11–20 of 122 posts
As long as you're asked for permission I don't see the problem
This is what I was just thinking. It asks for permission just like microphone or location. Both of which you could argue 'allow for surveillance'
What user-oriented use-cases does this enable which couldn’t have been done otherwise?
I really thinks this is apples vs oranges.
I already don't really like how websites can detect whether a tab is active or not (perhaps because callbacks/timers get delayed when a tab is inactive?). For example, dslreports's speedtest fails your measurement if you switch tabs, and Duo's web 2FA interface fails to approve a device which you've set to remember for 30 days if you're in a different tab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what I was just thinking. It asks for permission just like microphone or location. Both of which you could argue 'allow for surveillance'
Those permissions have pretty clear use-cases which benefits the user itself and enables things which otherwise wouldn’t be possible. What user-oriented use-cases does this enable which couldn’t have been done otherwise? I really thinks this is apples vs oranges.
"As you might expect, developers love this new feature—anything that can provide them with more information regarding how users are interacting with their apps is a positive." Here I am deliberately designing apps that track no user interaction data at all. Maybe that's why Google doesn't even list my app even though it's one of the longest running "web apps" alive and used to be listed #1 when it first came out. Now…
Instead of designing a system that allows third parties to offer alternative browsers they decided to be selfish and do everything by themselves for themselves, and wonder why their market share continues to plummet.
Where is the GeckoView alernative for desktops that would allow their technology further reach?
As long as you're asked for permission I don't see the problem
Unless the feature is designed to fake data and make permission status opaque to the remote, it's a privacy reduction that will happen, the only question is when.
This API is behind a permission prompt that can only be triggered in response to a user gesture, so the bar to entry is high. The example on web.dev is a chat app that would automatically set an active/away status: seems useful! IMO I ought to have the ability to cash in some of my privacy chips (so to speak) on a site that I know and trust and that I want extra functionality from.
Relatedly, I feel like Safari is heavy-handed in the opposite direction. For example, it removes all locally stored data from a site if it isn't used within 7 days. There are sites I use less frequently than that where I'd still appreciate the ability to save information, but I don't have a choice. It all but guarantees sites need logins, backend storage etc. just to store simple data, which ends up being just as big a privacy danger!
Says the company which has no intent whatsoever of providing a half decent alternative to Chrome. Instead of designing a system that allows third parties to offer alternative browsers they decided to be selfish and do everything by themselves for themselves, and wonder why their market share continues to plummet. Where is the GeckoView alernative for desktops that would allow their technology further reach?