Will accessibility tools that rely on automating input to the browser cause it to become untrusted? Will it affect extensions? The spec does currently specify a carveout for browser modifications and extensions, but those can make automating interactions with a website trivial. So, either the spec is useless or restrictions will eventually be applied there too.
The Firefox team responded saying that it’s an awful idea and that plenty of people rely on being able to appear human, for example screen readers who need to interact as a human would but then translates it into a format their users can understand.
These propositions are just full of drawbacks for the user, the user actually gains nothing at all. Let’s hope this rubbish doesn’t take a foothold.
The biggest issue I see is not being able to block malicious scripts from running. An all or nothing approach is a terrible terrible idea.
Just goes to show, google is an ad company first and foremost and they’re in the process of cutting out any competition to their dominance.
Props too to Vivaldi for blowing the whistle as they have access to all the upcoming chromium builds being a fork.
They didn’t blow any whistles, the proposal was public and lots of people spoke out against it already.
Besides, I like Vivaldi, but they’re part of the problem.
The only reason this discussion is happening is because everyone and their grandma decided it’s a great idea to re-skin a browser built by an ad-company and expect them not to abuse their position.
