• scholar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    It’s bizarre how blatent this is. Google has so much power over web standards that Mozilla have to work really hard to make firefox work, but YouTube don’t bother being subtle or clever and just write ‘if Firefox, get stuffed’ in plain text for everyone to see.

    • aseriesoftubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Google has been doing this kind of thing for a while. If you try to use Google Meet in Firefox, you can’t use things like background blurring. Spoofing Chrome works in that situation as well.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        And the stupid thing is that all I use Chrome for is Meets… And that’s it. Do they really think they win me over?

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      So this is part of a larger adblock checker, if the ad doesn’t load within 5 seconds, it fails and triggers the adblocker warning. Since the ad should load in 3, they’ve set it for 5. If you have ubo, you won’t see the warning that it then wants to pop up, it just seems (and is) a 5 second delay. Changing the UA probably removes this from Firefox because then the clientside scripts will attempt to use builtin Chrome functions that wouldn’t need this hacky script to detect the adblock. Since they don’t exist, it just carries on.

      • localhost443@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I was wondering how badly out of context the above quote must be considering the UA isn’t checked in the function. Above poster is trying to construe it as a pure and simple permanent delay for Firefox.

        That being said, the solution is still bullshit.

      • Thermal_shocked@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The thing that gets me is they think no one will ever find this stuff. There are hundreds of thousands of people (maybe more) who are actively looking ways to block ads and get around this behavior. There’s no way it’ll ever go unnoticed.

  • fenrasulfr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Let’s hope Europe stars investigating Google as a gatekeeper. That seemed to work miracles on Apple.

    • steltek@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s not what net neutrality is about. NN is about carriers and ISPs treating all services and websites equally. Don’t feature creep NN. It weakens the arguments for why why we need NN.

  • ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    They do the same shit for Google search results. Search weather or stock tickers with a Chrome user agent* and you get a rich, interactive chart of the weather forecast or stock history. Search with another mobile user agent and you get a static snapshot of the weather or stock price at an instant in time.

    There’s even an extension for Firefox for Android which changes the user agent for Google searches to Chrome, to get the rich content.

    * just a user agent, not an actual browser, which proves that it isn’t about browser capability, but rather abusing their monopolistic market position in search to further their web browser’s market share. Sound familiar, Microsoft from the 90’s?

    • umbraroze@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Microsoft got repeatedly hit over this kind of shenanigans in MSIE during and after the anti-trust lawsuit.

      Sadly, that was 20 years ago. I’m not having much faith in American justice system doing anything about this nowadays.

  • Murdo Maclachlan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Ah, I was wondering why YouTube was taking so long to load recently. I thought it was just because their code was shit, and it turns out I was right, but not in the way I thought.

      • sweeny@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        What law are they breaking? Not trying to defend Google or anything, just curious what law is blatantly being broken here because I don’t know of one

        • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          It’s an anti competition law, they cannot penalize you for using a competitor service. This would be like getting fined by McDonald’s because I went to Taco Bell.

        • Laurel Raven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Blatantly anticompetitive behavior where you (ab)use your dominance in one sector (i.e. YouTube) to choke out competition in another (i.e. make it slow on competing browsers) is illegal in the US and the EU, at the very least. I don’t know the specific laws or acts in play, but that’s the sort of thing that triggers antitrust lawsuits