Technology

37719 readers

104 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

930

Google is working on essentially putting DRM on the web (github.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

258 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The much maligned "Trusted Computing" idea requires that the party you are supposed to trust deserves to be trusted, and Google is DEFINITELY NOT worthy of being trusted, this is a naked power grab to destroy the open web for Google's ad profits no matter the consequences, this would put heavy surveillance in Google's hands, this would eliminate ad-blocking, this would break any and all accessibility features, this would obliterate any competing platform, this is very much opposed to what the web is.

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

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

OTOH, this will create a massive "in" group, and a much smaller "out" group. It almost formalizes the Indie Web, which would take us back to the early 90's, but with better bandwidth. I'd be into that.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Until you're required to use their software for, say, banking or legal procedures. You DO NOT want this to become the status quo

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I was not advocating for it at all. Just looking on the bright side.

load more comments (2 replies)