• fosho@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s pretty inconclusive if there’s no context for how that code is called. I’m kinda confused why the article wouldn’t have provided any additional detail other than a single line of code. why bother digging at all?

      • _thisdot@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        it’s part of their anti-adblock code. without going into too much details, they can instantly find out whether ad-block is trying to do anything on chrome, but on firefox they need a 5 sec delay

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which is honestly to Firefox’s credit. Making it harder to find out stuff about your browser is a good thing, unless it has to do with feature support.

          But the fact that they don’t give a shit and are willing to ruin the user experience for it, that’s despicable.

        • DolphinMath@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d be more likely to believe that if spoofing your user agent didn’t immediately fix the issue.

    • fernandofig@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Have you read past that screenshot of the code, though? It says the problem was not limited to Firefox, it seems Edge users reported problems as well. Anecdotally, I did experience that delay problem on Thorium this weekend as well. I have seen a variation of this problem almost a month ago, where sometimes the video would take a long time (like, over a minute, sometimes) to load, or often just not load at all. So I just chalked it up to Youtube having done something stupid on their end.

    • lipilee@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      that half sentence in the aa article though

      “That move makes sense in many ways, as the platform needs to make money to survive…”

      should we also start a gofundme for youtube, i am suddenly worried for them /s

      • businessfish@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        not saying we should worry for them, but youtube is run at a loss so they do actually need money from SOMEWHERE to maintain youtube. youtube still sucks and this is definitely not the way to win over users but thems the facts

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Alphabet made $50 billion in profit last year. They’ve got enough to run YouTube, but enough isn’t enough.