this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
381 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

2164 readers
301 users here now

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!

  1. Be civil and no prejudice
  2. Don't promote big-tech software
  3. No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
  4. No reposting of news that was already posted
  5. No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
  6. No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 106 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The DOJ is asking the court to force Google to promptly and fully divest itself of Chrome, along with any data or other assets required for its continued operation. It is essentially aiming to take the Chrome user base—consisting of some 3.4 billion people—away from Google and hand it to a competitor

Fuck yes, shatter that shit.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Shatter it and probably have it bought out by Elon.

[–] [email protected] 71 points 2 months ago

Seriously. The only people willing to pay what it's "worth" will end up doing the same thing (or worse).

What we need are some actual privacy laws with teeth, so that the data isn't worth as much to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago

Elon's a dunce, so he'll probably enshittify it so badly that people will leave. So google is weakened and chrome dies (at least, i hope in a good outcome)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but is it Elon&friends who will get to buy it?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (6 children)

The optimist in me hopes not, but only time will tell.

If he does i hope he tanks it so badly that it loses a huge chunk of market share - ideally when ladybird is ready.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 77 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Google says government proposals would "harm America’s consumers."

Says the company that couldn't stand by the core value "don't be evil".

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Musk will be champing at the bit to own a controlling share of both of these. It disgusts me to agree with them but they're right. This is the single worst possible time to try and push this through.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is the single worst possible time to try and push this through.

Which is why it's happening now, I agree.

But we, the non-billionaires are still better off after any monopoly split. It's hard to express how incredibly bad powerful monopolies are. The fact that another billionaire will be the buyer sucks, but it's no reason to back away from forcing the legally required split.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

as if america's consumers aren't quite willing to be harmed at this point

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Google is awful, but any other company that could afford to buy and run Chrome would be worse.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Microsoft Chrome - now with Cortana!

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago

Heaven forbid it becomes its own company/a non profit.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Any alternative is better than letting monopolies stand.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Sounds a lot like, "Biden & Harris support genocide, so let's vote for Trump."

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zipzoopaboop 31 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I would laugh if a European company stepped in to buy it. Most used browser in the whole entire world bought by a European company? Would absolutely be hilarious and I'd be so down for that to happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Take a guess who’s going to buy it.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh god can you imagine the fucking nightmare.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Do Elon now. He owns way too much shit and always tries for a monopoly. Start by nationalizing star link.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nationalizing under that administration? Who would that help?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

So…. What are the odds on fElon ending up owning some of this shit?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Depends on how low we can sink his Tesla stock.

It's a team effort, if everyone throws one Molotov we can be done by April.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago

Good. Now do Amazon.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago

If they really wanted to change the character of the company, spin off the ad and cloud businesses into two separate things and let them figure out the rest.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (3 children)

selling android or breaking it up would be terrible since you just go back to each manufacturer making their own flavor with no updates or compatability.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

Disagree, you might be right in the short term, but long term competition like that only benefits the customer.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

I used to believe this, before google turned evil. Right now I'd take 5 shitty flavours than the pure shit google is doing. They have turned into a vile corporation that needs to be cut down

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

It'd be good for Android to be mostly its base, the Android Open Source Project. Over the years Google put more and more things in the proprietary part of Android (Google Play Services) instead of AOSP.

Depends on who takes over whether that gets better of course. If they also put too much in Play Services, or ask the manufacturers for a high fee, yes it's possible we go back to more oem flavours.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

i really distrust Google and I'm glad about the verdict. I do agree that chrome and android should be ~~cut off models~~.

edit: cut off from advertising business models

on the other hand, like with Firefox, I'm worried about the instability and changes that are coming, mainly in the effect on fork projects Like Graphene, Calyx, Lineage, any privacy-focused Chrome forks, and of course Chromium.

DOJ probably isn't able to guarantee chrome & potentially android are taken over by totally ethical, stable companies/NPOs who will keep the projects open source, or allow an open source offshoot project to which the new organization would still contribute coding people-hours.

I'm sure there will be some sort of guarantees for stock chrome and android users, like paid services/subscriptions will be continued or refunded.

but what about users of community projects based on chrome and Android?

many other Lemmy users have commented how community projects don't really have the resources to keep browser engines up to date, let alone innovate. without Google (which i think is a good thing), Microsoft Edge team could become the de facto direction-setter of Chronium (which i think is really really really bad).

TL;DR the foss mobile OS community, and especially the foss browser community (considering Firefox funding shortfall and AI/ad revenue pursuits) are possibly f*ed in the a for the near term.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

DOJ probably isn't able to guarantee chrome & potentially android are taken over by totally ethical, stable companies/NPOs who will keep the projects open source

This doesn't seem like their job. This is antitrust, as long as the result isn't monopolistic, that's it, no?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Not sure why Google needs to sell chrome but Microsoft doesn't need to sell edge. Noone controlling the device should also own the internet browser imo.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

I think the biggest difference is the fact Google owns the majority of the web browser market share, but there's more to the cases than "big company owns big browser," it actually has to do with Google's search engine deals (e.g. with Apple and Mozilla) and Google's ad business stifling the industry.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ok but is this like REAL yet or did they just say they intend to?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Reading the article helps to answer this question:

The DOJ is asking the court to force Google to promptly and fully divest itself of Chrome, along with any data or other assets required for its continued operation.

It also links the filing, see specifically "III. Plaintiffs’ Revised Proposed Final Judgment"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

Who reads articles these days?

Thank you

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You’re happy until you figure out who’s going to buy it when it splits.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›