5 ms·

For one, it’s ironically first being deployed in countries where DNS manipulation by the government isn’t happening (US first generally), but Google has competi

For one, it’s ironically first being deployed in countries where DNS manipulation by the government isn’t happening (US first generally), but Google has competitive concerns with ISPs getting ad targeting data. I feel like defending against oppressive governments is being used more as an excuse than a driving motivation. The primary concern seems to be that Google really wants to protect its monopoly, and Firefox, as a major benefactor of Google money, has fallen in line. And second, as an IT admin, I’m annoyed web browsers keep trying to develop new ways to bypass my network security.

userbinator 7y ago
Decades of experience have told me that whenever some big organisation wants to do something in the name of "security", it's almost always an excuse to remove freedom and force their control over everyone. Yes, that includes oppressive governments too... but I hardly think that even more centralisation is the solution. The old security vs freedom quote is surprisingly relevant in so many situations today.
- bepvte 7y ago
  This argument can be applied to the encouraging the rollout of HSTS and HTTPS by firefox and google, which cant be disabled very easily by administrators.