this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
373 points (99.2% liked)
Privacy
1717 readers
208 users here now
Protect your privacy in the digital world
Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.
Rules
PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!
- Be nice, civil and no bigotry/prejudice
- Stay on topic
- Don't promote big-tech software
- No reposting of news that was already posted
- No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
- No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)
Related communities:
Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.
- !opensource@programming.dev
- !selfhosting@slrpnk.net / !selfhosted@lemmy.world
- !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !drm@lemmy.dbzer0.com
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Any alternative is better than letting monopolies stand.
Sounds a lot like, "Biden & Harris support genocide, so let's vote for Trump."
No thread is safe...
The spoiler effect doesn't apply in this scenario. We aren't stuck with 2 choices, either Chrome under Google or Chrome under another shitty corporate.
If Chrome enshittifies, we have Firefox, Librewolf, Brave, Ironfox, Waterfox, Ungoogle Chromium, etc...
There is really only three browsers webkit (safari/apple), blink (chrome/Google) , and gecko (firefox/Mozilla) . Pretty much everything is running on one of those three and if Google has to seel chrome, I'm not sure if that would help the landscape. Building/maintinaing browsers is really hard and expensive, most likely you'd just have another big tech company step in making things worse.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_browser_engines
Preferring that we enforce our laws regardless of which billionaire benefits is a vote for Trump? I didn't realize that. I've seen the light now. Thank you.
We can't continue selectively enforcing our laws against monopolies. (This is just dark humor. Citizens United is for the express purpose of ensuring that any anti-monopoly law enforcement we get is selective and political, for the rest of however long the US has left.)
I think what they were saying is: two powerful, competing corpos is better than one huge and practically omnipotent corporation, which is what google currently is.
Under normal circumstances, but i just have this suspicion that Musk will buy it using Russian and Saudi funding like was rumored for where he got the funding for Twitter.
So whether that would be a better situation I guess is up to interpretation.
That's how blow back works dear...