• Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Google actively blocking Aurora Store would be much worse than them simply changing their backend. The latter can likely be quickly resolved while the former might lead to a cat and mouse game, where it gets increasingly difficult for Aurora Store to continue to work.

      • HowdyLemmy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        The linked gitlab discussion suggests it. There’s intermittent successes, and the particular errors align with a backend change.

        • artyom@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Yes. once again, we know there was a backend change. The question is “why was it changed”? We already know Google manipulates YouTube for the explicit purpose of breaking Firefox, adblockers and yt-dlp. Who’s to say this is different? Certainly not anyone on GitLab.

          • HowdyLemmy@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            20 hours ago

            Ah, I think I understand you a bit better. It’s true that the reason for the change is unclear, and it definitely could be malicious. However, that lack of clarity is what makes the OP article title misleading.

            The article title claims the certainty that Google has blocked the Aurora store outright. I think you’ll agree that frequent errors with some successes is not the same as an intentional, simple block.

            We may find that, yes, Google is intentionally blocking Aurora. It is just misleading to say so at this point.

        • artyom@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          LOL yes, anyone asking you questions you can’t answer about the shit you’re saying is “sealioning”.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            The thing is, it’s already been answered. The conclusion was made based on reading the gitlab discussion. 🤷‍♂️ I didn’t read that myself but maybe try doing that if you’re curious. 😉🫶

            • artyom@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 day ago

              The thing is, the conclusion is not going to be in any discussion outside of a Google internal chat or meeting. We know what happened, we don’t know why it happened, or what it means.