Technology

4148 readers

293 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.

Post guidelines

[Opinion] prefix

Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.

Rules

1. English only

Title and associated content has to be in English.

2. Use original link

Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.

3. Respectful communication

All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.

4. Inclusivity

Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.

5. Ad hominem attacks

Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.

6. Off-topic tangents

Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.

7. Instance rules may apply

If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

BrikoX@lemmy.zip

Ecosia has offered to take ‘stewardship’ of Chrome. And it's not a bad idea. (techcrunch.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.zip

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Berlin-based non-profit search engine Ecosia has asked a U.S. judge to turn Chrome into a foundation it controls, funding billions in climate projects.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] o_d@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Google would maintain intellectual property ownership, and can even continue to be the default search engine. When the decade is up, stewardship could be passed to another, or otherwise reviewed.

Ecosia, which uses Google to power its search engine, already has a revenue-share partnership with the tech giant. And it already offers its own browser built on the Chromium open source engine that powers Chrome. That’s why Kroll thinks the stewardship idea isn’t so out-of-line. “We would be happy to manage Chrome for them,” he says. Ecosia is even offering to maintain employment for the Chrome staff.

Sounds like they're offering Google a workaround. They won't manage it, but all the reasons for the court's decision get to remain. And then in a decade or whatever, Google will just take it back since they never really relinquished ownership to begin with.

[–] tazeycrazy@feddit.uk 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's like a Google buy out but with extra steps. Will anything change with chromes underlying technology to make it less Google focused

[–] o_d@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

My guess is that the appeal will erase the decision. Trump fired all the antitrust experts from the DOJ and replaced them with corporate cronies.

https://www.vox.com/politics/458685/trump-doj-antitrust-roger-alford-mizelle-hewlett-packard