Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Google Chrome To Begin Marking Sites That Are Slow / Fast

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post

    Use DuckDuckGo, taste the freedom.
    I've been doing it for years already, and besides image search it's superior to Google in every possible way. I was talking about them using the fast page program to drive people away from sites with content they don't like regardless of how fast they are.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by JanW View Post
    Their blog post shows the warning on the loading screen of a site, not in Google search. And yes, I obviously forgot about safe browsing - my bad. Among the first things I deactivate whenever I set up a new browser or computer - even though I (maybe wrongly) have less qualms about Mozilla receiving my browsing data wrt. Google.

    I can sort of see the justification for safety (though the quote on giving up liberties to gain safety comes to mind). Now sending my browsing data to Google so they can give me their opinion on the site I visit is another matter. But obviously this will be opt-in only, right?
    Probably same as Safe Browsing, so opt-out.

    Quite frankly, if you are running Noscript and ublock or other equivalents (uMatrix I think?) and you use the brain you don't really need that.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by numacross View Post

    At least on Firefox 70 it looks like it's using both. In about:config browser.safebrowsing.provider keys have both Google and Mozilla URLs.
    Hm, it seems like that here too.

    Dammit Mozilla!

    EDIT: no wait a minute.

    It seems this is a list-based system so Firefox is just downloading lists of bad sites from Google's repos, but the system is local, it does not send all your URLs over https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...rotection-work
    Last edited by starshipeleven; 11-12-2019, 07:06 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scellow
    replied
    the age of trash bloated developers is coming to an end!! finally!

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View Post
    I can't wait for Google to inevitably start deciding which pages they deem good based on their politics and ideologies, rather than technical aspects. I guess this is a pretty good time to boycott them again over crap they're trying to pull off.
    Use DuckDuckGo, taste the freedom.

    Leave a comment:


  • numacross
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Yes. Firefox sends the URLs to Mozilla though.
    At least on Firefox 70 it looks like it's using both. In about:config browser.safebrowsing.provider keys have both Google and Mozilla URLs.

    Leave a comment:


  • JanW
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    If you go to a website through Google search, yes, yes they know. This is far from news.

    Also this happens already with Google Safe Browsing as said by others
    Their blog post shows the warning on the loading screen of a site, not in Google search. And yes, I obviously forgot about safe browsing - my bad. Among the first things I deactivate whenever I set up a new browser or computer - even though I (maybe wrongly) have less qualms about Mozilla receiving my browsing data wrt. Google.

    I can sort of see the justification for safety (though the quote on giving up liberties to gain safety comes to mind). Now sending my browsing data to Google so they can give me their opinion on the site I visit is another matter. But obviously this will be opt-in only, right?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Ipkh View Post
    Sites would load much quicker if the ad spots didn't keep changing. A static ad is fine, but lately the damn thing loads 1 ad for a few seconds and loads a different ad. So in essence the page never fully loads. And to think it's all Google's fault in the first place for selling ads on auction and starting this downward trend.

    Way to solve your self created problem Google.
    There are times when a page loads slowly simply because bots are auctioning ad space for you as the page is loading. I get it that ads are the main revenue stream of Google, but ad-based web has shown to be a bad idea, and there are already websites that handle the money side of things in a superior way already.

    I always block ads from Google, so they can't get their cut, and to reduce the amount of information they have about me. Not to mention, ads deface every site they're on.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by arQon View Post

    Yeah, no kidding. My "favorite" was when every time YouTube was slow - sometimes because my conn was genuinely flaking out in a storm, but usually just because it somehow magically "needed" to buffer halfway through a video - Google's *immediate* "diagnostic" popup was "Switch to Chrome!".
    Not "Lower the stream resolution" or "Don't use the 60FPS stream we automatically chose for you", just "Switch to Chrome", because obviously it could only POSSIBLY be the browser that's to blame.
    And yeah, sure, I use Firefox and I'm well aware that Google has deliberately, repeatedly, sabotaged YouTube for both that and IE / Edge. But you'd think it would at least CONSIDER something other than the browser as the potential cause of playback issues... :P

    I'm not QUITE so cynical as to imagine that the same site that knows I'm not using their spyware browser stalled the stream just because of the UserAgent string. But honestly, these days I wouldn't be SURPRISED to discover that it did, which is a pretty sad state of affairs for a company that really did generally adhere to "Don't Be Evil" before the MBA asstards took over.
    YouTube's website is unbearably slow in general. I can't stand using it, due to bad performance, irrelevant "suggestions" and autoplay of next videos by default. Try grabbing a random YT video and running the link through their PageSpeed Insights.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    (X) doubt
    Google Analytics can easily block the main js thread for ~150ms, which is a lot when you actually make a website that's fast.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X