While this "battle" may be won for now, I've no doubt Google will simply try to implement this in a different way with less backlash.
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
1635 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
59605 readers
3422 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Good! Now we just need to degoogle everything else on the internet.
Ah, let me guess, now Google's gonna get everyone and their sister to move all their content to apps...
They already have. I can barely go to a mobile page that isn't broken or doesn't have a pop up I must dismiss telling me it's better in the app when it most certainly is not. Some things I use have let their desktop web pages go into disrepair and when I contact them with my issues logging in they just tell me to use the app and that their site has been down for months. Gotta force that tracking and those arbitration clauses somehow.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Rriiiiiiiigghhhhtt.
I'll just be standing over here, watching them not do that.
Web Integrity API proposal is what happens when Big Tech takes over the internet.
I absolutely do not trust Chrome or the google team. It does not make me feel any better the only barrier to them trying to ruin a internet a bit is some backlash.
I have not followed this stuff very closely. Here's a question. This article says:
People took issue with how the Web Integrity API would bring DRM to the open web.
Has there not been DRM on the web for many years by now for videos?
load more comments
(2 replies)
The Media Integrity API is something that streaming video services want and applies only to Android apps that are built on web technologies. This has nothing to do with conventional web experiences or even the Chrome browser on Android: it's effectively a solution for when media is served on webpages that are embedded inside an Android app.
Typically an Android app will use native libraries like ExoPlayer to request and serve DRM content, for instance a video from a paid streaming service to ensure that the viewer is permitted to watch it. Chrome is built on top of open video codecs and doesn't inherently support DRM in this manner (as far as I'm aware), so if an app developer wants to use web technologies by leveraging a WebView, they are restricted to which codecs and DRM is available.
It's my understanding that this new library offers a solution to such developers. As a reminder, this doesn't apply to the web at large.
From my perspective, this is no different than DRM offerings that are supported natively in all operating systems, including Android, iOS, Mac and Windows.
That's why DRM is bad period. It takes away your power and gives it to a single authority
load more comments
(2 replies)
Yeah, but they were testing the waters with this one. The hydra's going to grow another head eventually. It'll be interesting to see how/if the media integrity API gets leveraged in the Android Chrome browser. They're eventually going to attack this problem from a slightly different angle.
Good summary. I used to think that apps were soooo much better than web apps, but I've come to realize that frequently the web UI is made intentionally janky to nudge users onto the apps where ads can't be blocked.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I am not asking for much. Just break up Google and throw both the big shareholders as well as the executives in jail for the rest of their lifes. If you go as far and decide to take all their money and spend it on social services, healthcare and education for the general public, I wouldn't be mad.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Google isn't proceeding. Maybe now they'll realize YouTube is also suffering from their poor decisions.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Unpopular opinion here: I kind of hoped they'd go through with it, as that would completely kill Chrome and Chromium and would lead to a repeat of IE vs Firefox, except Chrome would be the new IE. The fact that they backtracked means that they too saw that people would be massively flocking to Firefox.
Careful what you wish for.
I still think it will come out but on the down low
It wouldn't. If Google only owned Chrome, then maybe. But combined with services like AdSense, Google can easily leverage people and site operators to keep using Chrome.
Firefox is losing users year over year. I think it's beyond saving.
load more comments
(5 replies)
thank FUCK