• Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s kind of the opposite of this though, it’s not censorship. It’s not that you aren’t allowed to visit other sites, it’s that sites can choose to let you in or not.

    The scary part is we don’t know what makes that decision, and from Google’s proposal is that it could just be anything they decide. So it’s not censorship, but it is saying “You aren’t playing by our rules (like by using an ad blocker, or you visited too many whistleblower forums, or we just plain decided we don’t like you) so you don’t get to use gmail/your bank/whoever decides to implement this”

    • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s true. But the “integrity authority” has the power to censor. Maybe that’s not how it will be used now, but the infrastructure will be there and ready to use.

      When I see these things come about, I’m always reminded of that quote, “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should”