• guyrocket
      link
      fedilink
      331 year ago

      And, you know, broke them up into many smaller companies.

      • @stellargmite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        I wonder to what extent this will help, in the case of YouTube? Its so dominant of that market. Is it purely fiscal or also technical?

        • @Quik@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          121 year ago

          It probably would help, as Google couldn’t connect their advertising services that easily with YouTube, and both parties would have to be more independent.

          • Inevitable Waffles [Ohio]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 year ago

            Youtube is a money pit. If it had to split from Google, they will need to up monitization pronto or shut down. While I do want Google broken like Bane cracking Batman, there will be casualities. Too many parts of our internet infrastructure exist via subsidization and we use them like utilities. It is going to be messy out there if the FTC succeeds.

              • Inevitable Waffles [Ohio]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                51 year ago

                Agreed. I feel the same way about youtube going as Reddit did. For some of us, it is just a fun thing. Some people need it because it is their best access to knowledge. I worry for those who need it.

    • e0qdk
      link
      fedilink
      161 year ago

      There are two US antitrust cases against Google right now:

      The first is related to things like paying to be the default search engine on iPhone, Firefox, etc. The second is related to ad tech. Neither really directly addresses the issues that average people have with Google’s behavior though, so keep filing complaints!

    • @Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Google gets sued for this shit all the time, but do you think you’re going to hear about this on Google or Youtube?

      Case in point, very few people know that they got sued for protecting multiple pedophiles as they were grooming kids on their platform.

  • Yote.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    221 year ago

    I’ve been noticing this for a while now. I chalked it up to YouTube having ugly code, but now I see that it is simply malicious code.

    • TechNom (nobody)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence*.

      • Except for Google. This is the same company that decided that ‘Don’t be evil’ is inappropriate for them.
    • TechNom (nobody)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Actually, this isn’t the first time they did it. There was a thread by a mozilla ex-employee that described how Google destroyed Firefox’s market share using the same dirty trick.

      • @andioop@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Thread can be read on this article.

        YouTube page load is 5x slower in Firefox and Edge than in Chrome because YouTube’s Polymer redesign relies on the deprecated Shadow DOM v0 API only implemented in Chrome. You can restore YouTube’s faster pre-Polymer design with this Firefox extension: https://t.co/F5uEn3iMLR

        — Chris Peterson (@cpeterso) July 24, 2018

        According to that article,

        Google Chrome ads started appearing next to Firefox search terms. Gmail & [Google] Docs started to experience selective performance issues and bugs on Firefox. Demo sites would falsely block Firefox as ‘incompatible’

        while Firefox was still a Google search partner.

        EDIT: Did not realize how long ago this post was made, whoops.

      • Free Palestine 🇵🇸
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        UntrackMe is nice, but it’s not required for YouTube link redirection on Android as LibreTube and NewPipe natively support opening YouTube links.

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      Makes sense and improves privacy but they’re not going to win on speed, not even on Firefox, unless you host a private instance or use a nearby-hosted one.

      • Free Palestine 🇵🇸
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        By default, when using Invidious, your browser loads the video right from Google, you can proxy videos through the Invidious instance but it’s disabled by default. Only Piped always proxies videos through the Piped server.

  • Gunpachi
    link
    fedilink
    111 year ago

    Just install the chameleon add on and set it to chrome. Problem solved.

  • Steve
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    This doesn’t have any impact on video load times on Piped, does it?

    • @MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      All current conversations surrounding Net Neutrality refer to ISPs being neutral. Since this is happening at the browser level, it would not technically be a violation.

      For example streaming websites aren’t required to support Linux. It’s a dick move, but it’s not a violation to “block” users.

      That isn’t to say this isn’t a dick move, it absolutely is, but as currently defined it isn’t a Net Neutrality issue.

      • @GaMEChld@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Hmm, perhaps not net neutrality then, but it could be anti competitive maybe. Like the Internet Explorer fiasco from back in the day.

  • danielbln
    link
    fedilink
    41 year ago

    I don’t notice this, Firefox on Mac, YouTube Premium. Do they only do this for YouTube Free? Yep, seems like it. Terrible nonetheless of course but it explains why I never experienced this.