3 ms·

The 'what is good for the web is good for Google' line certainly was true in 2005 when the greatest threat to the web was companies like microsoft using interne

The 'what is good for the web is good for Google' line certainly was true in 2005 when the greatest threat to the web was companies like microsoft using internet explorer to adjust the de-facto web standards and privatize it in the "EEE" fashion. Obviously the most visited websites would maintain the web better than OS vendors, their buisness depended on it being open. We have a similar situation now, but with google locking down the most common browser (Manifest v3) and using extensions of web standards to maintain a dominant position. Disclaimer: I am a zoomer and not a web developer so my history may be off here.

Voultapher 2y ago
Let's not forget their attempt to push web attestation through WEI https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-demon https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-de...
- megadata 2y ago
  Attempt? Isn't that project still in full swing?
  - Voultapher 2y ago
    > A Web Environment Integrity prototype existed in Chromium,[2][3] but was removed in November 2023 after extensive criticism by many tech groups. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity#Reception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity#Rece...
- charcircuit 2y ago
  Malicous bots are a serious issue that trouble site operators. Trying to come up with solutions to such problems doesn't mean they don't care about the web. If it allows web sites to spend less time moderating and users to spend less time reading spam that would be a win win for both parties.
  - animuchan 2y ago
    The only party largely unaffected by this anti-consumer disaster is the malicious bots' operators.
hkt 2y ago
Re: your first paragraph, this is exactly what Google does now. They maintain such an incredible pace of development and such a unilateral attitude that nobody can stop them from developing web standards even if they want to. When was the last time anyone said no to a Chrome feature and expected it everywhere else? Developers treat it as the go to to the extent that some don't even bother testing in other browsers. Google are showing Microsoft how it is done.
- OccamsMirror 2y ago
  It makes you wonder if Microsoft had given developers what they wanted, i.e. modern CSS and Javascript support, more browser features, etc., would they have actually moved off of Internet Explorer?
  - Ygg2 2y ago
    They did? AJAX of jQuery fame, is extremely similar to ActiveX XmlHttpRequest. The problem isn't XmlHttpRequest, but everything else they added/removed. Same with Google. The problem isn't they made request more secure, they made ad blocking impossible.
    - wincy 2y ago
      My custom user scripts from Tampermonkey that I used to make my life as a developer easier are just gone. I can’t even access the extension to grab them, some of them are complicated workflow stuff that made my life easier in some pages that are poorly designed. Like I’m often looking at the contents of JWTs so I added a global function into my global scope to parse JWTs. There wasn’t even a “hey we’re getting rid of this extension back stuff up”, it’s just disabled.
      - VladStanimir 2y ago
        What do you mean? I have the new version of Tampermonkey installed and after turning on developer mode in the extensions section all my scripts work perfectly. https://www.tampermonkey.net/faq.php?locale=en#Q209 https://www.tampermonkey.net/faq.php?locale=en#Q209
danaris 2y ago
> The 'what is good for the web is good for Google' line certainly was true in 2005 ...But even then, it did not follow that "what is good for Google is good for the web". Just because 2005!Google does something that improves its situation doesn't mean that's automatically good for all of us, even if stuff that improves the web for all of us makes 2005!Google's situation better as a side effect. And 2025!Google is definitely not in that position. At this point, what's good for the web is only good for Google if it fits with Google's own plans and enhances their control.

Voultapher 2y ago

Let's not forget their attempt to push web attestation through WEI https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-demon https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-de...

megadata 2y ago
Attempt? Isn't that project still in full swing?
- Voultapher 2y ago
  > A Web Environment Integrity prototype existed in Chromium,[2][3] but was removed in November 2023 after extensive criticism by many tech groups. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity#Reception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity#Rece...
charcircuit 2y ago
Malicous bots are a serious issue that trouble site operators. Trying to come up with solutions to such problems doesn't mean they don't care about the web. If it allows web sites to spend less time moderating and users to spend less time reading spam that would be a win win for both parties.
- animuchan 2y ago
  The only party largely unaffected by this anti-consumer disaster is the malicious bots' operators.

hkt 2y ago

Re: your first paragraph, this is exactly what Google does now. They maintain such an incredible pace of development and such a unilateral attitude that nobody can stop them from developing web standards even if they want to. When was the last time anyone said no to a Chrome feature and expected it everywhere else? Developers treat it as the go to to the extent that some don't even bother testing in other browsers. Google are showing Microsoft how it is done.

OccamsMirror 2y ago
It makes you wonder if Microsoft had given developers what they wanted, i.e. modern CSS and Javascript support, more browser features, etc., would they have actually moved off of Internet Explorer?
- Ygg2 2y ago
  They did? AJAX of jQuery fame, is extremely similar to ActiveX XmlHttpRequest. The problem isn't XmlHttpRequest, but everything else they added/removed. Same with Google. The problem isn't they made request more secure, they made ad blocking impossible.
  - wincy 2y ago
    My custom user scripts from Tampermonkey that I used to make my life as a developer easier are just gone. I can’t even access the extension to grab them, some of them are complicated workflow stuff that made my life easier in some pages that are poorly designed. Like I’m often looking at the contents of JWTs so I added a global function into my global scope to parse JWTs. There wasn’t even a “hey we’re getting rid of this extension back stuff up”, it’s just disabled.
    - VladStanimir 2y ago
      What do you mean? I have the new version of Tampermonkey installed and after turning on developer mode in the extensions section all my scripts work perfectly. https://www.tampermonkey.net/faq.php?locale=en#Q209 https://www.tampermonkey.net/faq.php?locale=en#Q209

danaris 2y ago

> The 'what is good for the web is good for Google' line certainly was true in 2005 ...But even then, it did not follow that "what is good for Google is good for the web". Just because 2005!Google does something that improves its situation doesn't mean that's automatically good for all of us, even if stuff that improves the web for all of us makes 2005!Google's situation better as a side effect. And 2025!Google is definitely not in that position. At this point, what's good for the web is only good for Google if it fits with Google's own plans and enhances their control.