40 ms·
> It seems to me that it could be considered to be monopoly abuse and it also seems to be pro-consumer. The move only is pro-consumer where it benefits Google
by hackuser 9y ago
> It seems to me that it could be considered to be monopoly abuse and it also seems to be pro-consumer.
The move only is pro-consumer where it benefits Google's bottom line: Blocking competitors ads, using a standard that Google easily meets. It's similar to when countries block agricultural imports that don't meet a standard that is unique to their domestic industry, in the name of "safety".
For example, I don't expect Google to block ads that violate users' privacy by tracking them. But I hope they surprise me!
- pooper 9y ago> The move only is pro-consumer where it benefits Google's bottom line: Blocking competitors ads, using a standard that Google easily meets. It's similar to when countries block agricultural imports that don't meet a standard that is unique to their domestic industry, in the name of "safety". I never thought of this implementation but I imagine this is one of the few ways Google can bundle in ad blocking in Chrome. As long as third party blockers (specifically uBlock Origin https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode for me) I don't mind. I go back and forth to using Mozilla Firefox mostly because I use it on Android but I appreciate all that Google has done to move the web forward.