• DontMakeMoreBabies@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    144
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Fuck Google.

    Searching a tracking number from Chrome using Google? Finds a package.

    Same search on Google from Firefox leads to nothing.

      • El Barto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        37
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Sorry, I’m all for net neutrality, but behavior based on browser usage, while dickish, has nothing to do with it.

        Edit: it seems like I’m being schooled. Got any sources to back up your downvotes?

        • Zunon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          33
          ·
          11 months ago

          yes it does, net neutrality not only has to do with the ISP but also the services. different useragent string should NOT lead to a worse quality of service.

          • vithigar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            11 months ago

            Right, but your service provider has nothing to do with that difference. The fact that the entity you’re contacting on the other end of the connection is providing a degraded experience isn’t an internet service delivery problem.

            Your internet service, which is what net neutrality is concerned with, is distinct from services on the internet. In the same way that your phone service has nothing to do with the quality of service you get from HP’s telephone support line.

            • ag10n@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              The web is based on open standards; that’s what made it universally accessible. How does limiting access based on how you access the web benefit anyone?

              • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                It doesn’t, but that isn’t their point. They’re simply pointing out that existing net neutrality laws in the US usually only apply to ISPs and telcos, not internet businesses.

              • El Barto@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Imagine a business making some smoothies with water provided by the utility company. The business decides to sell less appetizing smoothies to certain organizations. Are you saying that that’s a “water utility neutrality” issue?

              • vithigar@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Where did I say it did? The fact that it’s not a net neutrality issue doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. Net neutrality is just a specific thing that isn’t this.

              • prole@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Nobody is defending the practice, they’re just differentiating it from what we’ve previously referred to as “net neutrality,” which is 100% entirely about how ISPs process internet traffic, and not about the services being used within that traffic.

                Unless I missed the memo, and “net neutrality” means something different now.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It also does that with other unrecognised user agents.

      Personally I don’t understand why someone would still use Google when duckduckgo has more features and is just as good for searching and in the very rare case it isn’t you can easily switch back temporarily by just adding the prefix “!g” to your query.

      • ruckblack@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I tried duckduckgo for a while and kept coming back to Google for “real” searches at work. It’s not as good for searching in my experience. Yet.

        • masquenox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          11 months ago

          Duckduckgo has become a little better than it used to be… but google has also become a whole lot worse.

        • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          11 months ago

          The vast majority of times I go back to Google to do a search I find it also returns useless results. I’m not convinced it’s any better than duckduckgo. I think it used to be, but not anymore.

          • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            I had the same experience. I used switch between DDG and Google when DDG gave results I didn’t want. During the pandemic, I remember DDG giving lots of false positives and odd, non-standard web page hits. Like, if I was searching for current COVID advice, it would give me hits from the health department in Bumfuck, Nebraska instead of, say, CDC (and I don’t live in Bumfuck, Nebraska). It has really improved since then and now I can use DDG pretty much exclusively. Not having to scroll past a page of Google ads to find my search results is quite glorious.

        • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          What’s your field?

          I’m in a DevOps/Cloud Engineer role and DDG works better for me than Google. No ads and somehow fewer of the gpt generated fake help articles.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          Big same. I’ll even bang out to Startpage to try to avoid directly using Google (!sp vs. !g), but that’s not as good either.

          I bow to my search overlord Google. Until I try Grasp, Kagi, and SearXNG, and hopefully one of those will satisfy (in particular SearXNG).

          Until then DDG remains my default, and I’ll !g half the time :(

            • czech@low.faux.moe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              Been using Kagi for a few months. Now that the unlimited tier is $10 it’s a no brainer, for me.

              • m_randall@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I tried it a few months ago and bought it before the trial was over. Took some time to build trust but it’s still on par with google if not better.

                (My account probably looks like a shill for them but I swear I’m just a happy user)

                • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I also really like Kagi, and their bundle for Ultimate users of the various text AI tools is also very helpful for work.

      • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        ddg always drops one of at least two troublesome terms. Which is infuriating.

        Might have to do with my settings, in which case it is a bug.

        Bangs are gold (which is why ddg is my default) but i still sometimes miss exclusions.

      • slumberlust@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Isn’t ducksuckgo just paying for google search with a privacy wrapper/obfuscation layer on top?

    • Bahnd Rollard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      Slam dunks, yes. But does any of the people who would bring a case against then have enough money to fight an army of more lawyers? Probably not.

      • stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Idk I’ll just find some millionaire/billionaire who’s hungry for public approval in the space and bug them about it probably

    • Knusper@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The thing is, I really don’t think, Google would care about Firefox. Firefox is sitting at negligible percentages of usage share. The only real competitor to Chrome is Safari and that’s because of iOS.
      I guess, they might impact Safari on macOS with this, but someone would have to try this out to actually see, and ultimately, this could still just be a dumb mistake.

      Having said that, Google holds a near-monopoly in both video content and web browsers. They have a special duty to not disadvantage competitors and even if this was an honest mistake, I do think, it deserves a slap on the wrist.

  • Engywuck@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    From what I can understand from the thread, they aren’t deliberatly crippling FF.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        11 months ago

        The way I read it is Chrome gets a pass on the architecture crippling, the others don’t.

        Someone correct me if I got the wrong idea.

        • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          So Google is saying out loud they are trying to be Microsoft and abuse its near monopoy to push their other products.

          Got it.

      • Kalash@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Which turned out to also have nothing to do with FF but is targeting adblockers.

      • Engywuck@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        It looks like also this was against adblocker so, again, not specifically Firefox. Quote from the article itself:

        The issue was initially reported as targeting Firefox users, but users online have said they’re seeing the delay in Chrome and Edge, too. Reddit and Hacker News users who’ve examined the code that appears to be causing the delay have said they see no indication that YouTube checks what kind of browser is in use. Mozilla’s senior brand manager Damiano DeMonte wrote in an email to The Verge that “there’s no evidence that this is a Firefox-specific issue.

        • Ace! _SL/S@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Reddit and Hacker News users who’ve examined the code that appears to be causing the delay have said they see no indication that YouTube checks what kind of browser is in use

          That means nothing, this check could be done on the server side and noone would know

          • Engywuck@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            I mean… We can we can invent a thousand conspiracies if we want to…

          • kautau@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Except that the delay and browser check is literally in the JavaScript code, you can see it.

            • Ace! _SL/S@ani.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Indeed, but google can just transmit different javascript to different users/browsers/regions etc (that’s why browsers have useragents, so websites can improve browser compatibility according to the circumstances). It can be decided on a whim and noone would know except some coders at google

  • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    They finally made YouTube unusable for me even with ublock. Refreshing the filters didn’t work and told me I could only watch 3 videos.

    Google was always going to win the war but I didn’t expect it to be like this.

    I’m now using piped for all YouTube videos.

    • datelmd5sum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      I randomly stopped getting the anti-adblocking. On my gaming PC I never got them, on my laptop they went away after I disabled my adblocking for one video and then re-enabled it. Now I don’t get them at all. Did they give up on me?

    • jflorez@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      What works for me is opening a new Private windows on Firefox, with ublock installed, and then login into YouTube. I do have to login every time I hope a private windows by so far I’ve been able to watch unlimited videos with an ad blocker installed

    • YoorWeb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I wish Piped worked for me, I was trying to watch a Linux tutorial in full HD to see the commands better and Piped just refused to buffer the video.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Why are you using YouTube at all if you don’t like it so much? Go use something else.

    • ██████████@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      yea like if they want money just grow some balls and ask for a monthly pay for youtube they got our generation like cable had our parents

      i would be willing to pay so much much money for REAL premium youtube

      i thank the community for all the amazing broadcasts

      • Drusenija@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Out of curiosity, what would you consider “real” premium YouTube to be? Are you thinking something where the creators get a higher share of the revenue in return for better production values?

  • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It might just be a coincidence but I’ve had a lot of trouble using Invidious or Piped lately too. Videos load and titles load, but video thumbnails don’t load for me.

      • spez@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        There was a problem with DASH. Now it’s fixed, it should work with the proxy enabled.

          • agileharddisk@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            there’s a browser extension called libredirect that has a keyboard shortcut to switch between instances. you can also use freetube/newpipe/mpv.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Good to know about Stealth. Thanks!

            Yeah I might try the others a couple more times before giving up but it’s not gone well for me thusfar. Libreddit and invidious worked for me for like 4 days last time, both crapped out about the same time. It’s annoying to have to repeatedly troubleshoot what used to be something you could basically count on working

          • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I tried it and my main complaint was it was like 720p, so lower quality (noticeable to me just looking at it). But it “just worked” for me. But I’m also not interested in YouTube enough to play this game - if they block me, I stop going there. It seems like they give up blocking me every so often (or something updates IDK).

  • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Steelmanning: perhaps no ARM Linux system was capable of playing 4K reliably until Asahi Linux came along?

    • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      11 months ago

      Someone on the Hacker News cross-post mentioned it, but it seems like they assumed any ARM Linux device that wasn’t detected as running Android was some low-power device like a Raspberry Pi, and didn’t anticipate more powerful devices running bog-standard Linux until Apple Silicon and thus Asahi came along.

    • whfsdude@dmv.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s probably the case that this was good intent given the lack of desktop ARM computing hardware, but they really should let the client decide the video quality.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        True, but I would guess that the clients didn’t handle that well and this was just a stupid quick fix.

  • Sprokes@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I think they want everyone to use user agent switcher so that Firefox share will drop and then nobody will support it and will die.