•  Gnubyte   ( @Gnubyte@lemdit.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    221 year ago

    Sigh. Whoever they have working in their DRM department has been an asshole for a long time now.

    This is what the third or fourth - minimum - thing like this they’ve tried to pass in a few years? I actually like Google as a product family but every time they do this it hits me right in the “maybe I should reconsider” department. Its also usually met with a hard resounding no from everyone. Maybe its that they have a task force that is paid well to protect their ad interests and recover some sort of deficit they see in their ad product.

    I donate to the EFF to fight things like this at a professional level…also good to point out though that its not just google’s fault. If they build a moat for businesses and everyone installs one, that is everyone’s fault.

    •  d-RLY?   ( @dRLY@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Getting more people to start using Firefox instead of Chrome would be the best way to “vote with our wallets” in this case. Though some of the Chromium forks do make easier sells, but they are much much more likely to just go with whatever Google does by using the same base. So if Google forces something into Chromium in order to keep being able to functioning and being compatible (in web standards, security updates, and the massive extension library). It will just force the use of whatever Google wants, and make Google the de facto boss of how we are “allowed” to use the internet.

  • @uthredii It’s kind of interesting that this is coming out after Ai stuff like chatgpt and dall-e came out. iirc, those tools scrap a lot of data from the internet from all places [main reason why twitter had it’s rate-limiting, if it’s true and not bullshit].

    I get that scraping is pretty bad, but putting drm on everything just isn’t the right way to go about it. It’s like nuking all forests to destroy mosquitos; the mosquitos will die, but so will everything.