a few things but those are the ones that stand out to me.
I use firefox as my sidearm browser on my work computer, but I literally just made it the default on my personal computer
I’d solely use Firefox if jetbrains had better JS debugging support for it.
So for now I use edge for that at work.
Also I really like the tab sleep and vertical tabs features on Edge.
But everything is Firefox on my personal machines
The fact that this is even remotely controversial is stunning. Like does google not understand its not just home users that use adblock, but also businesses as well? Because google is so fucking bad they don’t understand there are viruses in their fucking ads. If this shit goes through, you think anyone’s dumb enough to believe google will be on top of the virus shit? Fuck off google
ya, using the internet without an adblocker is a security risk because Google enables scams across its services.
How about they learn to clean house first before shitting on the internet lol.
incompetent company will do incompetent things.
I think the FBI recommends the use of ad blockers for personal safety, let me find that link real quick…
Edit: FOUND IT, Third point under “Tips to Protect Yourself”
Let’s just go back to the good old days when the web worked without JS. That would remove a massive amount of attack surface. Might seem a bit shit without the interactivity, though.
Is there any way to make JS safer? E.g. limiting the scope of its access to specific functions (e.g. visual/DOM changes, posting/querying a server only but no local function), or is it just inherently unsafe?
There’s always possibilities to make things safer, but that often comes at a cost of features, features that many web developers (or possibly more likely their employer) would hate to see removed or be inaccessible. At least Firefox has done some great things to keep websites separated so a tracking cookie from tracking service A on site B and site C doesn’t quite get the same possibilities to track you as before (IIRC, take it with a grain of salt). But in general I would lean more towards JS sort of being inherently “unsafe”.
You can always make yourself a lot more secure by browsing the web through a browser confined to a virtual machine, but most people won’t do that. And as with IOT, the S in World Wide Web stands for Security.
Is there any way to make JS safer? E.g. limiting the scope of its access to specific functions (e.g. visual/DOM changes, posting/querying a server only but no local function), or is it just inherently unsafe?
More like money hungry company will do money hungry things
Ad blockers are more important to security than virus checkers.
You really think they don’t exactly know what they are doing?
They are an ad and data company, you blocking anything isn’t something they want to make possible.
People’s willingness to seize every opportunity and monetize everything that was once free and open is truly shocking. Every day when I read about another dogshit attempt to make the internet as a whole a worse place, I’m not even supprised anymore
In our society it’s literally stupid NOT to do these things. If you got rich doing it you “won.” Fuck the general population, fuck “good” things, fuck literally everything, C.R.E.A.M.
I hate it so much.
Whats C.R.E.A.M.?
Cash rules everything around me, a famous Wu-Tang Clan song!
Dolla Dolla bills y’all
deleted by creator
People need to be paid for their efforts. If you’re not going to pay them, who is? Advertiser are.
It’s unfortunate that so many people use Chrome. Google has control over the internet that no single company should hold.
Same as with IE in the past. A little better with most of the source being open but not much. I wonder how we could solve this issue since people obviously don’t care.
It’s like IE in the 90s/early 2000s all over.
Example Firefox: As it is Google is funding Mozilla to make it seem that there is competition. I don’t know if I want firefox to get bigger just enough so Google cuts their funding and it disappears. If so many people want to use spyware let them, so we can have the goodies.
Google pays to be the default search engine in Firefox.
The larger Firefox gets, the less Google is going to want that default search to be anybody OTHER than them.
Mozilla are also trying to find sources of additional funding, such as the ads (sponsored sites) that appear on the new tab page now, and their other services such as their VPN.
“It’s in our interest to make the Internet better and without competition we have stagnation”. From the Google Chrome comic book.
slowly switching to firefox here
Being fair to Chrome (which I hate doing but there is a point), they got in when more tech-people online saw them as pushing so many things forward. Was functionally faster than IE for sure, but also Firefox got stuck on their 4.0 limbo and being heavy in memory usage. Though I think the issue with memory usage also came from having almost a decade of so many extensions. Chrome was also slightly simpler than Firefox (imo even though my primary browser is and has been since before 1.5). Pair that with Google also then becoming the only (in market share) real competition to Apple’s ecosystem on Smartphones.
The best way to start taking down Chrome’s massive control over web standards is to do the same things as when IE was the default name people knew. Start using Firefox and get others to try it again or for the first time. Since so many people would trick their parents into using Chrome by changing the name and icon to IE. Most older folks kind of don’t even notice, and just think and “update” changed the look a bit. But as long as it works, they will just use it. In fact this can apply to a lot of the general public in actually scary ways. Back in the day with IE and those stacks and stacks of toolbars that I saw on almost every PC I worked on for people. I would just start removing them while they told me about why they were in (which was often caused by but not seen as to them as the issue). They would see me just OCD getting rid of them and would be shocked, and I do truly mean shocked, that those things weren’t just “part of the browser and never questioned them being there.”
Now that Chrome and Chromium are the main browser and browser base. I see soooo many BS Chromium browsers just get installed via the same kinds of tactics as the old toolbars. Even set themselves to both launch at every reboot, set themselves to always be able to run in the background, AND set themselves as the system default browser. Sometimes there may be multiple all doing the same things, but also have been made into desktop toolbars/docks of sorts. And that same shit is done by the super annoying ones skinned by the AV companies (AVG, Avast, CCleaner, and now even mainline Norton). And the person just thinks they are just part of Windows, but they only even came in because they “started having issues with wifi” or even a broken Windows update that wasn’t related.
That shit should really really get more attention in general. With so many fake things just being ignored, it means that the mass public will just never know or care about Google turning the internet into whatever it wants. Just not even know that they had actual options before they are removed. If it wouldn’t piss off the massive amount of companies that do ad business with Google. I wouldn’t be shocked if they turned ad blocking into a “premium feature” to subscribe to monthly.
I personally install Firefox as the non-Edge option when setting up someone’s new PC (so long as they didn’t specify Chrome) so they might at least try it. I never set it as the default, and will remove it if they want it gone when picking up the PC. Also do try to let some of them that ask about Chrome know that Edge is 100% compatible for their sites that mention Chrome. Which they at least then tend to be like “oh, well then I guess don’t worry about installing Chrome then.” No real pressure is put on them, just information, though Microsoft is making it hard with all the wild “HEY TRY THIS FEATURE!” pop-ups and that damn pointless desktop search bar.
I can’t believe I’m witnessing the death of the internet, at least it isn’t going quietly into the night.
The web is not the whole internet. Plus isn’t you being here prove that the internet is resilient?
Even if Lemmy does fight it and doesn’t accept the fingerprinting bullshit, how many other websites are going to do that? We’re just a link aggregator at the end of the day, I feel like all of the most important parts of the Internet are no longer going to be open.
Honestly, I barely go to any other websites anymore anyway, and I just read the headlines and comments here.
The problem with just reading headlines is that they’re often (almost always) misleading or just plain false.
The vast majority of people will not care about or even be aware of this. They’ll support it because they just want to watch their Netflix or YouTube. Things will continue on as normal, but with more ads and less end-user control.
It’ll be a problem when people are effectively banned from the internet.
But again, the average person won’t be impacted enough to care. They’ll keep browsing. I’m not saying what Google is trying to do is okay, but it certainly wouldn’t be the death of the internet.
They’ll be impacted when they can’t get online on a gosh darn iPhone because Apple doesn’t wanna play ball with Google
You think Apple with App Attest and FairPlay won’t jump on this?
It depends, if Google’s the only one who can “Choose” they’ll be all “I don’t know about that one Chief”, otherwise… Yeah I’m just practicing wishful thinking
good stuff, glad to see this opposition.
Also slightly related, but I’d absolutely hate if I were an employee having to work on this project and having my name attached to this. Quite embarrassing for all those involved.
wiping_tears_with_money.gif
welp, who isnt on firefox might want to start using it now.
It’s a little slower and a little more broken and a little less compatible, but its not google’s.
It’s not slower, and the rare incompatibilities can be solved by changing the user agent, which shows it’s artificial.
try not to ruin the user experience to make more money challenge (impossible)
They fight an uphill battle because lazy web devs optimize for Chrome and Firefox is a 2nd class citizen, but they do rock the last couple of years.
Sometimes changing just the user agent isn’t enough FWIW.
In my experience, Firefox is as fast as Chromium and extremely stable. What are the extensions you are using? Perhaps one of them is causing the instability you’re mentioning.
never thought of that, let me try…
deleted by creator
in my personal experience, instability with firefox has rarely been an issue with firefox, and more to do with something else in my system going wrong. Like bad ram, for one example.
As a Linux user this has got me very worried. Chromium has so much market share that this change will certainly go through, and I feel like Safari won’t care as it benefits them and their ecosystem to have device checks. I feel like Firefox and non standard OSes will almost certainly be blocked on a large range of websites with little impact on total users, not to mention completely blocking ad block and anti-tracking clients.
I think eventually regulators in the US will file an antitrust lawsuit and break chromium off of Google if this actually happens, but until then Fediverse/FOSS and personal websites are going to be the only places untouched by this.
I don’t think our politicians will do anything but protect big business, personally.
Safari won’t care as it benefits them and their ecosystem to have device checks.
Apparently Apple already rolled it out in a previous update, they just didn’t call any attention to it.
I just hope that google won’t try to lobby for this API like disney does for copyright changes
They won’t need too. Chrome is the standard.
What is the web integrity API?
Basically drm for your browser
Fuck that though
this is the most batshit insane proposal… I hope nobody supports it
if google microsoft and apple support it, that already covers over 90% of the market
Google alone is enough. Biggest browser, search engine, advertiser, OS and some of the biggest sites on the web all owned by them.
If they steamroll this thru, youll have an amazing anti trust case
Don’t worry, people will certainly make bypasses for that shit
that’s exactly what people said with manifest V3 then all the sudden they were getting strikes on youtube for having their ad blocker on
And how well did that work out? I personally haven’t gotten any strike on youtube, using uBlock/mpv on PC, Youtube Revanced on mobile and SmartTube for TV since forever
Also there’s this https://invidious.io/. So yeah, it’s just the classic cat & mouse game that has been going on for ever since software added drm
Google has already lashed out at Invidious though, and they’ll keep trying
I agree that in most cases people can find workarounds, but I don’t think we should take these things for granted
Google has no ground to stand on against Invidious
They may harass them but it’ll be veeery difficult to chase down all instances
It’s probably a slow roll out for exact cases like this one to ease the backlash. I havent gotten any notice like such either but Im on Firefox. I do fully support invidious though
Notice they are DRMing text and computer code, WSJ and malware brokers are gonna really happy, everyone else had their DRM fix with multimedia
and what kinda of thing does this protect?
Ads. To be precise this on it’s own provides a way for servers to be certain of the environment the pages run (browser, plugins, os). Protecting ads or other functions come from servers refusing unattested configurations or configurations they don’t like (i.e. running adblock, running firefox, running linux).
if chrome fully adapts this, this might well be a full blown commerical by chrome for people to switch to firefox. i have been only using chrome only to run our projects locally and test it out.
It should be noted that “being certain of the environment the pages run” requires controlling the client software being executed which requires preventing the user from modifying said executable which requires the browser to either be closed source or, more effectively, controlling the user’s hardware via blackbox verification chips (e.g. TPM DRM). It’s not just advertisers that would benefit but any website that wants to DRM content.
I’d guess it’s first gonna be used for streaming TV shows and such. After that it’ll probably be used for absurd things
I’d guess it’s first gonna be used for streaming TV shows
I thought they were already being protected by DRM.
Kinda, but it doesn’t work very well. Using video download manager you can download pretty much every video from the web
Can you recommend me one that can be used to download DRM protected content from OTT platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Mubi? Might well as archive the content I watch.
Sadly I can’t, netflix won’t let me watch anything on Librewolf/Firefox on linux. I’d recommend looking into getting a good proxy, a Jellyfin server and also the *arr stack (Sonarr, etc…)
Malware, malware encrypts its code so researchers cant crack into it and antivirus cant anilize it. Google is accedentally sponsoring malware
Some fucking greedy cunts at Google having a vision of internet being accessible only by “approved”(Chrome) browsers/clients.
They want to approve the whole environment, including os, even if virtualized or not
The whole stack will need to be approved. approved browser running on approved OS on approved hardware. Good luck browsing on Linux. The end of user software choice.
V3 manifest got too much bad press so they had to hinder it’s ability to gimp ad block.
So now their trying another approach, this time they will probably develop and push this proposal out, and have multiple adopters before anyone can do anything about it. See also: WebHID.
Orwellian doublespeak for DRMing and paywalling the web.
deleted by creator
Orwell was never refering to the economics in 1984. It was a dystopia of an autocratic government in an ever autocratic world, that fully infected and controlled every aspect of everyones life. Whether that is for capitalism, or communism wasn’t part of it.
Also free capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism is inherently unfree and the less regulated it gets, the more imprisoning it becomes to the normal people.
A system for websites to request a proof of the “integrity” of a user’s browser and underlying OS/hardware, and “attesters” to check this “integrity” and provide the proof. If that sounds vague, that’s because it is. What “integrity” means is for the “attester” to decide.
Google would of course be one of the major “attesters”, and could just deny the proof if you installed an ad blocker or VPN for example. In this case you would likely not be able to access the website anymore, because your device is deemed as “untrustworthy”.
So it’s a way for big companies to decide who can still use big parts of the internet and who can’t, based on whether it would make them money.
every day that passes we are closer to the day using TOR is not an option.
It’s an API for web integrity. Thank me later
can you explain this further? what does this integrate that’s not yet integrated in web?
It makes sure you’re running an approved browser with an approved OS on approved hardware and Google controls it all.
Basically, say goodbye to Adblock, video downloaders, startup search engines, accessibility tools, and Linux.
Or more accurately, the rest of us will simply fork the Internet itself.
This is why we need Mozilla.
Firefox is all I run these days.
Ffs everyone is a firefox main, how does chrome have 62% market share is a mystery
I would assume enterprise is a huge chunk
Also Chrome books, Android users that don’t care enough to change browsers, and most people who aren’t wholly in Apple’s ecosystem. Lemmy users are more knowledgeable about tech than probably 90% of the population. The demographics here definitely aren’t representative of the real world
Google already rolled out AMP which is overtly hostile to an open internet and faced zero repercussions from it. The same will be true for this. The average person has no idea what this means, doesn’t care, and won’t be bothered by it. Politicians always side with big business.
I’m hoping the average user will be sufficient annoyed by the lack of adblocking to finally give a shit.
Average users view the web raw, this will go totally unnoticed by >90% of users. If web-drm becomes a thing then it will be easy enough to block those sites and add them to the list of media that is morally acceptable to pirate.
Is there any reason Firefox or anyone else can’t just draw blank elements over the ads to block them on a separate layer? That way the site still thinks ads are being displayed. Kind of like the browser internal version of cutting out sticky notes and pasting them over your screen to cover the ads.
Firefox could get litigated for ad fraud and these trusted 3rd parties could block firefox from accessing the sites. It won’t work.
deleted by creator
Time to fly the Jolly Roger and find ways to get entire websites, not just movies and TV shows, off the high seas and past the blockade. Drink up, me hearties, yo ho!
I believe that’s the same as uBO’s cosmetic filters. They’re loaded but not shown…
The most valuable sites are already advertisement free. Anyone remaining who implements this standard just reduces their viewers. People will do without or other sites will offer an alternative. The tech is doomed to fail because the consumer is always right.
Politicians always side with big business.
That’s not true at all as far as EU tech company regulations are concerned. Examples: laws for GDPR, right to repair, consolidated charging ports, minimum size & pricing roof on roaming data - and related fines for disobeying them.
There is a German ARD Video about Open Source. The EU Parlament is big in with Microsoft products and don’t want to change because they are idiots.
Same goes for local authorities. Munich even had its own Linux distro, then M$ opened a big office in the city and suddenly whole FOSS project was abandoned and everything runs on Windows.
Noone had issues, everything was fine. Everyone was against using Windows in the parlament vote. The president or smth who was part of Microsoft had the full decision and just went with it. Fucking creepy. Humanity was a mistake.
I’m still salty that they implemented video DRM (for Netflix, Amazon, etc.), but at least they’re standing against this bullshit.
Without video DRM those services don’t work at all. It was necessary to keep users.
While for a web page this is simply unprecedented and useless.
Without video DRM those services don’t work at all.
(x)
I think they meant it as a “necessary evil” because companies could start implementing their own drm and make everything more difficult to crack. Also without it, companies would not trust it without drm due to the greed.
“Don’t work at all” in Firefox, when Chrome implements the DRM the service insists upon and Firefox doesn’t
and
“Don’t work at all” because the services can’t exist without DRM
are very different assertions.
I think you’re (rightfully!) doubting the latter, but the person you replied to meant the former.
But that’s exactly the point. The fact that they have given up before on something as small (compared to this proposal that could affect a lot more content) as video/audio DRM only means that anything they say about this is meaningless. Google already knows that Firefox fill just give in and implement it anyway, so they have literally no reason to listen to them.
But I understand that there’s nothing they could’ve done about it, given their market share. Just like they can’t do anything in this situation, apart from “strongly disagreeing” before eventually being forced to implement it anyway, because without it more and more websites will stop working at all, and it will be necessary to keep users.
I think we need to try to get Firefox’s user base up fast (and the user base for other browsers that are ultimately controlled by non-profits) - if non-commercial browsers dominate or even have 30+% market share, if they say no to something bad for users and the open web, it doesn’t happen. While non-commercial browsers are a small minority, if they say no, services that work everywhere else follow Google / Apple and consider breaking Firefox acceptable collateral damage, and then Firefox etc… becomes an ever smaller minority, so they get forced into things like this.
The trouble is FAANG get advantage by posing an insidious threat - they treat users well when they are trying to gain market share, and invest heavily and maybe briefly offer a superior user respecting product. But when they get the market share to give them the leverage, the switch part of bait-and-switch comes out, and we see them try to take down the open web to cement their position against the non-profits, and make their browsers inferior for users to bump up revenue (enshitification, to borrow a term from Cory Doctorow).
Alright you have convinced this internet stranger to switch
I am a pirate myself but they have to implement video DRM since the content is technically their’s and you are just allowed to view it as long as you are subscribed to them, and they don’t want their content to be stolen (which they can’t stop btw).
-
The content’s copyright is technically owned by the copyright holders, not Google.
-
Copying isn’t theft. Nothing is removed from the servers; YouTube still has its copy. Calling it “stealing” is biased loaded language.
Strictly speaking copyright also means that the copyright holder is the only one that is allowed to either copy the content or grant permissions to copy it, thus any of us making copies of things to be sure we don’t lose access to it are truly breaking that. But I would be a lot more conflicted about it if the system wasn’t like it currently is and it wasn’t almost only big corporations that seem to benefit.
If I create art, then copyright states that you cannot copy (and redistribute) the art I created.
I’d be bummed out and it would feel like you just stole from me. Now the people I might have sold my art aren’t interested, as they already got it for free. It feels like the work I did was wasted, and I also lost some profits, the amount of which is naturally hard to guess, but still.
Story time’s over. So your 2nd point is shit, and I wish people stopped making that. It’s not biased or loaded because there are actual monetary losses to whomever it is you are illegally copying stuff from, instead of paying.
Anyway, I just pirate because I really just will not pay for 10 different subs to get the content I want. Never. Spotify is great, but as long as movie/tv streaming is fragmented, Piracy will never dwindle.
Just stop fucking justifying yourselves with shit arguments.
I’d be bummed out and it would feel like you just stole from me.
Words have meanings. You are factually incorrect, and frankly, I don’t give a shit how you “feel” about it.
-
Funny how webrips still exist literally everywhere. They built a 10 foot wall, so someone else just built an 11 foot ladder.
They built a 10 foot wall, so someone else just built an 11 foot ladder.
That is sir, the beauty of piracy.
Firefox is ❤️
I’m doing my part using Firefox. I’ve always liked it over Chrome and I don’t like the sign into Google BS.
