Google can't be trusted with ads. I've seen 3 ads today pretending to be Macy's and Bed Bath & Beyond, that were actually from Hong Kong, as well as the fake Mr Beast ads are back on YouTube. I won't even get into the borderline porn Queen's Blade ads.
Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
71–80 of 486 posts
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#72> Attesters will be required to offer their service under the same conditions to any browser who wishes to use it and meets certain baseline requirements.
I'm slightly suspicious this won't work in any way, but I'm not exactly sure why... Maybe because "will be required" is a huge non-technical issue that has to be resolved separately in non-technical means.
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#73The latest, tone-deaf response from a Google engineer: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/...
"it's clear we need a larger discussion (so you understand why I'm right" and not "it's clear this was a bad idea"
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#74The latest, tone-deaf response from a Google engineer: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/...
You have to be hopelessly naive to believe that the hold-back feature is going to be implemented as described, if at all, and not quietly removed when the outrage dies down.
And even if it stays as described, the percentage will be low enough that those that fail attestation can be safely barraged with captchas or simply told to go away. (You can try browsing the web with TOR to get a taste of how you will be treated)
The whole post can be summarized as "trust me bro"
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#75A good and measured article marred only by a silly, clickbait title. Unless there is a plan to allow attesters that are independent bodies then this is absolutely a threat to the open internet, or what's left of it. The biggest dead canary for me is the lack of calling this out explicitly by Google or Apple. We're left to assume that Google is hand-wavingly saying "don't worry we can take care of that" when the priva…
What is wrong when walking into a web shop with disclosing how much money you earn and may be able to part with?
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same engineers doing this in exchange for money, healthcare, etc to put food on their tables and provide for their families? Not everyone has the ability to act on said 'choice' and risk their jobs, income, benefits.
Yeah, but you know what? Many of us do have choices and many actively do make those choices. Lets not pretend that we are struggling low paid workers whose families would starved if we changed the job or asked for reassignment. Also, many unethical choices are made or advocated for by engineers themselves.
Yes, there's some that just want to work on different problems and want to just fix the puzzles.
But blanket blaming all of them and saying they all have a choice is not real. Any of them on visas? How would you feel about risking not just your job but also the ability to live somewhere.
You can't blanket blame all engineers and say they all have a choice.
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#77I know ads is a huge business. I never click them. Who clicks on ads? Really? What segment of Internet users does?
Which implies the click fraud problem. I thought that Google was strongly disinterested in robust counter measures because so much as engagement is straight fraud. If you shine a light on it the market shrinks a lot.
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#78It isn't just "make ad-blocking (near) impossible" as the current title of the submission suggests. It is: Make browsing the internet possible only on Chrome, Safari or Edge (with no modifications or extensions). No competition allowed in browsers. Make browsing the internet possible only on macOS, Windows, Android or iOS (no custom Android distributions, definitely no LineageOS or GrapheneOS or whatever). No competi…
iirc remote attestation is reliant on hardware attestation, which means these websites will only run on authorized DRM-enforcing hardware and architectures. Only Intel, AMD, Qualcomm and the like. No open-source firmwares, architectures or hardware.
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#79Blaming the engineers themselves?
Both should be blamed. A proposal like this would make me not want to hire Ben Wiser, Borbala Benko, Philipp Pfeiffenberger, or Sergey Kataev, ever. There are projects one of integrity should simply refuse to work on, if they make the world a worse place. With Google on a resume, it's not exactly hard to find jobs. People who agree to work on projects like these are defective human beings.
I might actually start a blacklist over this. We are looking at aggressively hiring and I don't think I want anyone who has ever served time at Google on my staff anymore.
Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible
#80Waving that don't be evil flag proudly eh team.
I hate ads as much as anyone but providing a free service that runs ads and shares part of that income with content creators is hardly particularly evil.
Ads per se are a fine alternative to pay for a website, the problem is when they are the most attractive option. Because them being the most attractive option usually means they are the only option, meaning they are also the only option for people that would be willing to pay to see no ads (me).
I see it like smoking. It should be legal, but there need to be laws in place preventing smokers from harming and annoying anyone that chooses not to smoke. Ads should be legal, but there need to be laws in place allowing people to completely avoid them by paying a fair price. Until this is the case and everyone can choose, making them unavoidable is morally wrong.