15 ms·
I think you'll need some evidence for that. Silence is not consent, and it's certainly not enthusiastic consent. And even if you do want to take silence for co
by geofft 7y ago
I think you'll need some evidence for that. Silence is not consent, and it's certainly not enthusiastic consent.
And even if you do want to take silence for consent, the fact that the vast majority of millions of millions of web users do not install an extension to route around Google AMP indicates that they do not want the operators of the web page to do whatever they want, they want to run a restricted subset of what the web designer might imagine. AMP is extremely popular among web users; approximately 100% of Google users use it. (The more defensible argument, of course, is that users don't really want AMP, at which point the question of what users really do want gets back on the table.)
Also, users did vote with their feet against downloading EXEs from the internet - which can actually do whatever the developer wants - and using JS on the web platform, which can make unrestricted GET requests (even if it can't see the responses), sure, but can't do anything near "whatever." It stands to reason that users would gladly accept even more restrictions on the execution platform.
- paulddraper 7y ago> they want to run a restricted subset of what the web designer might imagine For the kinds of places that AMP is used, I would suspect so. > Also, users did vote with their feet against downloading EXEs from the internet So....this CAN happen??? > users would gladly accept even more restrictions on the execution platform. The recent popularity of clipboard permissions, geolocation permissions, notification permissions, etc. would suggest otherwise. What makes you so sure that web users care so much about the uptime of lihkg.com ?
- geofft 7y ago> The recent popularity of clipboard permissions, geolocation permissions, notification permissions, etc. would suggest otherwise. What popularity? Do you have data that users tend to click "yes" on such permission prompts? > What makes you so sure that web users care so much about the uptime of lihkg.com ? I'm not sure I understand what you're asking or what you're responding to.
- paulddraper 7y ago> I'm not sure I understand what you're asking or what you're responding to. lihkg.com being down is the negative consequence of this code running, right?
- geofft 7y agoThat's one of the negative consequences. If you phrase it as "In order for you to use the web as you're used to it, lihkg.com will go down, do you care" then sure, users may say "no." But if you phrase it as "When you visit this website, a portion of your bandwidth and battery life will be used to suppress dissident communications in Hong Kong, would you like to use your bandwidth and battery life on it," do you expect users to say yes?