Google decided to delay playback of youtube on firefox.
Is there a reason they shouldn’t be beaten into itty bitty bits with the antitrust hammer?
Because all that hammer ever does is make an adorable squeaky noise.
Sure! That reason is because they took the person responsible for wielding said hammer to a nice steak dinner before the trial.
I truly don’t understand their motivation to do this. It is the definition of anti-competitive behavior. Maybe they hope that a lawsuit will arrive at a default judgement on adblockers? Or maybe they’re just so brazen in that the US government won’t break up one of its prized conglomerates? One thing is for sure, Mozilla is going to continue to be awarded headlines
Competition is bad for (their) business, and it seems they’re trying to slowly steal control of the Internet.
Right, but the Browser Wars are long dead and Google essentially won, then proceeded to build their business upon that outcome. It is surprising that they would opt to potentially lose their market share, (which is in the ballpark of 70% of users!), to reclaim the 10% they may be able to take from Mozilla.
** I want to add: I relatively recently watched the YouTuber Louis Rossman’s breakdown of u/Spez and his ridiculous handling of Reddit api pricing. The conclusion was basically that spez discarded his business sense to chase a vendetta. He wasn’t pricing to maximize Reddit’s profits but was pricing out Christian because the latter was more articulate about the issue at hand. I believe we’re seeing the same… that some exec within alphabet decided enough is enough and he is going to make sure adblocks die, regardless of what business sense tells us
In spite of Google’s share, the fact that you still need to go download a browser means it isn’t over. The barrier for entry is no higher for Firefox vs Chrome, and to the average user, they’re not differentiated - you could change the icon and they’d be none the wiser.
Google using their functional monopoly on search and streaming to entrench their functional monopoly on the browser in a way that’ll give them meaningful control of the way the Internet operates isn’t something we should just roll over on.
I don’t wholly disagree, but I do take issue with the “they’d be none the wiser”
Even the average person knows there are more options than the original default browser. I have no love for windows, but long gone are the days when they didn’t prompt you for “would you like to make this your default browser” when you downloaded something else.
Try changing the average user’s web browser that they’re accustomed to overnight and tell me they don’t pitch a fit
Beyond transferring bookmarks and extensions (neither of which tend to be an issue), and the different icon, what would the average user hang their allegiance off?
The prompts to use Edge are the same whether you’re using Chrome or Firefox.
Someone elsewhere shared this but:
Go into your ublock origin settings and go to your My Filters section. Add:
www.youtube.com##+js(nano-stb, resolve(1), *, 0.001)
on a new line and apply. Should stop the delay from occuring.
Piped, Lighttube, Invidious
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Go home piped you’re drunk again
Guys stop bullying them
Stay off that pipe!
As if the fines are big enough for them to care.
Depends what the EU investigation ends up at. They’re known to take decent chunks at least.
Hey cool the 500th thread that hasn’t done any research.
It’s right in the Javascript… What more do you need to research?
He’s basically saying what Google said. “It’s not Firefox, it’s for checking for adblocking.” But it’s mostly summarized here without me getting into why either are bad (which they are)
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/youtube-responds-to-delayed-loading-in-rival-browser-complaints
Yeah, that’s even worse…
No they did not. It is an anti adblock feature and you can get it in chrome too. YouTube already answered to the claims.
