- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- technology@lemmy.ml
Fuckers
This guy is amazing. He is asking for patience to move this to a proper place to discuss this website drm and then commits it to chrome lol.
Forced to implement is the wrong term - they were tasked with designing it. They can’t just swap one person out for another - losing the lead dev or designer would be delay or kill the effort
They could’ve pushed back - software ethics is a required course for very good reason - but it’s easy to never ask if you should do something and skip straight to how. It gets easier to skip that piece every time, and the company isn’t going to respect it - we need outside pressure so they can point to us and say “this will have repercussions”
They don’t deserve death threats, but trashing everything they push on GitHub is fair. Measured steady pressure - save the most extreme stuff for upper management and shareholders
For the engineers you have to make them understand they did bad and they should feel bad, they need to feel that their peers have lost respect for them, not that this is the public lashing out
Your notion is just wrong. First of all engineers can’t push back on something like this. They can try to push back on stuff that might be wrong for the product, that is not performant or potentially break stuff, but not on something that can make the company so much money. If this is the roadmap, they must align, they are being paid (tons of money) to implement the company’s vision.
Second of all, you are looking at this as a consumer perspective. They are part of the company and most likely heavily invested in it. And if such thing will increase the company’s revenue, it will icrease theirs too. They won’t feel bad trust me, they know where they are and what they’re doing.
That’s where the ethics part comes into play. They’re not being ethical.
deleted by creator
imagine working on shit like this. like wouldn’t that make your life worse as well? how fucking malignant
Apple and Cloudflare already added something like this called Private Access Tokens https://developer.apple.com/news/
Why don’t they collaborate with them?
Basically adware.
It isn’t Google Engineers wanting to do it. It’s Google engineers being told to do it.
deleted by creator
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.
I see your point
10:10 wholesome response.
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
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.
But it looks like that only affects users of the Chrome Browser right?
Will use firefox until it gets broken into pieces. I would rather stop using the internet other than for necessary situations.
Ah yes kill the internet. I’m OK with that.
Google engineers are making my chances of using a Chromium-based browser (near) impossible
Can someone shed some light for me? I’m a noob and I’m not sure I understand what is being proposed by google here. From what I can tell, they’re proposing a cryptographically signed token that details information about a website user’s ‘environment’, which I take to mean, their device OS and browser information, for the sake of verifying their humanity for website owners and advertisers. Isn’t this sort of information already collected when a user visits a webpage, and doesn’t google (or whomever) already collect and use this data (and more) for fingerprinting? How is this new proposal different, and something to be specifically concerned about?
I know there are anti-fingerprinting browser privacy addons that spoof this information, or prevent its collection. Is the concern that these tools will become inoperable?
For the record I don’t like google or any company collecting any fingerprinting information, but it’s already being done widely and in an unregulated manner, isn’t it?
Welp, there we go.
I’m working on the contrary, some sort of gemini web plus with modules, to keep the engine as small as possible to make porting/reinventions easier. The engine only provides basics like displaying text. Modules provide functionality like ‘video player’, gallery’, ‘search bar with filters’, ‘login’, keeping webshops, company pages, etc. in mind. There’s no JS or CSS, the styling is entirely in the hand of the browser/user (including dark mode, mobile view), the servers push only content. Likewise, active logins and payments will be handled by the browser, not the webpage. Though it will not be compatible with HTTPS/the current web. The protocol and the browser will be licensed open source.
I’m still planning, it’s not even in the prototype phase yet. Should i push this further? If so, how would i get financial support? opentech.fund, ngi.edu, nlnet?