• floofloof@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I suspect “authentic” will mean “pays a license fee to Google.” In this respect it will work like other forms of DRM, and it will have the same effect of excluding new and smaller players from the market. Except in this case the market is the whole of the web.

    • mainframegremlin
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, definitely. Some form of extortion because ultimately that’s what it will be either way. I mean, that’s really the whole point of being the party that chooses what is authentic or not (and, what the definition of that word even means in this context). Monetary, data, whatever. Gotta keep the bottom line increasing for shareholders.

    • xradeon@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, there are no fees at all. Authentic just means approved device state, which will be defined by the website you go to I believe. So youtube might required many different things in order to be “authentic” like no ad blockers, genuine browser, non-rooted phone, etc., whereas bank-xyz may just check for one thing, like a genuine browser. Also, websites have to enable this on their side, so its not going to be used by default on all websites. The whole thing is crap though, even if only a few websites enable this, it could have huge impacts.

    • Johem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not necessarily. With some forms od tracking being curbed, just being sent the who accesses which webpage on what device when (the bare minimum for attestation) has lots of value. And google won’t stop at the bare minimum of data grabbing, of course.