zlacker

>>reacto+(OP)
This is a level or two below where my knowledge of the browser trails off, so I'll ask generally: how would this interact with things like the WebKit Content Blocker API?

>>eroppl+hb
Step 1: Sites require a "secure" (read proprietary) browser like "Google Chrome", "Microsoft Edge", "Safari" or refuse to operate.

Step 2: "Secure" browsers change the behavior of their implementation of the Content Blocker API so an industry-accepted "secure" site lile Google Ads can opt-out of being blocked ("You wouldn't want a misconfigured content blocker to accidentally break a verified secure site right?")

Step 3: ??? (Force the users into a take it or leave it choice for whether they want to be part of the internet or not)

Step 4: Profit

>>jabban+He
I don't understand how the Apple that introduced their Content Blocker APIs would choose to invest into this API to kneecap their own content blockers?

>>madeof+hj
I can imagine a situation where "low-quality" sites get ad blocked and "high-quality" sites get DRM.