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

I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

blog.samuelmaddock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 632 posts

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#501

Post by marcus_holmes »

dspillett wrote: post #488
marcus_holmes wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but you do have full control... if you don't want to see ads, don't visit sites that use ads to support their business model.

I'll bite. How do you propose I know which sites not to visit without visiting them?

good question. I don't have an answer.

though at this point it is kinda predictable - all news sites, except the ones with paywalls (and if you haven't bought the subscription, then its pointless visiting them). All information sources, except a few notable exceptions (usually aggregators like HN/Reddit, but also Medium).

Everything else divides into SaaS products, personal blogs and random shit. Random shit is usually ad-supported, the rest are usually fine.

it's all sort of moot anyway - the ads model is crap and getting worse, and businesses are going to have to move to something else soon. I don't think we'll have this problem long.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#502

Post by sonnyblarney »

arendtio wrote: post #430

DRM is just a huge pile of shit. I mean, if it would actually work I would say okay, at least we have a solution that everyone is somehow happy with. But instead we consumers just loose. To give a few examples: - When I want to watch movies on Amazon Prime Video, there are some movies I can't watch in HD, even if I paid for HD (so the movie obviously exists in HD; probably dependent on the rights holder). The problem…

I think this is the most important point.

Consumers are not going to put up with all sorts of shenanigans regarding browsers, monitor support etc. etc. - it's an ugly mess.

If it 'just works' - then I think most people will accept 'paying for content' as a premise.

But when the pieces don't fit together because industry players don't see the 'big picture' ... it will just be bad for everyone and ironically encourage piracy.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#503

Post by nerdile »

So the article is complaining that companies that chose to create a gated consortium to protect content are exhibiting gatekeeping behaviors and not representing open ideals.

Um, duh?

These entities have elected to participate in two communities - open where it commoditizes their competitors (e.g. Chromium, Netflix service infra) and closed where it protects their differentiation (e.g. Chrome, Netflix licensed content).

As an open community, instead of demanding access to the gated communities, and whining when companies innovate behind walls, we should be building better, richer solutions in the open.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#504

Post by Daiz »

Boy howdy, this is one subject where I loathe saying "I told you so", but... I sure told you so.[1]

HTML DRM is antithetical to the Open Web itself. It was built on a sham of "plugin-free" media playback, but all we did was change Flash and Silverlight for a whole range of closed black boxes, which in turn are effectively all controlled by Big Media (to make it crystal clear: EME was built with third-party decryption modules in mind, and Big Media was obviously never going to support any sort of decryption modules that they couldn't control, so even if your custom browser supports EME it's completely useless without a Big Media-approved decryption module). And make no mistake: Requiring permission from Big Media to essentially build a fully-fledged browser is a 100% intended and expected outcome of HTML DRM as conceived. Big Media would love nothing more than to turn the entirety of the Open Web into Closed Web that they control, and with HTML DRM they've certainly achieved a great step toward doing so, to the detriment of public at wide. I'm sure they're positively salivating about the thought of eventually reaching The Right to Read![2]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7747142

[2] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#505

Post by danShumway »

x220 wrote: post #482
arendtio wrote: post #430

DRM is just a huge pile of shit. I mean, if it would actually work I would say okay, at least we have a solution that everyone is somehow happy with. But instead we consumers just loose. To give a few examples: - When I want to watch movies on Amazon Prime Video, there are some movies I can't watch in HD, even if I paid for HD (so the movie obviously exists in HD; probably dependent on the rights holder). The problem…

>- A few hours ago, I wanted to play a game, but guess what... Steam had a network problem [1] and didn't even let me enter the offline mode. I think Steam is a really good (not shitty) DRM enforcer. A very occasional lapse in service is acceptable for entertainment platforms. I use steam because it is actually easier to use their DRM systems than it is to, for example, buy CDs or download individual game installers.

> A very occasional lapse in service is acceptable for entertainment platforms.

I would generally agree that this is acceptable, but it's still a step backwards from Itch and GOG, where my library literally never has a lapse in service. Steam is arguably one of the best DRM solutions out there, but even the best solution on the market still has worse uptime and reliability than a store that just provides users with a bunch of DRM free downloads that they can launch offline whenever they want.

Of course, platforms like Itch don't have cloud saves. But Steam's DRM isn't essential for cloud saves, or for the community workshop, or for the storefront, or for the library management tools. The DRM part of it doesn't add any value to the consumer. So while Steam is an excellent product, Steam without DRM would still be a better product than it is right now.

That's what people mean when they complain about DRM. You can take a great product and add DRM in a way that doesn't completely break it, but it's still pretty much always a strict downgrade in user experience. People look at services like Steam and think, "yeah, this is acceptable. But it could so easily be really great."

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#506

Post by fwip »

pornel wrote: post #438
gsnedders wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EME does not require Widevine; you can implement EME in its entirety yourself, in open code. Widevine is only one of several implementations of a Content Decryption Module; it just so happens to be by far the easiest to license (though that doesn't mean that's easy!).

> you can implement EME in its entirety yourself, in open code Noope. Netflix has explicitly stated, at W3C, that they absolutely won't use any open EME implementation. In practice any open CDM that you implement yourself will be totally useless. The "open" parts of EME have no real utility, and exist only to be able derail criticism by making rhetorical arguments about hypothetical open implementation, even though i…

That's Netflix blocking you then, not Google.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#507

Post by darkpuma »

danShumway wrote: post #505
x220 wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>- A few hours ago, I wanted to play a game, but guess what... Steam had a network problem [1] and didn't even let me enter the offline mode. I think Steam is a really good (not shitty) DRM enforcer. A very occasional lapse in service is acceptable for entertainment platforms. I use steam because it is actually easier to use their DRM systems than it is to, for example, buy CDs or download individual game installers.

> A very occasional lapse in service is acceptable for entertainment platforms. I would generally agree that this is acceptable, but it's still a step backwards from Itch and GOG, where my library literally never has a lapse in service. Steam is arguably one of the best DRM solutions out there, but even the best solution on the market still has worse uptime and reliability than a store that just provides users with a…

> "Of course, platforms like Itch don't have cloud saves. But Steam's DRM isn't essential for cloud saves,"

To this point, GOG supports cloud saves.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#508

Post by chongli »

dd36 wrote: post #392
freedomben wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree. Those government believe that protecting intellectual property is necessary to further human and societal progress. I won't take a position on whether I agree with that or not. However, based on that premise they've instituted rules to "protect" intellectual property, but unfortunately they're so weighted toward the "owner" of the IP that they do (IMHO serious) harm to regular users and consumers. I…

The government is propping up the companies because that's what the companies made happen. Your framing suggests that government did this on its own. It did not. The outsized ability of companies to influence the government is the core problem that must first be solved. It is the root of most people's gripes with the government.

The outsized ability of companies to influence the government is the core problem that must first be solved.

Replace companies with nobility or aristocracy and you're talking about a problem as old as civilization itself. The fact is, small groups with control over a lot of resource (elites) will always work to consolidate and secure their power. Barring some radical, unforeseen technology, the masses of people will always have a more difficult time coordinating their actions to prevent this. This is the class struggle narrative of history.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#509

Post by realusername »

kwindla wrote: post #256

Let's add the US Congress and the EU to the long list of parties to blame for the DRM situation. "Reverse engineering" software for the purposes of "circumventing" copyright is illegal. "Circumventing" is much more broadly defined than it should be. It's not just illegal to redistribute copyrighted material. That's the point of copyright and has been the case for a long time. It's also illegal to watch/consume conten…

> Let's add the US Congress and the EU to the long list of parties to blame for the DRM situation. "Reverse engineering" software for the purposes of "circumventing" copyright is illegal.

That does depend on the countries, at least on my case in France there's an accessibility exception which makes it okay in his case to break the DRM legally because he does not have any other choice.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#510

Post by WrtCdEvrydy »

Daiz wrote: post #504

Boy howdy, this is one subject where I loathe saying "I told you so", but... I sure told you so.[1] HTML DRM is antithetical to the Open Web itself. It was built on a sham of "plugin-free" media playback, but all we did was change Flash and Silverlight for a whole range of closed black boxes, which in turn are effectively all controlled by Big Media ( to make it crystal clear: EME was built with third-party decryptio…

> The Right to Read

As interesting to read as the first twelve times.

Post reply on HN