3 ms·
> Preventing legitimate users that use different browsers is not good behaviour. One company shouldn't be able to control the web this way. They're talking abo
by kbenson 6y ago
> Preventing legitimate users that use different browsers is not good behaviour. One company shouldn't be able to control the web this way.
They're talking about their own services that they require accounts for here, not "the web", or even general search, AFAICT. You can still use google, you just can't log in using an app they aren't sure is trusted, for user security. Google goes a great many problematic things these days, but I'm not sure this is one of them.
You could keep a trusted browser around and use it just for authenticating and getting a token. That's all they care about here, that they have a certain base level of assurance that you aren't being directed through an application that can steal credentials.
- anonymousab 6y ago> you just can't log in using an app they aren't sure is trusted, for user security s/app/browser, though. Effectively and strongly kneecapping any new browser competition.
- kbenson 6y agoI mean app in the traditional sense, application. It's apps (almost) all the way down. ;) And any new browser competition has been kneecapped in that way by recaptcha for a long time already. You either deal with the web being less convenient because you've opted somewhat out of the easy path presented you (like I do, with Firefox and many container tabs), or you don't use Google services, or accept the easy path of Chrome and Google services together. We're talking about convenience here. Google makes it convenient and more secure (from others) to use their applications and services together. I'm not going to begrudge them making something harder to do it a way they think is worse for them as a company as long as they still leave it possible. That's better than you'll get from Apple.