google’s latest fuckery: if you write online, read this
The Google app for iOS now adds THEIR links to YOUR posts from YOUR website unless you opt-out.
Their links lead people away from your site and back to Google. Because that’s definitely what you want, right? That’s why you have a blog or portal or web site or whatever. You want people to leave your site and go back to Google.
Oh, it’s not?
If you don’t like it, you can “Opt out.” Opting out is a pain in the ass. Here’s where you go to do it. You have to enter every variation of each of your domains or it won’t work. It will take up to 30 days, during which time Google will continue to pollute your work and your writing and your website with their modifications and their added links to take people away from your site and back to themselves.
For example, here’s the list of what I need to opt-out just for this one blog:
Making it difficult like this is 100% intentional and entirely designed to make it as annoying as possible, and also, to make sure you slip up if at all possible and forget one or more combinations.
(Tho’ I am just going to depreciate web. as a prefix right now, to bring down the load a little. Still gonna list ’em, though, because spite is why.)
Right now it’s only in the Google app for iOS and it’s probably a test to see whether they can get away with it without complaint, and how much revenue it generates. Let’s make that a combination of no and as close to zero as possible. Because otherwise they’ll roll it out everywhere, and probably derank you if you don’t go along.
Fucking hell, Google. Fuck you. Just… fuck you.
[#]art #t0000000000bs_ #writing
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from solarbird@solarbird.net
Comments on “google’s latest fuckery: if you write online, read this” on Dreamwidth
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from solarbird@solarbird.net
@solarbird
Does this kick in if you use a google browser to edit your WordPress/Wix/whatever site, on an iOS platform like an iPad?
So using Safari or Firefox would prevent this?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from NNN@urbanists.social
Only when viewed in the Google app for iOS. They’re not editing your website, that’s not something they can do. They’re adding the links when viewing the website within their app.
They’re only doing this within the iOS Google app at the moment. They tend to try things like this in small steps, then expand it out if they think they can get away with it.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from solarbird@solarbird.net
@solarbird
This is what happens when murderous oil despots invest in your company...
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/07/heres-a-look-at-who.html
https://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-peter-thiel-rupert-murdoch-met-with-bin-salman-2020-1
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-06/google-thiel-stand-out-in-saudi-prince-s-silicon-valley-tour
https://www.businessinsider.com/saudi-arabia-crown-prince-visits-apple-google-2018-4
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Npars01@mstdn.social
@Npars01 @solarbird Are they gonna give him the data of Google users, in exchange for investing, let's say $2 billion in their company? Like bro-business between Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner & Mr Bone Saw?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ArenaCops@infosec.exchange
@solarbird as someone building a web app, this has me rather concerned that it might find it's way into Chrome
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from chris_e_simpson@hachyderm.io
@chris_e_simpson @solarbird "might"?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mensrea@freeradical.zone
@solarbird @hazelnoot TIL google has an app? That is not Chrome? But anyway, so people who use this app/browser thingy get an altered version of the internet and probably don’t even know it? Wth. I’ll have a look into it. Thank you for alerting us.
How long until this hits Chrome…? Ugh.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from h5e@tech.lgbt
@h5e @solarbird @hazelnoot on Pixel devices, using the unremovable Google search bar on the homescreen does your search in this app.
In order to do this in Chrome, Google would have to relax standard web security to accomplish it, but they already did this to make YouTube videos autoplay without user interaction, so it's definitely a plausible concern.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nyquildotorg@fedia.social
@nyquildotorg @solarbird @hazelnoot if they can do it in this app it stands to reason they can do it in chrome too.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from h5e@tech.lgbt
@h5e @solarbird @hazelnoot that's definitely a concern, but I'm hoping this makes people more aware in general of the problem of native apps that embed browsers in them. The Facebook app has been doing this sort of thing for a long time in ways that the user can't actually notice.
Any app where a link to a remote site opens inside of it, instead of handing it over to your default browser should be eyed extremely warily; they can and probably do track you in ways they couldn't if you were looking at it outside the app.
But yeah, if Google also controls your default browser, there's definitely room for concern.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nyquildotorg@fedia.social
@nyquildotorg @solarbird @hazelnoot Yeah I get that Apple may not want to give up that api (yet), but they could warn users if they cannot guarantee the integrity of a webview.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from h5e@tech.lgbt
@h5e @nyquildotorg @solarbird @hazelnoot they could limit it to domains that the publisher can prove they control :neocat_think:
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mei@donotsta.re
@solarbird is it possible to opt-out for all subdomains?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from solonovamax@tech.lgbt
@solonovamax @solarbird only if you list each one. three times. manually. does anyone have a spare set of explosives enough to deconstruct a medium sized building? asking for a friend
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from gravitos@wetdry.world
@solarbird wow, like 10 years ago this would just be the results of a malware infection, now it's... canon? hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from vxo@digipres.club
@vxo This. My brain also asked if this is just "referral hijacking" but on a corporate level.
@solarbird
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bekopharm@indieweb.social
@bekopharm @solarbird it probably is
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from vxo@digipres.club
@solarbird Here's another way to opt out:
In /robots.txt add:
User-agent: Googlebot
Disallow: /
(Yes, I realise this is not a realistic option for some people. For those of us running personal webgardens and such... perfect.)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mikro2nd@indieweb.social
@solarbird I agree wholeheartedly with Google's Page Annotations being an absolutely awful antifeature, and recommend that others opt-out and/or protest the feature. I want to make a clarification that doesn't invalidate your main points:
Clicking annotations doesn't navigate away from your site to a Google search; it triggers an overlay with infoboxes about the term you selected. It's similar to the iOS "Look Up" option for selected text. It's wrong to do because this obfuscates what is and isn't a link the author placed on the page. Inserting what appears to be links into the page crosses the line from user-agent interventions, such as adblocking or turning off certain unsafe features (acceptable) to editing an author's words in a way that isn't required for people to read them (unacceptable).
Editing page contents is fine if it's necessary for people to read them, e.g. translations or the WAI-Adapt standards. Both ideally inform the user that the page has been modified. Page Annotations go well beyond that.
Originally posted on seirdy.one: See Original (POSSE).
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Seirdy@pleroma.envs.net
@solarbird
Too bad I don't have a development environment at the moment. I am mad enough to write an app to bypass Google's trickery, maybe make opting out a 1-click operation. You enter a domain, my code automatically generates variants and talks to Google. If the user is a lady then I am the smiley old man by the side of the road who lays down his coat ( code ) over a dirty ditch ( Google ), to be a gentleman hobo and make the lady's day a bit nicer.
But as I said, I don't have a dev env atm, so I need to sleep on the beach and do cyberpunk hobo things till I do.
Good luck and y'all come back now, y'hear? 🤠
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ashwin@chaotic.fun
@solarbird At least they make it easy to opt back in with "N/A", ugh
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ctietze@mastodon.social
@solarbird only on iOS so it's a minority
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fredbrooker@witter.cz
@solarbird how long before opted-out disappear from search results ?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Tacitus@masto.bike
@solarbird
How is this not a copyright violation ?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bsdphk@fosstodon.org
@solarbird my solution is just blocking the user-agent of the google app ("GSA"):
handle @google_search_app {
header "Content-Type" "text/html; charset=utf-8"
respond <
Unsupported web browser.
<strong>Error: Unsupported web browser.</strong>
Your web browser (Google Search App) is not supported by this website.
Please use a supported browser, such as:
<li>Mozilla Firefox</li>
<li>Vivaldi</li>
<li>Safari</li>
<li>Google Chrome</li>
</ul>
HTML 403
}</code></pre>
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lunareclipse@snug.moe
@domi I found a solution :blobcatcoffee:
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from issotm@treehouse.systems This content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).Proxy Information
text/gemini