Now ask yourself: is Google a neutral entity when it comes to you allowing permission to access your data? Or do they have an interest?https://twitter.com/aral/status/834679919363948544 …
-
-
-
Having a W3C Permissions API standard crafted by Google is like having the fox decide the specifications of the chicken coop door.https://twitter.com/aral/status/834680757524299776 …
-
So browser vendors should not take part in the standardization process? This sounds very much like guilt by association?
-
Sure they should. But “browser vendor” even is a generalisation. Google’s reasons for among Chrome different to Apple’s for Safari
-
Agree, but sounded like you thought it was wrong of these Google employees to take part? :/ Did I misunderstand you?
-
You tell me: would it be problematic for employees from Philip Morris to be involved in drafting legislation on the smoking age?
-
Standards are not laws and depend on the involvement of those expected to implement them, so not sure I agree with that comparison
-
(That said, generally in at least Sweden everyone with an interest in the legislation are consulted when new laws are made)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
maybe you should look up Adrienne's work first.
-
My point is not about Adrienne or Jake personally but with the fact they’re Google employees and must represent its interests.
-
They move the needle in the right direction inside G. Which is the best outcome until there is an alternative. I agree it is sad.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's no secret that browser vendors participate in defining browser APIs. Cause we implement them. Not a conspiracy.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.