Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

stackdiary.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 486 posts

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#191

Post by rovr138 »

maeil wrote: post #120
rovr138 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much is the cost of living? Lifestyle creep? Do they have anyone at home sick and they're the only ones working while also living in a high cost of living area? It's not that easy.

I'm not joking when I say it's very hard to tell whether you're sarcastically making fun of the facetious arguments they could hypothetically put forth or if you're serious.

I don't work at Google. I know of people that have the circumstances I've mentioned.

Some that help their parents, some that have kids, some that have sick spouses, some that brought their parents to live with them and support them due to health issues, some that have work visas.

I am simply saying that even though the right thing to do would be refusing, you also have to consider everyone's life circumstances when they make decisions.

The fact that they make $100k, $200k, $300k like another comment said means that they don't just need a job, they need a job making roughly the same amount of money and having the same benefits to be able to risk getting fired.

My original comment I wrote it so that we wouldn't just place everyone in the same group and generalize. It's not necessarily always as easy as refusing and risking your job. You're risking whoever else you support for example.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#192

Post by keonbrown1 »

nikanj wrote: post #176
liendolucas wrote: post #116

Do you know what puzzles me most? How can software engineers work on something like this? Don't those paid engineers or involved ones have the balls or dignity to walk away? I'm just wondering how they would feel about this (if they feel anything at all). I mean, if I'd be in such a position and asked to push something like this I'd have walked away on the spot, no matter what you offer me. No one at Google is standi…

Tell me you don't have a mortgage and kids without telling me

[dead]

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#193

Post by rpastuszak »

In practical terms, what’s the best think and individual can do to make this less likely to happen?

I’ve been doing webdev for 20+ years, haven’t used chrome for the past few years besides using its inspector in Chrome canary. I’m content, I don’t feel like I miss it. I will try to convert my family to FF as I did in the past. But this makes me feel hopeless, unless there’s a strong legislative pushback (probably from the EU) or we break up the behemoth… It’s the first time I can’t see a way out of this.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#194

Post by liendolucas »

nikanj wrote: post #176
liendolucas wrote: post #116

Do you know what puzzles me most? How can software engineers work on something like this? Don't those paid engineers or involved ones have the balls or dignity to walk away? I'm just wondering how they would feel about this (if they feel anything at all). I mean, if I'd be in such a position and asked to push something like this I'd have walked away on the spot, no matter what you offer me. No one at Google is standi…

Tell me you don't have a mortgage and kids without telling me

But my point is that you do have plenty options in the industry! For sure if you're in charge of something like this you can have a pretty decent job elsewhere. You sound as if those people have nowhere else to continue their careers... Am I wrong?

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#195

Post by kibwen »

edg5000 wrote: post #97
nfriedly wrote: post #57

I hate to say it, but if you used Chrome to read this, then you're part of the problem. Awful stuff like this wouldn't stand a chance if Google didn't have such a near-monopoly position. For the sake of the open internet, please switch to a different browser. IMO, Firefox is best*, but even something chromium based is probably fine. Just not Google Chrome. * On desktop - Firefox is a bit weaker on Android, with an ex…

I agree, I use Firefox everywhere. But we must not forget the following: In 2011 Mozilla income was 85% derrived from Google, through the primary search engine deal. Around a billion was paid over three years as part of this deal at some point. Appearantly there was bidding by Microsoft for making Bing the default, which pushed up the pricing. So every time Mozilla speaks out against Google, it is a bit awkward, sinc…

> That is at least some small degree of insurance against potential freedom-limiting shenanigans by tech giants.

Chromium being open source is a red herring. The web is a protocol between clients and servers, and having the ability to fork the client doesn't matter if all the servers ignore your fork and continue speaking the protocol dictated by the dominant client. You need to fork the entire protocol, which is to say, you need to fork the entire web.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#196

Post by c0l0 »

edg5000 wrote: post #97
nfriedly wrote: post #57

I hate to say it, but if you used Chrome to read this, then you're part of the problem. Awful stuff like this wouldn't stand a chance if Google didn't have such a near-monopoly position. For the sake of the open internet, please switch to a different browser. IMO, Firefox is best*, but even something chromium based is probably fine. Just not Google Chrome. * On desktop - Firefox is a bit weaker on Android, with an ex…

I agree, I use Firefox everywhere. But we must not forget the following: In 2011 Mozilla income was 85% derrived from Google, through the primary search engine deal. Around a billion was paid over three years as part of this deal at some point. Appearantly there was bidding by Microsoft for making Bing the default, which pushed up the pricing. So every time Mozilla speaks out against Google, it is a bit awkward, sinc…

Perfect is the enemy of good. If you postpone or skip using Firefox because of this reason/excuse, you are even more a part of the problem than you probably realize ;)

Mozilla's opposition to such initiatives matters only because of their users. And there are no other significant fighters in this ring on _our_ side, unfortunately.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#198

Post by civilitty »

smeej wrote: post #100
heisenbit wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is wrong when walking into a web shop with disclosing how much money you earn and may be able to part with?

It terrifies me that I'm actually unsure whether this comment is sarcastic.

On HN Poe’s Law can always be assumed in the affirmative.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#199

Post by rovr138 »

ModernMech wrote: post #63
Frost1x wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes sense. This is the (labor) market selecting on services it wants to support. Employers like Google have no sort of leverage or responsibility here what-so-ever.

I never said they didn’t, but people seem to be arguing the engineers have no responsibility here. And people wonder why the internet and technology sucks — no one wants to own it, even the people who are literally writing the code. “What choice do I have?” - a Google engineer who drives a brand new Tesla, living in a $10k per month apartment.

> “What choice do I have?” - a Google engineer who drives a brand new Tesla, living in a $10k per month apartment.

There's also Google engineers driving Corollas and helping their parents back home with expenses.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#200

Post by jeroenhd »

mozball wrote: post #78
Adverblessly wrote: post #32

It 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.

What attestation the website accepts entirely depends on the configuration. There's nothing in the spec that will prevent attestations for Linux computers. Linux already works perfectly fine with secure boot and such, I don't see why a signed bootloader starting a signed attestation engine wouldn't be trusted by third party websites.

It'll kill open platforms like the rare open source RISC-V implementations, but for almost any platform in use today this can be implemented.

The real question is "but will it", and in practice websites will probably only whitelist Chrome, Edge, and (reluctantly) Safari.

Post reply on HN