Mastodawn

Mariano Jul 26, 2023

Francisco Tolmasky

Mozilla should call for a vote on the removal of Google from the W3C over the implementation of Web Environment Integrity. "But Chrome has 65% market share, what good is the W3C without them?” If Google can take unilateral action to fundamentally change the basic principles of the web, then the W3C is *already* useless. This will give Google a clear choice: if they want to maintain the idea that the W3C matters, they should withdraw this implementation.

https://github.com/chromium/chromium/commit/6f47a22906b2899412e79a2727355efa9cc8f5bd

/cc @[email protected]

[wei] Ensure Origin Trial enables full feature · chromium/chromium@6f47a22

This CL moves the base::Feature from content_features.h to a generated feature from runtime_enabled_features.json5. This means that the base::Feature can be default-enabled while the web API is co...

GitHub

Francisco Tolmasky Jul 26, 2023

If someone drafted a proposal to the W3C that only a pre-approved set of existing browsers should be allowed to render web pages, the correct response would not be to "take the stance that you oppose that proposal," it would be to seriously question whether the party should even participate in the group. Make no mistake, that is what is happening now.

Christian Berger DECT 2763 Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky Yes, though the W3C already is kinda useless. They allowed standards to be so complex, the list of "full-featured" browser engines is already down to 3.

We are at a point where only large corporations have the power to maintain a browser engine. Browsers are no longer free, as they are to complex for individuals to change in any meaningful way.

Kushal Dave Jul 27, 2023

@tolmasky As I understand it, one of the participants in web standards makes a physical phone used by more than half of Americans, and on that phone nobody is allowed to use a web engine from anyone other than the participant, an even broader restriction for more nebulous gain. What am I missing?

Rafal Jul 28, 2023

@krave Your point being?

Ursidinoj/The Bjornsdottirs Jul 28, 2023

@krave @tolmasky Google and Apple both do that (though with Android you aren't engine restricted).

SlightlyCyberpunk Jul 28, 2023

@ellenor2000 @krave @tolmasky Eh, I use an Android device that has no Google apps and no associated Google account. I also have a couple old Apple devices people have given me that might as well be bricked because I can't do a damn thing with them without having an Apple account to associate them to. Hardly comparable.

(Of course, that is why they're working on that Fuscia crap...the only way Google can get their iron fist around Android is by replacing it entirely...)

jonny (nonvenomous)Jul 28, 2023

@krave
@tolmasky
is this a "whatabout" or "both are fucked up"

Kushal Dave Jul 28, 2023

@jonny @tolmasky Honestly my understanding of the Google issue that started this thread is that it's more nuanced than the strawman version here. Overall everyone in web standards has complicated incentives, and I wish we'd either look at that for all parties or ignore them for all parties, rather than assuming malice for the company with the worse PR team

Francisco Tolmasky Jul 28, 2023

@krave I’ve addressed this elsewhere, but I am way harder on Apple. I have been harping on the anti-competitiveness of their rules literally not allowing other engines. Their particular version of WEI happens to be restrictive than Google’s, but again, it doesn’t matter because they don’t even allow you to ship anything else anyways. We’re long past “assuming” malice, the intentions of all these actions are clear: to consolidate and wall the gardens.

Shannon Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla Agreed!

BarterClub 🏳️‍🌈 💖 🇺🇸Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla They should. Chromium is not there's. Chrome that uses chromium is.

natriumchloride Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla good idea although google probably doesn't give a fuck

Baral'heia Stormdancer ΘΔ🐲Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla Google is pulling the same kind of shit Microsoft once pulled with IE. Remember when they used to add support for non-standard html tags on a regular basis?

Deirdre Saoirse Moen Jul 28, 2023

@baralheia @tolmasky @mozilla Embrace and extend is seriously uncool.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

Embrace, extend, and extinguish - Wikipedia

SlightlyCyberpunk Jul 28, 2023

@baralheia @tolmasky @mozilla

If you see these returning: run far, FAR away from that website. And complain excessively to the admins.
https://danq.me/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/best-viewed-with-google-chrome.png

Happosai 八宝斎 Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla

> This will give Google a clear choice: if they want to maintain the idea that the W3C matters, they should withdraw this implementation.

Some choice.

Steven Sandoval Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla I thought the browser vendors already voted out the W3C in 2019 when they took over HTML and put their WHATWG in charge. https://www.zdnet.com/article/browser-vendors-win-war-with-w3c-over-html-and-dom-standards/

Browser vendors win war with W3C over HTML and DOM standards

W3C hands over development of HTML and DOM standards to browser vendors (WHATWG).

ZDNET

HTPC NZ Jul 26, 2023

@tolmasky @[email protected] those who jumped onto Chrome instead of Firefox to stop Microsoft from being evil with excuses such as Google is standards compliant, has a do no evil slogan what not bs must really feel good about how things are panning out... Only real idiots think that any corporation has your best interest as their priority, that goes to all the Apple cult as well.

Francisco Tolmasky Jul 26, 2023

@htpcnz Mozilla isn’t blameless here. Chrome was just a better product for a long time. And that’s partially because Mozilla lost focus on all sorts of non-browser things. I’ve said it before, but it’s not enough to be open, you have to be open *and* good. Chrome didn’t get to 65% because all the devs didn’t do their part in staying loyal to Firefox, the vast majority of those users are normal people who have no idea about any of this.

James Just James Jul 27, 2023

@tolmasky @[email protected] I remember when the W3C pushed through the earlier DRM implementation for Netflix/etc... Why do folks think they have any credibility at all?

And most people won't switch to Firefox for more freedom, they'll switch when it's a unilaterally better browser, which unfortunately it is not.

seeteegee Jul 28, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla How bad does this need to get before we decide on a new approach(es) to the web? Perhaps one that makes it much easier to create competing browsers.

nshiell Jul 28, 2023

@tolmasky @mozilla there is a reference to "Play Integrity API" here https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/blob/main/explainer.md

I'm not an Android guy - I'm a web developer, is this about bringing Android's "Play Integrity API" to the web hmmmmm

Web-Environment-Integrity/explainer.md at main · RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity

Contribute to RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity development by creating an account on GitHub.

GitHub