this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
617 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59533 readers
4115 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Note: Original report by Bloomberg, article by Reuters proxied by Neuters to bypass paywall.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ColdWater@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago

LoL they won't, even if they buy it for 1 trillion dollar

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago (4 children)

What's to stop them just making another browser?

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (8 children)

What’s to stop them just making another browser?

Nothing. Chromium is open source. So they could just fork it and declare a new "official" google browser and it would be a lot like Chrome.

I'm not sure why the govt thinks forcing google to give up a particular fork/branch of an open source browser is all that meaningful. It might make more sense if Chrome was a closed source one of a kind browser.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I’ve worked in the aftermath of DoJ agreements like this one. The DoJ is not stupid (or at least didn’t used to be) and will have stipulations about removing Google employees from governance/write permissions to the project, with follow up check-ins every few months to make sure any shenanigans aren’t occurring.

..none of that matters though now that the DoJ is going to be dissolved.

[–] freeman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

They need to ban them from forking the browser. Google has the ability to get people to install the new Google totally-not-chrome browser. Especially if they keep Android as well.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

With blackjack and hookers?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not needed. Internet Explorer existed for years after the 90s. It wasn't killed by the courts. It was killed by the fact that it's only function was to install a better browser on first boot.

[–] cdf12345@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think you are severely underestimating how many people don’t even understand the difference between windows, explorer, a web browser and even the Internet itself during the 90’s well into the 2000’s even 2010’s.

That’s who kept IE alive

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No offense but it was the US Government. Most of their websites were coded for it, and quite a few of them didn't work properly or reliably in other browsers as a result. This was true up until it was sunsetted and they were forced to update to Edge and some of the websites still haven't been properly moved over to Chromium. When the pandemic hit and the Armed Forces had to setup remote work for thousands of people Microsoft basically built them a fork of Teams. The US Government is kind of running hand in hand with Microsoft on a lot of stuff if you just hazard a cursory look.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jocker@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

What if Linux foundation buys Chrome?

[–] Joker@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago

They already have Servo.

[–] TheBlackLounge@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

Do they have the money? What is the value of Chrome anyways, if you can't do monopoly things with it? About as much as Firefox?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›