Um um um um ummmmm... is this what it sounds like? Google is blocking browsers it doesn't "approve" of... apparently just letting in Firefox and Chrome? https://developers.googleblog.com/2020/08/guidance-for-our-effort-to-block-less-secure-browser-and-apps.html
The web as an open standards platform is rapidly falling apart. :\
I'm livid D:<
@cwebber Dominent member of the w3c announces "Fuck standards, actually, it's just me and my anti-antitrust blanket now"
extreme Dark Timeline 2020 cyber finish
the Fetch WG systematically ignored all requests to make it useful (probably proclaiming "no implementor interest") then Google 5 years latter is like, huh adoptions not great on this bleeding edge super cool feature no one ever supported, guess we'll just drop it.
so so so much frustration. google being prats about their own property is shit but whatever, it's just them. denying PUSH a future is murder to critical web architecture.
absolutely madcap completely unexpected gigantic WTF of the year from Google, for me:
It even blocks Firefox when the user tries to make it a little bit less "leaky"
While i dont care about the majority of "modern" websites that are just designed to sink time,
But i really want to log into Furaffinity again to connect with the artists and friends there. And to register for Events that can only be done behind a Recaptcha
@cwebber just dont use their services anymore and help people move out
@gabriel Only going to work if people become mad enough
I've been degoogling for a decade, and YouTube is the only thing of theirs which I still use with any regularity. The more they try to become Microsoft the more incentive there will be to use other things.
This is the next step for browser hegemony: You cannot use anything that does not comply exactly with the behavior of the big (co-dependent) development-groups.
It is a way how the spirit of Free Software dies even though the licenses remain. The kind of underhandedness Google also played with Android by creating contract-shackles for hardware developers so few people can get Android without Google.
Modern browsers with security updates will continue to be supported."
So basically if they support modern web standards, and are being maintained, they should still work. No mention on the linked article of specifically only Chrome and/or Firefox (just that you should not try to impersonate those two browsers).
hearing that google approves of firefox makes me suspicious of firefox.
I wonder if elinks and w3m are on those browsers given their use by disabled folks. This is a terrible precident to set as it is obviously going to choke out smaller browsers like Midori, Gnome Web, Falkon, and possibly even mid-tier browsers such as Opera and Brave.
And if this attitude continues foward how long until we see websites that entirely try to deprecate browser add-ons just because they want to force feed their content their way?
I mean, it doesn't explicitly say that it's only letting in Chrome and Firefox. Safari is likely allowed. Microsoft Edge and the new Microsoft Chromium presumably, too.
But yeah, that is a remarkably specific list of restrictions. It's like they went to one of their dev teams and asked them to describe Chrome without calling it that.
I also know of Dillo, Netsurf, and the various commandline web browsers.
I don't see any hope to preserve the functionality of the popular websites in any independant efforts, and as most people will say that these new browsers are "broken". I don't think it's even valuable. But I hope by targetting IoT-type devices I'll simultaneously lower such expectations whilst building something cooler!
@cwebber That's one possible interpretation.
A more likely interpretation is that they mean what they say, which is that they plan to block non-browser applications that embed a browser in order to log the user into Google and scrape their cookies. The supported way to do this is to use OAuth, which they explicitly say will still work, as it has done for the last ~10 years.
@iron_bug @cwebber obviously you can't and most likely they will just blocklist a handful of UA strings including the one chromium-embedded uses by default.
I honestly don't understand why people are interpreting this differently. The post is pretty clear. There are enough things to get upset about in 2020 without actively inventing new ones by interpreting everything in the worst possible light.
@cwebber it sure does appear that way... Oh I seriously hope the Linux phone industry takes off so I can finally move away from Android.
@cwebber no this is based as it will finally kill off ie9
@cwebber I especially like this bit: The browser must identify itself clearly in the User-Agent. The browser must not try to impersonate another browser like Chrome or Firefox.
Oh, you mean a browser should impersonate other browsers like this “Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/51.0.2704.103 Safari/537.36” ?
@cwebber only a matter of time until they announce Firefox no longer qualifies.
@cwebber It's an application platform now. Either you ship all the insane features required to make them work, or you're out.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!