Watching these two behemoths wrestle over the future of a space we all share, and wondering if they will need to loop in regulators on one side or another, convinces me that we shouldn't have gifted all of our digital infrastructure to just 2 companies. Inlcuding our economy, healthcare, government, and civil infrastructure. We've put all our eggs into only a couple of very greedy, impossible to audit baskets. We've really done this all to ourselves. We've raced ourselves all the way to the bottom.
There is nothing stopping other CDN/DNS providers from implementing similar services and tools to what Cloudflare offers. Part of the reason CF has become so popular is because so many of their competitors don't offer nearly the same convenience for routine tasks & protection.
After 50 years of effectively zero activity, we had some glimmers of anti-trust enforcement under the Biden admin. But then eggs were expensive in the summer of 2024, so we decided it was actually no problem for these half-dozen companies to control our speech and economy, and here we are.
I understand the idea behind it and am still kinda chewing on the scope of it all. It will probably break some enterprise applications and cause some help desk or group policy/profile headaches for some.
It would be nice to know when a site is probing the local network. But by the same token, here is Google once again putting barriers on self sufficiency and using them to promote their PaaS goals.
They'll gladly narc on your self hosted application doing what it's supposed to do, but what about the 23 separate calls to Google CDN, ads, fonts, ect that every website has your browser make?
I tend to believe the this particular functionality is no longer of any use to Google, which is why they want to deprecate it to raise the barrier of entry for others.
Idk, I like the idea of my browser warning me when a random website I visit tries to talk to my network. if there's a legitimate reason I can still click yes. This is orthogonal to any ads and data collection.
I agree that any newly proposed standards for the web coming from Google should be met with a skeptical eye — they aren’t good stewards IMO and are usually self-serving.
I’d be interested in hearing what the folks at Ladybird think of this proposal.
As a side note, BeamNG.Drive has the most accurate throttle response and audio response of any driving game I've ever tried. You can almost feel the car pull vacuum (or build boost).
Considering how terrible Android and ChromeOS and GCP is in every conceivable way, I'm surprised Google even has time to quantify the quality of Microsoft products.
About time. Where the hell has this guy been? Guy makes hundreds of billions of dollars off the backs of working Americans and then leaves to donate all that American money to India in the form of public toilets under the guise of philanthropy. Meanwhile the country that made him a billionaire is literally falling to a fascist coup.
Seriously, just screw off. We needed you 3 months ago. We'll call you when it's time for your day in court at Nuremburg 2.0.
Is this feigned incompetence. Perhaps a cry for help, or a calculated disclosure?
I can't imagine anyone who would make the mistakes this guy makes, yet here he is; freely using his computer in clear view of a reporter with a camera.
There are images from the user's screen, with him on the photograph using the application, showing the chats from the app reproduced verbatim (forwarded) to a GMail account.
The article states that "at least one line of code must've been added" to support such a feature, which I believe to be an honest and accurate assessment.
But it is unknown if the current version was modified to do so. As the name "TM SGNL" looks shortened to fit after hex editing the app. This can all have been achieved by library overloads etc.
> One line
This can also be a single JMP and RTS statement, to a function that makes a screenshot, or something that takes the message.
No technical analysis of a working application has been performed. Just speculation of how this could work. I am not saying Micah is wrong. I just hoped more was available, so an actual disassemble was possible.
I would speculate that they did not recompile from source, but used the same process as used by the other applications. Intrusive by modification of the code execution, by injection, etc. That is speculation from my end, but reuses similar approaches across all of their applications.
I'd be concerned purchasing a book from a "programmer" who claims to teach people how to code without code. Kinda sounds like an "author" who publishes books without writing books.
