
Google Now Bans Some Linux Web Browsers from Their Services - labase19
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-now-bans-some-linux-web-browsers-from-their-services/
======
siproprio
Google is becoming one the worst web companies these days.

Every change they make to their services or platforms make it harder for
people to block ads, or make more data go into Google services by default with
no way out.

Top of my list:

1\. Trying to kill the URL in chrome by eliding information and then forcing
advanced users to install an extension that promotes Google services

2\. Efforts to gimp advanced ad blockers with manifest V3

3\. Changes to Android defaults to make apps enforce not trusting user based
https certificates

4\. Syncing and signing-in on chrome for Google accounts

5\. Enforcing location based, filtered, web search results

6\. Pushing non organic, paid, results in all other products except web search

~~~
beagle3
1, 2 and 4 on your list are through chrome. Switch to Firefox. It is better in
almost every respect (specifically, these items you mentioned but also many
more) and has been for a while.

------
alyandon
I find it ironic that I go to read an article about banning people from
accessing content and get greeted with the following:

    
    
      Error 1005 Ray ID: 545442d6fa2aec4e • 2019-12-15 00:22:04 UTC
      Access denied
      What happened?
    
      The owner of this website (www.bleepingcomputer.com) has banned the autonomous
      system number (ASN) your IP address is in (XXXXX) from accessing this website.
    

I really miss the old internet that didn't discriminate against clients based
on IP address/origin.

------
badrabbit
How is google avoiding anti-trust prosecution. I don't get how they can get
away favoring their own product under another product to stifle competition.
Imagine if Windows alerted you about insecurity and inferiority of GCP vs
Azure when you visit sites that use GCP. Or a modal popup alert when you open
chrome telling you how much faster and more secure Edge is. Refusing to run
Firefox because it doesn't like it.

Why is google gettig a free pass in so many things?

~~~
unlinked_dll
Because the current regulators in the US don’t intervene in anti competitive
behavior until it is deemed harmful for consumers. They don’t generally
consider keeping prices low (in this case, zero) as harmful to consumers.

If anyone has an axe to grind it’s other browser developers and web service
providers, and if they want they can bring a class action against google for
anticompetitive behavior. But I suspect there’s too much for them to lose in a
drawn out suit than to gain.

~~~
badrabbit
If google uses this behavior to for example make everyone use and support only
chrome and tie their ad-targeting of the chrome user (google account) and
dissuade using other search engines, would that not make it hard for other
search platforms to compete by offering lower prices to consumers? I also
worry how everyone these days has vendor locking on Chrome, if I use firefox I
get lower quality content and Google has made it hard for devs to support non-
chrome browsers, this hurts me as a consumer, although I find it hard to come
up with a cash amount in damages.

~~~
unlinked_dll
I think this gets at the crux of it. If consumers aren't harmed directly, how
do you quantify the impact of anti-competitive behavior and argue that it's
"bad" and not "just business"?

I don't have an answer. I don't like Google's behavior here, and I don't like
seeing vertical integration that cuts out potential disrupters since it
stagnates innovation. But like has been seen for decades, vertical integration
like this can often lower prices for consumers, and regulators have a tough
time squaring that circle with what they can call tort.

------
nkkollaw
Don't most Linux users use Chrome and Firefox..?

~~~
badrabbit
Depends on who you ask there are plenty that use lynx too.

~~~
nkkollaw
Sure, there are plenty of users that still use Windows XP, but I guess it
doesn't make financial sense to support them.

The article has a click-baity headline that makes it seem like evil Google is
banning users on Linux, while reality is pretty different.

That was my point.

