3 ms·

I'm confused by your comment. Are you saying that browsers should connect to any host any website tells them to because of net neutrality?

• bpodgursky 6y ago
  Yes, a browser should be content-agnostic. Browsers filtering "known trackers" is a very quick slide into "known malware", "known spammers", "known foreign propaganda", "known conspiracy theories", "known fake news", and more. It's the exact path that social media and other online platforms took, and guess what? The same companies build browsers.
  • solosoyokaze 6y ago
    A browser should let the user control their browsing experience and make it extremely easy to block all manner of user hostile content, starting with trackers.
    • doakes 6y ago
      I don't disagree with you, but I think parent's point still stands that "user hostile content" is defined by a company that could change their definition at any time.
      • solosoyokaze 6y ago
        A truly user friendly solution would be to allow community curation of blocklists and full user control over which they choose to enable. Google is not interested in providing a good user experience though, they're interested in sucking out as much value from the user as possible, using dark patterns when convenient. With that, I also agree that Google couldn't be trusted to editorialize.
      • a1369209993 6y ago
        No. "User hostile content" is defined by the user.