And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.

  • eth0p@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh, for sure. When bullet point number one involves advertising, they don’t make it hard to see that the underlying motivation is to assist advertising platforms somehow.

    I think this is an extremely slippery and dangerous slope to go down, and I’ve commented as such and explained how this sort of thing could end up harming users directly as well as providing ways to shut out users with adblocking software.

    But, that doesn’t change my opinion that the original post is framed in a sensationalized manner and comes across as ragebaiting and misinforming. The proposal doesn’t directly endorse or enable DRMing of web pages and their contents, and the post text does not explain how the conclusion of adblockers being killed follows from the premise of the proposal being implemented. To understand how OP came to that conclusion, I had to read the full document, read the feedback on the GitHub issues, and put myself in the shoes of someone trying to abuse it. Unfortunately, not everyone will take the time to do that.

    As an open community, we need to do better than incite anger and lead others into jumping to conclusions. Teach and explain. Help readers understand what this is all about, and then show them how these changes would negatively impact them.