Firefox

17768 readers

25 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

k_o_t@lemmy.ml

1436

Mozilla officially opposes Web Enviroment Integrity API (DRM for web pages proposal from Google) (github.com)

submitted 1 year ago by sabreW4K3@lemmy.tf to c/firefox@lemmy.ml

130 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I have limited understanding of the technical side of this issue, but based on this comment, this sounds like a brilliant move by Google - Don't like the rules of the game, change the game...

Edit: for clarification, this comment was very tongue in cheek - I don't support Google, this was just an acknowledgement of a smart business play.

[–] masquenox@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

an acknowledgement of a smart business play.

When politicians do it, it's "corruption." When normal people do it, it's "crime." When capitalist parasites do it, it's "smart business."

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Double standards for yay! Smart business doesn't preclude moral/ethical cesspools

[–] xeekei@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While I have issues with the rules of "the game", the current rules are better than the changes that Google are proposing, but since they are infinitely more powerful than me, I can only hope whatever body (W3C?) does not make it an official standard. As long as it's just an extra thing that Chrome/Chromium does, there's still hope for Google to get into legal trouble.

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Fingers crossed that you're right. Definitely don't want to see them repositioning into an (even more) advantageous policy position. I imagine that a standards body such as the one you mentioned would be fairly careful about adopting anything proposed by a company without significant caution. At least that's how it works with some international standards agencies haha

[–] 4am@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need to stop this capitalist brainrot. It’s not a smart business move; a smart business move would be one where everyone wins. This is a lazy and evil move designed for pure extraction of value and coercion of compliance.

Live the way we want you to (and we take 30% off the top!)

[–] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

`I mean, yes, agreed. But this is literally how businesses operate - stay ahead of governments, or change the game so govts are onboard (as regulation regularly trails behind business). A genuinely smart business move would obviously be preferable, but the modern history of megacorps is not exactly a shining beacon of benevolence to the ppl. It should be, but gestures wildly at everything

Edit: exchanged "always" for "regularly"

[–] 4am@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

the modern history of megacorps is not exactly a shining beacon of benevolence to the ppl

I mean, yes, agreed. But why does anyone think that that’s ok?