this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
461 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

34987 readers
179 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 31 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I’m not sure that a protection against changing the default browser with third party programs (maybe without the user knowing) via the registry is the evil thing being depicted here.

The way I read this article is that this is a move for compliance with the new digital markets act and I’m not seeing the maliciousness.

Willing to be wrong, I haven’t used Windows regularly for like 20 years.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago

That's one take, except even the article notes that's a weak argument.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

You kidding? That means First party is now a protected method which will absolutely result in the expected outcome like they have done with every “feature” update blocking work arounds.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Incomprehensibly stupid, because all they have to do is ask the user to confirm. Forcing through their own default instead of asking is malicious.