There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Fish ,

This is why I recently switched back to Firefox.

FoxBJK ,
@FoxBJK@midwest.social avatar

While nice to do, it’s not going to solve the problem when the likes of Cloudflare are already on board with this. Apple has already implemented a similar system in Safari as well. Feels like the horse has already left the barn.

Philosophically I want to agree with you, but when sites like banks and employment finders are going to require this it’s really going to create a horrible world of the haves and have-nots.

2pt_perversion ,

If google really does away with adblockers I expect many more will follow. I’m not even against unobtrusive ads but the few times I’ve been away from my own pihole / ublock browser setup and rawdogged the internet those ads were next level obnoxious. I can’t live like that.

Bipta ,

Per the article, this is already being integrated into Chromium as we speak, as in days ago: https://github.com/chromium/chromium/commit/6f47a22906b2899412e79a2727355efa9cc8f5bd

Whirlybird ,

For a tech community there are a lot of uninformed and fear mongering posts in here. From the article:

What About Browser Modifications and Extensions?

Google’s proposal remains ambiguous about its impact on browser modifications and extensions. It attests to the legitimacy of the underlying hardware and software stack without restricting the application’s functionality. However, how this plays out with browsers that allow extensions or are modified remains a grey area. As the proposal vaguely mentions, “Web Environment Integrity attests the legitimacy of the underlying hardware and software stack, it does not restrict the indicated application’s functionality.”

Basically it can be summed up as “nothing in the new thing actually says it will make blocking ads impossible or even harder, but who knows right? So just trust that it will based on nothing other than fear mongering”

Sites have been detecting ad blockers and refusing to show you content unless you disable them for years. Sites already have paywalls as drm to restrict what you can see. This really isn’t bringing the ability do any of these DRM things since those already exist.

Having said all that - is there much of a reason for this new thing to exist? Debatable at this stage. The only benefit I can see to users is it could eliminate captchas and other “are you human?” checks, as well as maybe reduce cheaters in browser based games (which tbh I don’t even know if that’s a thing).

crowsby ,
@crowsby@lemmy.world avatar

I think the issue is that Google has both A) a track record of backdooring restrictions on adblocking, and B) an overwhelming motivation to do so seeing as how they generate their revenue from online advertising. They’ve forfeited the benefit of the doubt, especially when they’ve already disclosed that the whole point of the change is to enhance the profitability of online advertising:

Google’s engineers elaborate, “Websites funded by ads require proof that their users are human and not bots…Social websites need to differentiate between real user engagement and fake engagement”

So given that once implemented, this hop and this skip would just require a teensy jump in order to further restrict adblocking, it is reasonable to assume that’s within their desired goals.

Tired8281 ,

Google has a track record of attack articles written against them, all talking up their intentions to tank adblocking, including this attack article. And yet, my adblocker still works and my ads are still blocked. Strange that we just assume this is what they intend to do, when there’s no evidence they’ve pulled it off, we treat it as if they have.

crowsby ,
@crowsby@lemmy.world avatar

Are you really certain that Google is trying to eliminate adblocking is just an alarmist assumption?

Tired8281 ,

Threatens, as in, hasn’t happened and may not. Not all threats are true.

idk how well stuff works on Chrome Mobile. I use a different Chrome-based mobile browser that does allow extensions, and Ublock Origin works great on it. Turns out there’s more than one way to skin a cat. Who knew?

I’m well read on Manifest v3. I’m also aware of a Ublock Origin version that is designed to work under it. I have it installed and ready to go, for if and when the old one stops working. But that has only been threatened, too, and not even by Google.

I’m not certain it is just an assumption, but I am also not certain it is a prophecy. Until I get more certain, I’m not going to bust my hump worrying about it. And I’m certainly not going to bellow to the hillsides that we’re all doomed.

Whirlybird ,

YouTube test threatens to block viewers if they continue using ad blockers

They can do this without this new API though. Many sites block users if they use ad blockers, have for years, and that’s without this API.

How well is uBlock Origin working for you in Chrome Mobile?

Chrome isn’t the only browser on mobiles. If Chrome doesn’t let you block ads and you want to block ads, use a browser that does. Based on your logic, google would have eliminated ad blockers from Android overall already, yet they haven’t.

The fact is that this new API doesn’t block ad-blockers. Sites can already choose to block access if you have an ad blocker. There’s no change.

Whirlybird ,

💯. People are talking like there’s currently no way for websites to detect ad blockers or implement paywalls, and this is Googles way of doing it.

eth0p , (edited )

In other posts, I’ve tried to point out how some of the articles and comments around WEI are more speculative than factual and received downvotes and accusations of boot-licking for it. Welcome to the club, I guess.

The speculation isn’t baseless, but I’m concerned about the lack of accurate information about WEI in its current form. If the majority of people believe WEI is immediately capable of enforcing web page integrity, share that incorrect fact around, and incite others, it’s going to create a very good excuse for dismissing all dissenting feedback of WEI as FUD. The first post linking to the GitHub repository brought in so many pissed off/uninformed people that the authors of the proposal actually locked the repo issues, preventing anyone else from voicing their concerns or providing examples of how implementing the specification could have unintended or negative consequences.

Furthermore, by highlighting the DRM and anti-adblock aspect of WEI, it’s failing to give proper attention to many of the other valid concerns like:

  • Discrimination against older hardware/software that doesn’t support system-level environment integrity enforcement (i.e. Secure Boot)
  • The ability for WEI to be used to discriminate between browsers and provide poor (or no) service to browsers not created by specific corporations.
  • The possibility of WEI being used in a way to force usage of browsers provided by hostile vendors
  • The ability for it to be used to lock out self-built browsers or forked browsers.
  • The potential for a lack in diversity of attesters allowing for a cartel of attesters to refuse validation for browsers they dislike.

I very well could be wrong, but I think our (the public) opinions would have held more weight if they were presented in a rational, informed, and objective manner. Talking to software engineers as people generally goes down better than treating them like emotionless cogs in the corporate machine, you know?

diyrebel ,

The only benefit I can see to users is it could eliminate captchas

elimination is not a benefit. The CAPTCHA motive of separating humans from bots is responsible for killing beneficial bots. The only good thing about it is humans get fed-up with CAPTCHAs and the captcha-pushers lose human traffic. That backlash is a good thing™. Remove that backlash and beneficial bots are defeated on a much larger scale.

witx ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    whileloop ,
    @whileloop@lemmy.world avatar

    I’m afraid I disagree here. This line of thinking might lead some people to targeting Google engineers for harassment, doxxing, etc. We’re better than that, I hope. Instead, we need to call on governments to hit Google harder than they hit Microsoft over Internet Explorer. Back then, there were talks of forcing Microsoft to split off IE as a separate company, we need to make Google do the same with Chrome, and find some way to compel them to stop all browser development altogether. We have antitrust laws, we just aren’t using them.

    witx ,

    I see your point

    like47ninjas ,

    10:10 wholesome response.

    ArcticCircleSystem ,

    People call on governments to do things all the time, but it’s often just ignored. How do we get governments to actually listen? How do we get this to actually happen? ~Strawberry

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    I don’t blame the engineers so much as the executives. Those engineers could be people from India on H-1B visas just trying to live a better life.

    knobbysideup ,

    Imagine if ads had remained a single static banner at the top/bottom of the page and was hosted by the site itself. Maybe there wouldn’t be an arms race to infiltrate every aspect of our digital lives.

    TheBat ,
    @TheBat@lemmy.world avatar

    But that would mean leaving money on the table. Our economy doesn’t allow for that. You must always strive for more, on a planet with limited resources.

    PopOfAfrica ,

    What’s wild, is the stuff we really need (food and water) are self sustainable. Our resources or limited, but replenishing. Of course we instead base out society off one of the few nonrenewable resources (fossil fuels).

    GustavoM ,
    @GustavoM@lemmy.world avatar

    By all means… do that “Mr. Google”, and I’ll never touch any chromium-related browser, ever.

    meldroc ,

    And then the plan to force everyone to abandon Firefox whether they like it or not.

    1. Implement the misfeatures.
    2. Movie and music websites will be the first to announce requiring DRM to be able to watch movies or listen to tunes.
    3. The banks will be next. "For your safety, you must use an Official Approved Browser™ to be allowed access to your money!"
    4. Then ecommerce sites. "You must have DRM enabled to be allowed to buy anything."
    5. Then comes the social media sites. For your safety, of course…

    At that point, the userbase of anything that’s not Chrome or not DRM’d to death will be so eroded that virtually everyone else will abandon Firefox support, DRM will get enabled by default. Also, comes the lobbyists to Congress demanding changes to the DMCA to throw users in prison who dare to try to crack the DRM to block ads. “Ad-blocking is stealing!”

    Tired8281 ,

    Just means I’ll have the shittiest Chromebook I can buy used, for access to the sites you just listed, and my Linux laptop for everything else. If their non-financial, non-commerce site won’t let me in with my adblocking Linux machine, I just won’t go there. There will be lots of site still, run by us, that don’t do this shit, and they’ll get my traffic.

    HurlingDurling ,

    And I can bet that Google will spy on your home network from that shitty chromebook

    cyberpunk007 ,

    Not mine. I have a VLAN for that.

    Noxvento ,
    @Noxvento@lemmy.world avatar

    Yeah VLANs seem like a viable option for the average user. ;-)

    cyberpunk007 ,

    It’s true, but you can say that about almost anything. For example, for the “average” user lemmy is confusing compared to reddit.

    Besides, I’m just talking about how I tackle diseases inside my network, not what the average user should do.

    Noxvento ,
    @Noxvento@lemmy.world avatar

    Creating an account on lemmy.world is not much more difficult than creating one on reddit. Configurating VLANs is another story.

    aStonedSanta ,

    I have a router that can do it. Then I realized it felt like work to learn it so I stopped.

    Takumidesh ,

    Vlans babe!!

    Tired8281 ,

    They already do that from my Android phone, and I’m sure as hell not going Apple. Linux phones aren’t there yet, maybe in a few years, but I’ll still need an Android phone for the same reasons I’d need a Chromebok, bank apps will never support Linux phones. And yeah, like everybody said, VLANs. I already have one for untrusted IoT devices, I’ll just spin up another for Chromebooks.

    FoxBJK ,
    @FoxBJK@midwest.social avatar

    Just means I’ll have the shittiest Chromebook I can buy

    Google Exec: “But you did buy it, yes?”

    Tired8281 ,

    Not from them! They don’t make a dime when I buy yours.

    NekoRiv ,

    My thoughts on buying used Nintendo games. Love the IPS hate how Nintendo treats people. I’ll gladly buy the new Pokémon game from you for 2 quid less than retail.

    shadow ,

    Also gotta make sure it doesn’t “expire” or be the sucker buying ewaste that’s “no longer supported”

    cyberpunk007 ,

    This right here is what has always scared me. The internet is getting more and more controlled and locked down as the years go on. The general population will not take up for, Linux, Firefox, etc. Neither will the services we now rely upon like banking etc. So we will be forced.

    njordomir ,

    I think it was always sketch from the beginning that governments and educational institutions used proprietary software. Too much money changing hands. Too many opaque business dealings. Too many cogs who don’t care to understand, though they’re not unreachable. Louis Rossman, the Mac repair guy from YouTube has done a lot of pro-consumer, pro-freedom videos lately and a few of my non-nerdy friends have really had light bulbs go off for them.

    slidinggoal ,

    Hi. I finally have the balls to ask, what is DRM? I am kind of a neophyte in all tech matters. But I managed to get out of Reddit because it was full of baits and ridden with apple ads. And so I like this new platform, reminds me of the good old gamefaqs forums days. Hope all this slicker simpler UI from and for users never die…

    JunctionSystem ,

    Digital Rights Management. AKA the stuff that’s supposed to prevent unauthorized copying and suchlike, but in practice just means the pirates have a better experience than legit customers.

    LakesLem ,

    I don’t think any of this would stop me from using FF for day to day browsing.

    2 - At this point I’d just pirate it. I don’t care. If you’re going to be hostile to paying customers, I’m going to be a non-paying customer again.

    3 - Separate banking app. Not bothered about desktop banking

    4 - Fine I’ll support local businesses where possible, and use dedicated apps or if necessary Chrome (preferably sandboxed) specifically for shopping where not.

    5 - Social media was a mistake anyway, already deleted Twitter, I need very little excuse to get rid of Facebook as well.

    Honestly I think this is just the end phase of “Web 2.0” as I remember all this shit being labelled at the time. We managed fine with independent forums etc before and will manage again.

    Edit: I love the irony that people are killing off Reddit due to API access but the only way I’ve been able to post on lemmy.world is via the website. Connect app? Nope!

    njordomir ,

    Pretty much on board with this plan and already moving that direction step by step. Last year I started my deGoogling process again including switching to Firefox and working towards a gApps free phone. This year I mostly left Reddit. When the YouTube adblock stuff started coming up I’ve been waiting… show me one un-blockable ad, I fucking double dog dare you YouTube.

    We’re ripe for a video revolution because content creators might be the only people more pissed at YouTube than the users. I kind of disengaged when everyone started having to imply controversial topics or use similar sounding words. That was too far for me and if I can’t speak freely, or I have to listen to a bunch of people constantly self-censor, I will freely find my way to the door in search of greener pastures.

    Facebook popped this shit up on me the other day that said “Your AdBlocker will prevent you from seeing important updates from your Friends! Disable it now.” Important updates from my friends you say? Like the ones where my naive friends like a random super-popular post and get inadvertently subscribed to a page and later that page takes out an ad and my friends name gets put under it like “Billy Bob likes this corporate swill” Never gonna happen. If I can’t use it without an ad blocker I’m deleting what I can and moving on. If I’m paying for a product, I’ll pay for one that puts the benefit to the user as their first priority.

    Thanks for letting me rant on your comment. Here’s to hoping the internet somehow gets less shitty. :)

    voluble ,

    Then ecommerce sites. “You must have DRM enabled to be allowed to buy anything.”

    I’m actually not sure about this one. Money is money. If I’m a vendor, and a bunch of bots want to give me money, I say bring it on. Why would any ecommerce vendor add that layer of friction, which could actually prevent a user from buying something from them? What’s in it for the vendor?

    Seems to me the more likely anti-consumer hell is a points dystopia leveraged by monopolistic companies. Like apple, microsoft, or disney moving to some sort of loyalty points system where you can only buy their products using a currency and credit system that they control. Like, ‘stream this movie using your disney points card’. We’re not far off from that really.

    Im28xwa ,

    To all of mentioned above from the bottom of my heart https://lemdro.id/pictrs/image/8ef22328-ab99-4e02-bee1-d6a58113425b.webp

    Oka ,

    It’s NOT the engineers. It’s the executives and corporate management that decides that. The engineers just get paid to implement it.

    ZeroHora ,
    @ZeroHora@lemmy.world avatar

    Never blame the workers

    Uniquitous ,

    Are there any implications for DNS-based ad blocking, as is done with Pi Hole?

    listener17 ,

    Pi Hole only works if DNS over HTTPS isn’t forced.

    Bipta ,

    Which it is already on Android, if I'm not mistaken.

    flux , (edited )
    @flux@lemmy.world avatar

    So let’s say the API sever for the authentication that the browser has not been altered goes down. Does that mean that all sites that require the browser are unreachable?

    TheCrimsonKellashee ,

    Yep, and they won’t give a shit.

    UncleGooberleg ,

    The day Mr. Google tries to enter my home to remove my off switch is the day Mr. Google has a very big problem.

    kokesh ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    GustavoM ,
    @GustavoM@lemmy.world avatar

    AFAIK, AGhome doesn’t block youtube ads (which is part of Mr. Google’s ebool domain). So… don’t think so, tim.

    _number8_ ,

    imagine working on shit like this. like wouldn’t that make your life worse as well? how fucking malignant

    iamthatis ,

    I don’t think it’s an engineer problem as much as a management problem. The implementation is done by the engineers, sure, but it’s the product managers who decide the direction and it’s them who are at fault here

    pulaskiwasright , (edited )

    Engineers could leave and find a new job. “Just doing my job” is not a real defense.

    captainlezbian ,

    Yeah, it’s executives and shareholders too

    diyrebel , (edited )

    I’m not sure how you can blame a corporation for doing the job of a corporation. It’s capitalism doing its thing.

    I will blame the end users. When the masses of anti-bot pro-advertising normies decide to run browsers that play the token game, it will be on them. Just as countless shitty websites get high ranking search results today… it’s because the masses endorse it.

    Boycotts are far too rare. It’s the consumer’s job to . They don’t do their job and this is the real point of failure (which Google gladly exploits).

    StarServal ,
    @StarServal@kbin.social avatar

    The internet is unusable without adblockers.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •