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.

GenBlob ,

I had a feeling this was the case. Youtube has been painful for the past month now.

Aceticon ,

“Do no evil^1^”

^1^ unless we can make money from it.

HiddenLayer5 ,

Any organisation that needs to remind themselves not to be evil is already intrinsically evil.

Aceticon ,

Very overtly and loudly claiming a quality which should be self-evident in oneself, one’s company or one’s nation invariably means it’s not really there.

Excrubulent ,
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

“People’s Democratic Republic”

Aceticon ,

“The Greatest Democracy In The World” - Lots of US politicians, including those activelly engaged in gerrymandering and passing vote supression laws.

The dictum, supposedly from Einstein, about only the universe and human stupidity being infinite, needs to be ammended to include hypocrisy.

Excrubulent , (edited )
@Excrubulent@slrpnk.net avatar

The country with the most Freedom™*

*Freedom™ must be redeemed in Freedom™ tokens; sufficient Freedom™ tokens entitles you to trample others’ Freedom™; insufficient Freedom™ tokens entitles you to die in the gutter

tegs_terry ,

I think they changed it didn’t they?

HiddenLayer5 ,

I think it’s “do the right thing” now

DEngineer ,

For the shareholders

tegs_terry ,

Ahh, much more leeway

JonEFive ,

Right - “Do no evil” uhhh… Is that not your default setting?

Cannacheques ,

I feel like there’s scales of evil here Google starts to need to highlight on a whiteboard

SendMePhotos ,

I mean… “evil” is arbitrary, right?

Aceticon ,

“It’s evil not to make as much money as possible”, Google founders. C-suite and board, probably.

jonne ,

Not arbitrary enough that they thought they could keep saying it. They ditched that about a decade ago.

JonEFive ,

There’s a reason that doesn’t appear on their site or in their docs any more. It was a canary clause.

Boomkop3 ,

Not anymore: they ditched it for “do the right thing (for my wallet)” a couple years back

trent ,

Actually, their slogan was “Don’t be evil.” But they revised it recently by adding a comma after the first word.

a1studmuffin ,
@a1studmuffin@aussie.zone avatar

That’s an antitrust case if ever I saw one.

bruhduh ,
@bruhduh@lemmy.world avatar

EU be like: aw shit here we go again

recapitated ,

Just like that time that one operating was made to stop shipping with that one browser.

WuTang ,
@WuTang@lemmy.ninja avatar

that’s not my experience. same perf on both browsers.

altima_neo ,
@altima_neo@lemmy.zip avatar

Huh, I noticed YouTube videos taking a little extra longer to load.

punkwalrus ,
@punkwalrus@lemmy.world avatar

I did too… In Chrome on Linux. I’ll check my use agent, it might be set to something else because I use it to check some stuff with developers.

wavebeam ,
@wavebeam@lemmy.world avatar

i was wondering about this! very dumb.

badbytes ,

Yeah, user agent switch to chrome made YouTube vid instantly load. Real shitty google!

blind3rdeye ,

Google has been doing this kind of thing for years, to strangle their competition. For example, back when Windows Phone existed, Google went deliberately out of their way to cripple youTube, and maps. Apparently google will do anything they can to create lock-in and faux loyalty.

Google are completely evil. Here we’re talking about them using their popular products as weapons against competitors in unrelated areas. But also have a history of copying products made by others then using advertising strength to promote their version over the original. And if that somehow doesn’t work… they buy out the competitors. Both youTube and google maps are examples of this.

pelicans_plight ,

Everyone should remember that Google itself isn’t really as evil as the people who work for it, those “people” are the only thing keeping this shitty company going. They go to work every day to try and make this world a worse place, those people who enable evil need to start to be recognized for who they truly are, the ones who want total enshittification and love watching you suffer. At what point do we start to look at thr root of this problem?

erranto ,

They have all the decision makers in their payrolls. They will stop at nothing !

Johanno ,

I noticed logging out of your YouTube account helps.

I just opened a private window in Firefox.

buddascrayon ,

This actually helps with a lot of things on YouTube lately. It is slowly devolving into a truly crappy site.

Taleya ,

blocking youtube cookies makes a lot of their shenanigans go away :)

But yeah, any site that tells me what browser I have to use instantly goes on my shitlist. That isn’t how this works.

nfsu2 ,
@nfsu2@feddit.cl avatar

They are really the worst scumbags ever. They want world domination.

15liam20 ,

“Don’t be evil.”

nfsu2 ,
@nfsu2@feddit.cl avatar

xd

Agrivar ,

Hasn’t been their motto for some time… and it shows.

Wes_Dev ,

Bet it’s done in such a way that they can claim “We’re just optimizing for Chrome, not slowing down any competitors. It’s not our fault our competitors don’t using our web engine for their browsers.”

I mentioned similar shading behavior on another post, when using Firefox with Chrome or native user agents on the plain old Google search page.

Ultraviolet ,

It’s apparently not even subtle enough to make that claim, it checks the useragent and sleeps for 5 seconds if it’s not Chrome.

Tavarin ,
@Tavarin@lemmy.ca avatar

I was wondering why YouTube started taking a while to load pages in the last couple weeks. Fucking Google, pulling this shit.

funnystuff97 ,

Not that I don’t believe you, but do you have a source for that?

festus ,

It’s discussed in the firefox sub (link)

EDIT: There are some claims that this is related to anti-adblock.

spader312 ,

If changing your user agent to Chrome on Firefox fixes it that justification won’t fly

Cannacheques ,

You seem to be quite in the know, would you say that this happens often across the tech space or is this a case of web platform, and in some cases the browser developers acting out?

Wes_Dev ,

Oh, I have no idea. It’s just something I noticed previously, and has a similar thing to this post, so I thought I’d mention it. I don’t have any inside or expert knowledge here.

HawlSera ,

Well that sounds illegal, it also sounds like Mozilla will see them in court.

virtualbriefcase ,

Mozilla’s funding comes from Google (not all of it but enough that all their other finding source’s wouldn’t even cover the bulk of the CEO’s salery). I doubt Mozilla is going to do much.

We can hope it doesn’t bode well for their ongoing anti trust case though

Tygr ,

I’m seeing this on Safari with the AdGuard content blocker extension as well.

PrairieRanger ,

I wonder how long it’ll be before google gets sued for their anti-competitive behavior.

HawlSera ,

Oh I imagine the papers are being filed as we speak, because this is blatantly illegal.

bamboo ,

Well you typically need standing in order to file a lawsuit, who would do it? Mozilla are probably the only ones. Why would this cause them to do it when past similar practices haven’t?

Dulusa ,

Europe will step in as usual

pup_atlas ,

Perhaps YouTube premium subscribers would have standing as a class action, since Google is materially worsening the experience of a paid product if you don’t use their browser

bamboo ,

I personally don’t think an argument like that would hold up. A company making its service worse in itself isn’t going to win court cases, and this is hardly the worst example of a tech company making its products worse unless you use more of their software.

pup_atlas ,

Perhaps not, but it’s not just the act of making the service worse, it’s doing so measurably to paying customers ONLY when using a competitors product. With those caveats, I think you could at least argue standing. Winning is a whole other battle.

PersnickityPenguin ,

Microsoft, Mozilla org, maybe apple

EFF or government

bamboo ,

On what standing though? Mozilla potentially has standing, and if the government finds that google is a monopoly, then the government could have standing, but nobody else.

Crack0n7uesday ,

Isn’t Mozilla a non profit? I don’t they can sue for anything along the lines of hurting profits to the company.

bamboo ,

They do have a for-profit subsidiary that potentially could though

Fredthefishlord ,

Can’t you sue for loss of income regardless?

TurdMongler ,

Google funds then I’m pretty sure…

skippedtoc ,

Of course they can. If the word profit is confusing you replace it with returns or finances.

snazzles ,

How would Mozilla finance a court case against google though?

laurelraven ,

Users affected by it, Mozilla, any other company that comes to support Mozilla, watchdog groups like the EFF…

It can also be brought by attorneys general and governmental regulators, the FCC and FTC might have a bit to say about it…

Antitrust suits aren’t civil cases, I don’t think, so “having standing” is a bit different

I’m not a lawyer though so I could be way off base, but the antitrust cases I’ve been aware of I don’t think they were brought by companies but by government agencies

sweeny ,

What law are they breaking? Not trying to defend Google or anything, just curious what law is blatantly being broken here because I don’t know of one

laurelraven ,

Blatantly anticompetitive behavior where you (ab)use your dominance in one sector (i.e. YouTube) to choke out competition in another (i.e. make it slow on competing browsers) is illegal in the US and the EU, at the very least. I don’t know the specific laws or acts in play, but that’s the sort of thing that triggers antitrust lawsuits

orrk ,

see FTC anticompetitive-practices

HawlSera , (edited )

It’s an anti competition law, they cannot penalize you for using a competitor service. This would be like getting fined by McDonald’s because I went to Taco Bell.

Benaaasaaas ,

They are already in one anti-trust trial for search engine shenanigans.

nfsu2 ,
@nfsu2@feddit.cl avatar

It is being currently being sued by Epic Games for Anti-Trust behavior. Google offered millions of dollars to Epic so that Fortnite would be available in the Play Store and not in Epic’s own store.

erranto ,

Been there, done that, and came on top.

Kbobabob ,

Cost of doing business

Cannacheques ,

Trying to convince people to use your product by crippling other people’s stuff really needs to stop. Did they not do an analysis on the issue of diminishing returns?

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