US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

golinux · 2024-11-23 18:26:53

In a landmark antitrust case, the government asked a judge to force the company to sell its popular Chrome browser.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/tech … e-doj.html

If only . . .

Dutch_Master · 2024-11-23 19:57:33

I'm not sure that's actually a benefit for users. Cause pretty much any potential buyer will abuse the massive userbase to sell even more personal data for even more money.

But since when was user-privacy of any concern to corporate US Gov't

pcalvert · 2024-11-23 20:27:33

I am also not sure that this is a good idea. I would rather see Google be forced to allow people to use ChromeOS and Android without entering a Gmail address. And by "use" I mean use normally without severe limitations.

stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn · 2024-11-24 10:57:12

another question that will never be answered honestly is what google is doing with all that capacity now that they "claim" they aren't still "caching" the WorldWideWeb anymore?

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/google-search-kills-off-cached-webpages/

in all probability they are still caching on the backend to satisfy their internal requirements(not to mention servicing the global intelligence establishments), just lowering their operational bandwidth consumption on the front end(at the expense of the end-user naturally).

also this is thought-provoking as well:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/11/elizabeth-warren-calls-for-crackdown-on-internet-monopoly-youve-never-heard-of/

further reading:

https://www.internetgovernance.org/2020/08/18/icann-whois-and-global-data-governance/

especially the comments:

https://www.internetgovernance.org/2020/08/18/icann-whois-and-global-data-governance/#comment-42616

John Poole
August 27, 2020 at 14:31
ICANN has already FAILED the global internet community, including domain name registrants, in so many ways, why continue to persist in ignoring the obvious? ICANN policy making is “dysfunctional by design” and its “consensus decision making” often exhibits groupthink at its worst. As you have noted, ICANN structures are rigged in favor of lobbyists and lawyers representing a few special interests and ICANN’s own “contracted parties,” NOT the “global public interest” nor even the “public interest” as defined by the European Union or any other duly elected governmental authority, including the State of California! Most domain name registrants have NO representation within the “ICANN community” and that is “intentional.” ICANN exists primarily (1) to perpetuate itself — the obscenely overpaid, and oftentimes incompetent, ICANN management, and staff, the inept ICANN Board of Directors, and the “few” who dominate and control the “ICANN community” — and (2) to perpetuate U.S. hegemony over global internet governance including the global DNS. ICANN is a “failed organization.” It needs to be replaced. If people such as yourself persist in pretending otherwise, by default others will decide.

and while we are at it, who ultimately should control Skynet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starshield

see also Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers

obligatory skynet links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skynet_(Terminator)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKYNET_(surveillance_program)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skynet_(satellite)

and here is another bigger question/thought:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/the-nsas-skynet-program-may-be-killing-thousands-of-innocent-people/

Algorithms increasingly rule our lives. It's a small step from applying SKYNET logic to look for "terrorists" in Pakistan to applying the same logic domestically to look for "drug dealers" or "protesters" or just people who disagree with the state. Killing people "based on metadata," as Hayden said, is easy to ignore when it happens far away in a foreign land. But what happens when SKYNET gets turned on us—assuming it hasn't been already?

not to mention the great pumpkin heading the patch full of gourds again...

greenday anyone?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Idiot#Themes

black sabbath?

https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=51845#p51845

***********************************************************************************************

edited december 7th, 2024 to include another good link referencing the "hiding of the cache"

https://techrights.org/n/2024/12/07/Legacy_of_a_Dying_World_Wide_Web.shtml

edited december 8th, 2024 to include more google

https://techrights.org/n/2024/12/07/Google_Does_Not_Have_a_Search_Engine_Anymore.shtml

Last edited by stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn (2024-12-08 10:45:29)

stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn · 2024-11-29 08:37:59

skynet/starlink to vastly increase and normalize handset-to-satellite/satellite-to-handset communications.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/11/fcc-approves-starlink-plan-for-cellular-phone-service-with-some-limits/

perhaps a review of the immediately preceding post and associated reference links is in order.

especially/specifically/this_one

more regarding the 1984-style/big-brother/mass-surveillance/fbi/cia/dhs/ice/nsa/skynet/starshield third-party datafest:

https://www.techdirt.com/2024/11/27/you-cant-do-mass-deportations-without-mass-domestic-surveillance-and-ice-is-already-exploring-its-options/

modified to add content

Last edited by stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn (2024-11-29 12:00:20)

greenjeans · 2024-11-29 16:13:02

@stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn

The rabbit hole goes even deeper, but there's some sunlight peaking through. You should check out Joe Rogan's interview with Marc Andreesen.

I haven't watched it, just read some of the transcripted highlights, apparently he went to a meeting with other tech billionaires at the White House about AI, where it was gleefully explained to him that their plan was to seize control of the several major companies working on AI, completely federalize them and after that the government would have sole control over AI in the US, and that they would make laws forbidding any other companies or individuals from working on their own AI.

Interesting times. To quote Galadriel:

"The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all."

But she also said:

"Yet hope remains while the Company is true."

fanderal · 2024-11-29 22:22:22

My guess is the articles to take Chrome away from Google are like a shell game, to get people looking at and talking about this instead of that. What's 'that'? Despite the long overdue concern of search and browser monopoly, Google's been transitioning to a very different global monopoly. Why watch and suggest when they can directly influence what people think and do?

Optimized ultrasound neuromodulation for non-invasive control of behavior and physiology
NeuroResource, Volume 112, Issue 19p3252-3266.e5
October 09, 2024
https://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0 … 24)00493-8
Note: At the end of the page are 112 references to Google Scholars

"Focused ultrasound can non-invasively modulate neural activity, but whether effective stimulation parameters generalize across brain regions and cell types remains unknown. We used focused ultrasound coupled with fiber photometry to identify optimal neuromodulation parameters for four different arousal centers of the brain in an effort to yield overt changes in behavior."

Note dates

Mobile phone using non-invasive nerve stimulation - Google Patents
Filing date: 2014-05-30
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20150073505A1/en

Non-invasive Human Brain Stimulation in Cognitive Neuroscience: A Primer
Primer Volume 87, Issue 5p932-945
September 02, 2015
https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0 … 15)00674-1

"The use of non-invasive brain stimulation is widespread in studies of human cognitive neuroscience. This has led to some genuine advances in understanding perception and cognition, and has raised some hopes of applying the knowledge in clinical contexts. There are now several forms of stimulation, the ability to combine these with other methods, and ethical questions that are special to brain stimulation."

Waving Hello to Noninvasive Deep-Brain Stimulation
New England Journal of Medicine 2017;377:1096-109
September 14, 2017
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMcibr1707165
Join/pay wall, Abstract only

"A recent study in mice provides proof of concept that deep-brain tissue can be specifically targeted by the exterior application of two electromagnetic fields of slightly different frequencies."

Last edited by fanderal (2024-11-29 22:25:20)

golinux · 2024-11-29 22:30:27

/me lives happily and thankfully without a cell phone . . . If I were ever forced to own/use one, it would be locked in a Faraday cage . . . maybe 2!!.

zapper · 2024-11-30 03:34:43

@golinux I wish to do the same in the future.

At this time, I keep what I want to keep safe on a libre computer which I define as if it has backdoors, they are disabled, such as intel me and it has no blobs on it and is 100% RYP. Respects Your Privacy.

RYF as FSF talks about, is impossible currently. Respects your Freedom ain't possible yet.

Basically, the container approach. I only have one computer for non-free stuff needed and it uses devuan.

The rest go Hyperbola with no blobs.

I would love it btw, if Google lost control of their Recaptcha nonsense more than google chrome.

For now, this is a start.

Last edited by zapper (2024-11-30 03:36:13)

quickfur · 2024-12-05 13:12:26

I would rather see Google be forced to allow people to use ChromeOS and Android without entering a Gmail address. And by "use" I mean use normally without severe limitations.

I use an Android phone without a Gmail address. Not seeing any severe limitations, other than features I do not wish to use like automatically "backup" my files to Google's servers.

greenjeans · 2024-12-05 13:24:41

Phone free again here since October of last year :smug:

Have never in my life owned a smart phone, went without a phone period for several years back in the day. Moved out to the country last year and my cheapie walmart Tracfone wouldn't get any bars, so I chunked it in the trash, don't miss it a bit.

Wife has one, but she stays off it most of the time.

Stupid phones interfere with all my various mad-redneck-scientist projects.

Off-topic: Lxterminal dropped support for faux transparency, I has a sad now. That was my favorite feature and what made it even better than Mate terminal. With fake transparency it showed my lovely wallpaper in the background instead of whatever folder or directory I was in.

zapper · 2024-12-10 03:21:40

@greenjeans I myself use sakura, it has the fewest dependencies of any terminal I have seen while still having scrollback and other basic options I need including paste.

blackhole · 2024-12-10 14:24:27

Sakura is a decent terminal emulator. Unfortunately, I'm almost 99% certain it doesn't support pseudo transparency (just tested it here on FreeBSD 14.1 and it seems you need a compositor running). Unless you're completely averse to compositors you could try xcompmgr, which is very lightweight and easy enough to configure in just a single command line to run from .xsession / .xinitrc.

zapper · 2024-12-10 20:26:25

wouldn't know what psuedo transparency is or why it is important.

quickfur · 2024-12-11 00:45:52

I avoid anything the depends on Wayland like a plague. So anything that needs a compositor is not in my books. I run my terminals on rxvt-unicode in an X11 server just fine. No need for compositors, or pseudo transparency, whatever that is, rxvt-unicode uses X resources like a well-behaved terminal emulator should and is quite customizable. Supports 256 colors. No heavy-duty dependencies on resource hogs like gnome or Qt. The way things should be.

greenjeans · 2024-12-11 00:52:23

wouldn't know what psuedo transparency is or why it is important.

Because it's lovely, I don't use full transparency, just a percentage, so instead of a plain black background, I can see what's underneath it just a little bit, which is my wallpaper that I really like.

At heart i'm a look-and-feel guy, this is one of the reasons why I started rolling my own in the first place. semi-transparent terminal is just so much prettier, but you really have to try it to appreciate it.

greenjeans · 2024-12-11 00:58:11

No need for compositors, or pseudo transparency, whatever that is,

I don't use compositors either. The old LXterminal didn't need one to run faux-transparency which is why it was awesome.

If I remember correctly from the documentation, they had to dump it because GTK3, which is typical, GTK3 hates anything useful and fun like Gnome does, and they ruin it, but yet they continue to implement retardery like skinny disappearing scrollbars and other stupid crap that's ugly and reduces functionality making everything harder.

greenjeans · 2024-12-11 01:04:18

Theme file for GTK2 I use in Vuu-do =one file, 24.8kb

Same theme in GTK3 = 141 files 1.3mb

It's bizarre and stupid.

quickfur · 2024-12-11 01:38:01

Hmm, just found this online: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Rxvt-u … ansparency

Now that's what I call cool. No need for compositors, the software does the work without hairy dependencies.

I avoid gnome like the plague, my system has the absolute minimum gtk shims it takes to run software that unfortunately sometimes require some gtk libs. Most software that have fat gnome dependencies also tend to have sucky (read: non-keyboard ) interfaces, so I avoid those too.

But yeah, it's absolutely stupid how the simplest of tasks requires megabytes of config files and code where in the old days just a couple of lines in the right config file would have solved everything. The people pushing for this kind of crap are essentially pushing for the windowsification of linux, which is the diametrically opposite direction of why I left the Windows world in the 90's and never looked back. Gimme back my simple config files and keyboard interface dammit. I don't care for fat eye candy that add little value and needlessly consumes disproportionate amounts of resources for nothing.

greenjeans · 2024-12-11 02:45:34

We are definitely on (almost) the same page quickfur.

I am a GUI guy, but from the get-go at least in Vuu-do, my goal has been to eliminate ginormous amounts of code.

One instance: So there's a nice calendar program in the repo that goes in your tray for the tint2 panel, about 80kb.

The thing is, there is already a calendar built into GTK, the program actually just uses that and another few Kb's of code for not much that I can tell.

I duplicated the almost the same dang thing with one tiny line of code in the clock section of tint2.rc, not even kidding:

yad --calendar --undecorated --button=gtk-close:0 --skip-taskbar --borders=5 --posx=-1 --posy=-1 --width=300 --on-top

Does the same thing for the most part, works great, it's just a calendar.

I see a thousand instances of stuff like that all the time, it's like people don't even care anymore, what with terabyte HD's and a gazillion gigs of ram....

Dutch_Master · 2024-12-11 04:55:20

None of this has anything to do with Google potentially loosing Chrome

stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn · 2024-12-11 13:13:18

at ease compadres, smokem if ya gots em :rollafatone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Masters_(cigar)

moar

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Smoke+%27em+if+you+got+%27em

======================

Note that this response is not only incredibly stupid but off-topic and way out-of-line. stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn . . . you can do better than this.

Last edited by golinux (2024-12-11 20:52:02)

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2024-11-23 18:26:53

US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#2 2024-11-23 19:57:33

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#3 2024-11-23 20:27:33

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#4 2024-11-24 10:57:12

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#5 2024-11-29 08:37:59

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#6 2024-11-29 16:13:02

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#7 2024-11-29 22:22:22

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#8 2024-11-29 22:30:27

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#9 2024-11-30 03:34:43

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#10 2024-12-05 13:12:26

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#11 2024-12-05 13:24:41

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#12 2024-12-10 03:21:40

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#13 2024-12-10 14:24:27

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#14 2024-12-10 20:26:25

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#15 2024-12-11 00:45:52

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#16 2024-12-11 00:52:23

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#17 2024-12-11 00:58:11

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#18 2024-12-11 01:04:18

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#19 2024-12-11 01:38:01

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#20 2024-12-11 02:45:34

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#21 2024-12-11 04:55:20

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

#22 2024-12-11 13:13:18

Re: US Proposes Forcing Google to Sell Chrome . . .

Board footer