if they outright forced us to stop day one there’d be outrage, so they instead ease us in. first a popup, then a timed popup, slowly leading to their actual goal but without the risk of an initial outrage. i know this is an extreme comparison but we’re like lambs to a slaughter

  • probablyaCat@kbin.social
    1·
    1 year ago

    I’m not trying to form an argument. I’m trying to tell you they are already doing it.

    Here is the wiki description. Here is the commit adding it after they got massive backlash from the community and in spite of it. Instead, the person who made the commit made a blog whining that people are mean and they don’t have any better ideas. Then they made a code of conduct for those that wanted to comment. Here is even an explanation from google for the WEI. Some good quotes

    It can

    Detect non-human traffic in advertising to improve user experience and access to web content

    The proposal calls for at least the following information in the signed attestation:
    The attester’s identity, for example, “Google Play”.
    A verdict saying whether the attester considers the device trustworthy.

    Providing a signal that is unique to the attester could be hazardous if websites decide to only support attesters where certain signals are available. If websites know exactly what browser is running, some may deny service to web browsers that they disfavor for any reason. Both of these go against the principles we aspire to for the open web.