this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
400 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59448 readers
3609 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Note: Original report by Bloomberg, article by Reuters proxied by Neuters to bypass paywall.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 37 minutes ago

And whoever buys it won't also have some kind of ulterior motive? Chrome isn't likely to be a money-maker on its own. If it were, Firefox would have less trouble staying afloat. Anyone who buys Chrome most likely will have plans for it that are no more in the end-user's best interest than Google's.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 hour ago

Yes, regulate the web browsers where you can just download librewolf or brave, but don’t do anything about the criminal ISPs and wireless network service providers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Sell off? So who will buy

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

It will never happen. But it would be a good thing for the openness of the web. More Firefox, less Chrome.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 minutes ago

Wouldn't it put Firefox on a pickle? Say Chrome gets bought out of Google's hands, would they still bother to pay half a billion to Firefox to stay as the default search engine? Could Firefox survive being financially independent?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 33 minutes ago

Yep.

Tech companies have extreme "Fuck You" money. They have learned a lot from the past two decades of Antitrust acts.

That politician is either going to quickly change their mind with some bribes, or watch their entire life disappear with an army of lawyers or paid off peers shutting them down.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Google: Sure, we'll sell it to anyone who pays off our Russian Govt fine.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

What Lemmy client do you use?

I am asking because it caught my attention that you didn't upvote your own comment.

Also, funny reference 😂

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The Lemmy web client, same as Reddit, allows you to de-upvote your posts.
It feels weird to upvote your own post anyway and I don't do so unless I am asking for help and want it seen more, urgently.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

That is so odd, if you dont think what you are saying is relevant or necessary why say it?

Your conscientiousness will be lost in a sea of others self importance, at least level the playing field and support yourself.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

if you dont think what you are saying is relevant or necessary why say it?

If I worried about necessity, I would probably not have a Lemmy account.

level the playing field

I'm not playing dependent upon others, just upon my own ideals. I feel like an upvote needs to mean something. In my case, it means, I need more people to see it, for me.
In most cases, the feeling behind my posts/comments are: If someone sees it, good, have fun.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Your own upvote on your own comment doesn’t mean anything, because every single comment starts with one upvote by default, not zero. All you’re doing is moving your comments below everyone else’s.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 22 minutes ago

Your own upvote on your own comment doesn’t mean anything

Neither do words, or little magnetic particles lain down nicely on a polymer disc, until people decide they mean something.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Sometimes I downvote my own comment just to add a little chaos.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 20 minutes ago

I see you being Chaotic-Chaotic over here.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

This seems like a sensible consumer protection to not let the ad company control the biggest web browser. I won't hold my breath, but I'm glad they are trying something.

AWS should also be split from Amazon.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Why force one company to sell off their browser? Shouldn't MS have to sell Edge and Apple sell Safari?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 24 minutes ago

Microsoft having IE/Edge as the default browser has already cost them in the past. I don't think Apple faced anything with Safari.

The problem today with chrome is how prevalent it is and how that influences the main product of the internet (advertising), which happens to be Google's mais product too. Apple can at least make the argument that they make their money with the hardware, not the browser.

Either way, I think all OS should at least give you a list of browsers on first use to choose from.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 hours ago

I think this is something even Elon Musk could get behind.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They are going to ask a judge like they have no fucking balls.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It's called "Distribution of Power".
We should be thankful it's still here.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago

Distribution of power into corporate hands. Oh, im willing to bet it is here to stay.

load more comments
view more: next ›