And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.

    • BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      136
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well, the engineers say it themselves: nothing would prevent websites developers to prevent access from browsers that do not support this “Web DRM”.

      My biggest fear though is that it becomes a standard which all browsers will have to support to stay relevant. And with Google building the engine used by the vast majority of browsers, they can force this upon other browser engines (ie. Safari and Firefox).

      • sab@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        163
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s such a potent example why everyone who cares need to stop using Chromium based browsers before it’s too late. Stunts like this would be much harder to pull if there wasn’t a de facto browser monopoly.

        • Dojan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s such a potent example why everyone who cares need to stop using Chromium based browsers before it’s too late. Stunts like this would be much harder to pull if there wasn’t a de facto browser monopoly.

          I’ve always been a proponent of unifying the internet under a single platform, be it Blink or Gecko I don’t really care. Chromium itself was built on FOSS technology, and has its roots in KHTML, which Apple later adopted as WebKit, and Google used and made Blink.

          The problem I see is when a single company has such a large monopoly. Chromium should be community-owned, and Google shouldn’t get the final say.

          • sab@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            32
            ·
            1 year ago

            As far as I’m concerned, the web should be developed through universal standards (the World Wide Web Consortium takes care of that), while the job of rendering engines should be reduced to following these standards the best they can.

            • Dojan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              following these standards as best they can

              This is precisely why I want a unified web. I hate adding flags for support and testing across different systems. It’s a massive bother, and ultimately means you’ll test one platform and just hope for the best on the rest because that’s what you have time for.

          • FoxBJK@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            The problem I see is when a single company has such a large monopoly. Chromium should be community-owned, and Google shouldn’t get the final say.

            EU investigation is already underway for their ad business. Not sure that would apply to Chromium but owning the ad delivery, the website, AND the software that renders it should be considered.

        • Landrin201@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s such a potent example of why we need antitrust laws to actually be applied to tech companies.

          But our government here in the US is both run by geriatric idiots who don’t even know how to use a computer let alone regulate one and also is bought out by these companies.

          This is a blatant, out in the open anti-competitive action that is suggested in this article and it shouldn’t legally be allowed to stand, but our politicians understand so little about how technology works that they’ll blindly accept Google telling them that it isn’t monopolistic rather than actually try to understand it.

        • Zink@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          For what it’s worth, this comment just inspired me to switch my work PC from edge to Firefox. Was already using it in Linux, and will switch my home PC tonight.

      • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        All they need is a few major sites and tools requiring it to domino everything on the internet. Suddenly it’s standard.

        Most businesses all use either chrome or Microsoft. And they’re both Chromium.

        • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          40
          ·
          1 year ago

          Literally just applying it to YouTube would send tremors throughout the internet. If YouTube stopped working in Safari or Firefox, anyone using those browsers who don’t really care and just liked those browsers for other reasons will give them up and go to a chromium based browser.

          Google is fighting an apathy battle. One they know they can probably win because they own the Internet’s favorite content hub

        • nitefox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ironically I don’t think it would take foot. Many average users I know of use adBlockers - albeit shitty ones - and I don’t think companies would be willing to risk it

          • BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.comOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t know: people I know don’t always use ad-blockers and if they do they have no idea that they are less effective on Chrome than on Firefox.

            Also they all have been brainwashed to use Chrome because it was marketed as “faster, better and safer” all those years ago and wouldn’t even think of switching browsers (or it would be for another Chromium-based one)

          • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            People at home aren’t what matters. Companies will absolutely use it when it’s the next upgrade and deemed secure by whoever it is that keeps telling them to only use chrome and IE/Edge.

      • nivenkos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Reminds me of Microsoft with the ActivePlatform / Blackbird stuff in the 90s.

        Awful to see Google turn into that.

      • brombek@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Google will just say that pages with DRM will rank higher in their search and it’s all done.

        • floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s time to fork the community internet off the corporate one. Set up our own DRM-free sites and our own search engines, run by open source software. With blackjack and hookers.

          • KSP Atlas@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            We kinda have the small web (Gemini & Gopher), but it is a different, much simpler format than html (Gopher is literally plaintext)

            • floofloof@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I remember gopher but I haven’t used it for about 30 years. Does anyone still use that?

      • Spedwell@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sites that rely on ad revenue would have every business reason to switch to WebDRM-only.

        • dust_accelerator@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Everyone talks about this like it wouldn’t open a massive attack surface for the mother of DDOS.

          Make the attestor slow or take it out, you take down large parts of their business. I don’t know, i wouldn’t put too much stake in a platform/website that could be taken out so completely.

          • CallumWells@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hmmm, that’s a good point. It would probably be using some of the DDOS protection services. But make it cost enough and it may not be worth it for the corporations to continue that shit.

    • fearout@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Subscription-based, restricted to verified accounts Chromium, that shares your personally identifiable public key with each website you visit.
      Shudders

      • floofloof@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It makes such complete sense for Google and Microsoft that it’s a wonder we didn’t see it coming sooner.

    • fistac0rpse@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have exceeding low expectations, but I would hope that would be grounds for an antitrust lawsuit against Google as Chromium browsers account for roughly 70% of all users (based on numbers I pulled from Wikipedia)

      • whatsarefoogee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Antitrust lawsuit? What’s that?

        When is the last time any of the big tech companies got hit with antitrust? Microsoft is brazenly doing shit on windows they wouldn’t even dream of in early 2000s. Resetting user defaults to their products. Constantly advertising their products when user launches a competitors software.

        They don’t give a fuck and neither do the governments.