3 ms·
this is just the first step down a slippery slope. and it _is_ a slippery slope. are you really going to _not_ use gmail and google maps because you can't see
by appleflaxen 9y ago
this is just the first step down a slippery slope.
and it _is_ a slippery slope.
are you really going to _not_ use gmail and google maps because you can't see the source code? of course you're not. but is it beneficial for google to lock their code up behind a DRM blob? of course it is.
so there is every incentive in the world for web pages to be made proprietary, and no incentive at all for users to put up a fight (which is why this first step is so important: because it's being made at the level of technologists, who supposably have the insight to know why it's important).
but after this, the progression will be slow, but relentless, toward a closed web. Even if a subset of ideological wackos decide to fight... they're just ideological wackos.
Stallman was right, and this is the exact same thing playing out again on a distributed medium.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- floatboth 9y ago> is it beneficial for google to lock their code up behind a DRM blob? of course it is. No, it's not. Their code is locked behind… uh… A SERVER. You could never see the server side code, and it's always been that way. They do not give a flying fuck about people looking at their JavaScript UI code! That code is really, really NOT where the value is. The value is in the service — the databases full of data, the user accounts.