11–20 of 27 posts
Because adblocking doesn't work on Chrome. Use Firefox.
I recently saw a "adblockers aren't allowed on youtube" gate from Firefox. I recommend using Minitube on Linux desktop now. Plus youtube-dl and NewPipe.
yt-dlp is supposed to be the new hotness, though I've yet to try it. https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently saw a "adblockers aren't allowed on youtube" gate from Firefox. I recommend using Minitube on Linux desktop now. Plus youtube-dl and NewPipe.
youtube-dl is broken now and barely updated for some byzantine reasons, no? yt-dlp is supposed to be the new hotness, though I've yet to try it. https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/
I've been using it as a drop-in replacement for YouTube-dl and it's been great.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently saw a "adblockers aren't allowed on youtube" gate from Firefox. I recommend using Minitube on Linux desktop now. Plus youtube-dl and NewPipe.
youtube-dl is broken now and barely updated for some byzantine reasons, no? yt-dlp is supposed to be the new hotness, though I've yet to try it. https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/
Having an open source Chromium that allows competing browsers to be built at a fraction of the cost might make it hard to claim monopolistic practices. If Google never existed, would we have more browser choice now?
> at a fraction of the cost
Microsoft gave IE away for free and there where dozens of IE clones build on top of its engine, you just never had a reason to use any of them because in the end they where still IE clones.
"Chrome is a fast and secure browser for YouTube."
That claim is NOT BS. And I am not shilling for Google here, I use Brave and Firefox myself and NEVER used Chrome EVER and I am proud of it. However, they did not claim its MORE secure or faster, they just say "is a fast and secure".
I remember when Chrome came out how heavily Google pushed it back then I used their search. It was something similar I think, or was it Firefox ads somewhere else? Not sure but there was also no claim just a meaningless general statement.
God Google search is it shitty these days. Putting things in quotes does not even work anymore and the search results are garbage.
Having an open source Chromium that allows competing browsers to be built at a fraction of the cost might make it hard to claim monopolistic practices. If Google never existed, would we have more browser choice now?
The monopolistic practices are largely about (IMO) forcing standard adoption to make it impossible to develop new browsers. I suspect competition law is ill equipped to turn that into action, though.
Having an open source Chromium that allows competing browsers to be built at a fraction of the cost might make it hard to claim monopolistic practices. If Google never existed, would we have more browser choice now?
Having an open source Chromium that allows competing browsers to be built at a fraction of the cost might make it hard to claim monopolistic practices. If Google never existed, would we have more browser choice now?
There are so many angles. So many angles. Before chrome there where a lot more competing browser engines, so that is already a solid YES. Then you have the handheld/smartphone market that was a lot more diverse before Google Android hit the market. > at a fraction of the cost Microsoft gave IE away for free and there where dozens of IE clones build on top of its engine, you just never had a reason to use any of them…
"Then you have the UNIX market that was a lot more diverse before Red Hat Linux hit the market."
I think it will be trivial to prove that Google is actively harming the internet. Proving that Chromium is anticompetitive for being large and complicated is a suicide mission. If the market decides that a terrible, buggy and enormous runtime is the best way to freely distribute content, then that's what we'll settle on. It's hardly surprising that things got this way, too; locked-down platforms are becoming so normalized that browsers are the only window of freedom users and developers have. It's not like Google or Apple made it any easier to ship native, cross-platform apps in that time, either. So of course users will gravitate to a browser that has more features than their own OS.
So... implicating Google is easy. Trashing Chrome adoption and feature-creep is a different battle entirely.
Because adblocking doesn't work on Chrome. Use Firefox.
I recently saw a "adblockers aren't allowed on youtube" gate from Firefox. I recommend using Minitube on Linux desktop now. Plus youtube-dl and NewPipe.
Because adblocking doesn't work on Chrome. Use Firefox.