Live data from Hacker News

Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

mattcutts.com

61–70 of 88 posts

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are they going to do? Stop using the internet? Stop using newer versions of the software. Firefox is open-source, so forking and fixing the older versions before these hostile changes is not impossible.

I hope this is true. I don't know how to maintain a web browser, hopefully those that do are willing to do the work to keep it running.

[deleted]

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#62
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope this is true. I don't know how to maintain a web browser, hopefully those that do are willing to do the work to keep it running.

Does a web browser need maintenance beyond security fixes?

They can either spend their efforts at trying to catch up with Google and their constant anticompetitive churn, or propaganda (for lack of a better term) against web developers trendchasing that churn.

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#63
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope this is true. I don't know how to maintain a web browser, hopefully those that do are willing to do the work to keep it running.

Does a web browser need maintenance beyond security fixes?

I mean, security fixes are still maintenance on their own, and on an attack surface as wide as “the entire Internet”, it’s a non-trivial one.

But also… what people want to do on their devices evolves. Web developers want to be able to support that. So they rely on browser developers to constantly support new features. One can bemoan this state of the world as much as they’d like(*), but at a certain point it’s just sticking one’s head in the sand.

(*) I style myself mostly a native platforms developer, and I’d love it if the web wasn’t the de-facto cross-platform architecture of choice. But alas.

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#64

Looks like this article might need a new "Updated" entry because current chrome ToS points to generic : https://policies.google.com/terms

important fact missing in the article (maybe even from title): matt never spoke for google and didn't work at google since the mid 2010s i think. he's an early hire who became a star Obama-era DOGEdepto-esque (mostly for good) technocrat, which then caused most of his peers to be hired left and right in hopes to get access to that cadre.

The article is from 2008...

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#65
post #51
post #49

Mozilla is sooo fucked here. On one hand, it would take them approx ~1 sentence of blog to say "We won't sell your input info to anyone" and this drama goes away. OTOH: if the currently pending court case on anti-monopoly bars google from making payments to mozilla (which is about ~90%++ of their revenue), mozilla truly, and well is fucked. Meaning -they need to diversify, and they know it; they can't sell browsers,…

They've had a decade and a half now to invest and diversify. I've been incredibly disappointed in every attempt. Honestly, just investing the good portion of the revenue from Google in an index fund and treating it like an endowment would probably have done better than they ended up.

100% agree. there have been posts here investigating Mozilla's budget - they have clearly squandered the money they received from Google.

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#66
post #52
post #8

Matt Cutts was one of the Google search OGs. The kind of cultural values (e.g. make user happy all else will follow) he and a number of other original Google employees believed in and tried to defend have loooong been overridden by the Sundars and other Prabakhars who only kowtowed to the short-term demands of wall street. Cutts, Ben Gomes and similar-minded do-gooders have all neatly been benched a long time ago.

"Prabakhars"?

bean counters like Prabakhar Raghavan

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#67
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am building a company that accepts user generated data, and one surprising struggle is getting my lawyers to stop writing shitty, overbroad, abusive TOS. They are just so used to it, and all the templates and boiler plate is designed to give me everything and the user nothing. And if I want to do better by ny users I have to fight and cajole my own lawyers and pay extra for them to do the extra work of writing term…

> It sucks. It depends on your perspective surely? As a lawyer your job is typically to protect your client from legal risk, so if users are happy to sign a really expansive set of terms (which experience shows is the case) that gives grants lots of permission to do stuff with their data then that's low risk. If you as a business don't want that then you need to make it explicit that you're willing to take on some ex…

Also by using “standard boilerplate” they are using language with meanings well established by precedent. Craft your own version in “regular English” and it’s much more open to litigation.

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#68
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope this is true. I don't know how to maintain a web browser, hopefully those that do are willing to do the work to keep it running.

Does a web browser need maintenance beyond security fixes?

I tried viewing Notion and self-hosted Mattermost using SeaMonkey last week. Nothing was displayed at all. Trac pages still worked though. So yeah, a web browser needs more than security fixes.

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#69
post #68
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does a web browser need maintenance beyond security fixes?

I tried viewing Notion and self-hosted Mattermost using SeaMonkey last week. Nothing was displayed at all. Trac pages still worked though. So yeah, a web browser needs more than security fixes.

I wonder how much of that is user agent related?

Re: Google does not want rights to things you do using Chrome (2008)

#70
post #68
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does a web browser need maintenance beyond security fixes?

I tried viewing Notion and self-hosted Mattermost using SeaMonkey last week. Nothing was displayed at all. Trac pages still worked though. So yeah, a web browser needs more than security fixes.

Start blaming the sites for using new Chrome(ium)-exclusive features when they're not otherwise necessary. The fact that many sites which decide to update and then offer zero or often negative value to the user, while requiring a newer browser, should be proof that Google is doing an embrace-extend-extinguish on web standards, and web developers who get sucked into their propaganda are making it harder for alternative browsers.
Post reply on HN