this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
1045 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

34914 readers
198 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 167 points 1 year ago (34 children)

Is this arguably anticompetitive and illegal?

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 year ago (22 children)

Nobody can even state that it's actually happening "for competitive browsers" as even Chrome users are reporting an unexplained lag/slowdown. At this point, it's just wild speculation and bandwagoning.

[–] [email protected] 106 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

You absolutely can tell what's happening by reading the source code. They are using a listener and a delay for when ontimeupdate promise is not met, which timeouts the entire connection for 5 full seconds.

https://pastebin.com/TqjzbqQE

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sorry but I don't see how that check is browser-specific. Is that part happening on the browser side?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

They don't need to put incriminating "if Firefox" statements in their code -- the initial page request would have included the user agent and it would be trivial to serve different JavaScript based on what it said.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Easy enough to test though. Load the page with a UA changer and see if it still shows up when Firefox pretends to be Chrome

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The video in the linked article does just that. The page takes 5 seconds to load the video, the user changes the UA, they refresh the page and suddenly the video loads instantly. I would have liked to see them change the UA back to Firefox to prove it's not some weird caching issue though

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah, and also Edge or an older version of Chrome etc just to be sure.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I guess his question is "is that happening?"

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Well, at least I learned that javascript understands exponential notation. I never even bothered to try that lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Can I have ublock block that? It seems simple enough to extract that code out.

load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (29 replies)