this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
2510 points (99.2% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53370 readers
663 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

looks like rendering adblockers extensions obsolete with manifest-v3 was not enough so now they try to implement DRM into the browser giving the ability to any website to refuse traffic to you if you don't run a complaint browser ( cough...firefox )

here is an article in hacker news since i'm sure they can explain this to you better than i.

and also some github docs

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 111 points 1 year ago (3 children)

How is the worlds biggest ad distributor also the worlds biggest browser maker without it being an anti-trust violation?

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Because it is legal in the US to bribe politicians and this company has a lot of money

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Also doesn't help that half the people supposedly in charge of cracking down on this kind of thing in the US belong in an old folks home. Most of them don't even comprehend the issue.

I'm surprised I haven't heard any pushback on it from the EU though.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because the majority of legislatures think Chrome is the Internet

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've met plenty of people who can't differentiate between facebook and the internet, or the term "wifi" and the internet - literally calling ethernet a "wifi cable".

The people in charge barely understand enough to put on their own pants sometimes, yet they're pushing legislation like they're fully informed, and most don't even read the brief about a new law before voting on it; literally voting along party lines because that's what's expected of them. They're mostly braindead as-is; and you expect them to differentiate between the internet, a website, and a browser?

They should, but I really don't expect that much from anyone who is elected.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't forget that one dude who said 72 hours wasn't enough time to read a 99 page bill

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago

Well anti-trust would get in the way of profits, you see