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

Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 460 posts

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#431

Post by knewter »

michaelmrose wrote: post #414
eastbound wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The solution is very simple: uninstall Chrome and Chromium. No. Firefox, beyond being slower, also keeps constantly displaying ads… for itself. Want to open a new tab? “Big Browser cares about your privacy, read how!” I just want to open a new tab!!! I’m working! Restarting? “Discover what’s new with Firefox”, “Hohoho, we care about your privacy, LOOK HOW MUCH WE CARE! ALSO WE HAVE NO ADS!” Worse, they suggest to s…

There isn't a moral dimension attached to loving the right kind of people and gay and straight people are equally moral in pursuing relationships with significant others. On the other hand there is a moral dimension to trying to take away our fellow citizens rights. The CEO as the face of the org became unsuitable to his role when he acted publicly and objectively immorally in support of those who would gut the right…

Brendan Eich getting fired was like watching the original internet get murdered by progressives. Everything since then has been about how I thought that would go.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#432

Post by michaelmrose »

knewter wrote: post #431
michaelmrose wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a moral dimension attached to loving the right kind of people and gay and straight people are equally moral in pursuing relationships with significant others. On the other hand there is a moral dimension to trying to take away our fellow citizens rights. The CEO as the face of the org became unsuitable to his role when he acted publicly and objectively immorally in support of those who would gut the right…

Brendan Eich getting fired was like watching the original internet get murdered by progressives. Everything since then has been about how I thought that would go.

He spent money to promote misusing a legal process to as it turns out illegally take his fellow citizens rights away.

Why do you think that's acceptable?

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#433

Post by tn5421 »

Mindwipe wrote: post #298
apostacy wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DRM should be inconvenient and expensive. There have always been ways to implement DRM security theater for the comfort of content providers in board rooms. The media ecosystem is not going to be enhanced by making DRM more restrictive. Netflix could completely deactivate all DRM today, and it would change nothing. Apple completely abandoned their "FairPlay" iTunes music DRM because it became evident that it was not…

Apple in no way abandoned FairPlay. Every file on Apple Music, and iTunes Match is protected with it. And those greatly outnumber transactional sales through the iTunes store, by an order of magnitude. The customer picked the DRMed version, every time.

Because everyone else pirated to great effect.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#434

Post by Thorrez »

delehal wrote: post #403
Thorrez wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a holdback prevent it from being used to create walled gardens?

I doubt it. As explained by GitHub user tbrandirali, the stated goals seem to be inherently contradictory. Quoting in part: "This internal contradiction is further demonstrated by the fact that the proposed solution to prevent misuse by websites - holdbacks - is to simply sabotage the functionality of the system itself, by making attestation probabilistic. This is not a workable solution to the problem: if the holdba…

Why wouldn't a 10% holdback work? Would a company consider it "simply a cost of business" to block 10% of people at random? That's going to cause a huge amount of support load and probably a lot of negative press. 90% of data will still be good for analytics.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#435

Post by delehal »

Thorrez wrote: post #434
delehal wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. As explained by GitHub user tbrandirali, the stated goals seem to be inherently contradictory. Quoting in part: "This internal contradiction is further demonstrated by the fact that the proposed solution to prevent misuse by websites - holdbacks - is to simply sabotage the functionality of the system itself, by making attestation probabilistic. This is not a workable solution to the problem: if the holdba…

Why wouldn't a 10% holdback work? Would a company consider it "simply a cost of business" to block 10% of people at random? That's going to cause a huge amount of support load and probably a lot of negative press. 90% of data will still be good for analytics.

If the holdback rate is low enough that the data is "good enough for analytics", then you may as well not have a holdback rate at all.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#436

Post by howinteresting »

charcircuit wrote: post #253
rezonant wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't banking sites gone already? Because users expect to be able to use their desktop to do their banking. But if they can simply require you to use Chrome, suddenly you can get both birds with one stone! This is a bad thing for the web.

>Why aren't banking sites gone already? I don't work in the banking industry so I can't answer. >Because users expect to be able to use their desktop to do their banking. I question if this is true. Especially amongst younger people who grew up with phones. Regardless if with this banks are able to cut down fraud this will be a benefit to the world.

Banks are going to use this because some pointy headed boss reads an article in CIO Weekly or whatever talking about remote attestation and orders their IT team to implement it. It will not actually cut down on fraud but it will cut down on freedom. The only approach that enhances freedom is that banks, or any other internet sites, must simply not have the option to perform remote attestation outside of limited contexts like IT computers.

But this will likely fall on deaf ears because you already made up your mind last year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32283932

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#437

Post by juun »

raggi wrote: post #205
kibwen wrote: post #72

It's time to break Google up. They're the AT&T and Standard Oil of our generation. Make Ads, YouTube, Search, Cloud, Chrome, etc. all independent companies. Demand that antitrust regulators do their damn jobs for a change.

Let's just think this through: Google Cloud becomes a VC driven organization that slowly eats margin dirt against it's competitors until insolvency. There was no way for it to recover enough resources from the mothership before being split out. Search trundles along ok, assuming it took search ads and a ton of core infra with it, but it never makes enough money to ship a decent product extension. It hopefully removes…

Thanks for that, that was beautiful. I know it won't happen, but I can't wait for it

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#439

Post by paulryanrogers »

willywanker wrote: post #429
paulryanrogers wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That would accomplish nothing. Firefox came into the mainstream because of power-user recommendations and the browser ballots. It should be illegal for a significan platform (say 10mln users) to make its own browser, or any really, the unquestioned default. Users should be prompted on first use, giving a randomly ordered selection of any capable browser. If users can just click through it the choice should be rando…

You're describing the old Firefox before they became Google's controlled opposition. Since 2011 all they have done is continuously stripped out every useful power user feature in a bid to turn into a shitty copy of Chrome; the last straw was gutting their powerful XUL/XPCOM extension system in favor of Chrome's far limited web extensions because muh security (and since then there's been more, not less cross browser m…

My point wasn't to gush praise on Firefox here, rather to point out that we need browser ballots again -- and permanently.

Otherwise Palemoon is as doomed to obscurity as Firefox, if not moreso.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#440

Post by BananaaRepublik »

chii wrote: post #265
lygaret wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but "Netflix and my bank actually work in Chrome" is Google's endgame.

the adblock "endgame" will be a self-hosted DNS system that blocks requests to ad-server urls (or return benign responses). Then the game will switch to encrypted proxied traffic that you cannot block. Then the adblocking software will switch to the GPU layer, and use machine learning and AI to wipe the region of memory in the GPU containing the ads (and replace it with something benign). Then the next logical step f…

Which follows that the final frontier of ad blocking are AR glasses that use machine learning and AI to block light from ads from reaching your eyes?
Post reply on HN