Victim blaming is absolutely the correct approach here. Of course you shouldn't blame your grandma for using Chrome, but people on HN are a completely different audience. HN readers should be well aware of the damage Google is causing to the open internet, using Chrome is tantamount to supporting this effort.

What should HN readers do that are forced to work within these ecosystems? Ex. Work, school.

It’s not always so easy to walk away from an entire platform. People’s entire livelihoods could be based around Google.

I don’t see any issue with Google owning some of this responsibility.

Google is a monopolist that acts like a monopolist. Its main revenue source is advertising. So it will use its monopoly power to secure advertising.

You cannot expect Google to act against its own self-interest only because you ask nicely. You have to stop giving them the market power to do it.

Have they won the game of capitalism by becoming a monopoly?

I don’t expect Google to act against its own will, but they should.

I don’t know if they won the game of capitalism but their market power and profit incentive are facts.

If you don’t want to stop using Chrome, then your alternative is to buy a controlling share of Alphabet and appoint a Board that forgoes advertising revenue in exchange for being nice to adblock users.

Of course google is also to blame, but I think the point people are trying to make is that you should avoid chrome where you can, if your employer is forcing you to use chrome, then maybe mention once or twice that you would like to use firefox, if they ignore it then just go on with your life and maybe use firefox on your home pc/androidphone. It's not about being perfect with everything you do, just change the things you can.

I don't think they were talking about people who are forced to use chrome.

Yes, the worst are the techies who should know better but insist on using chrome because "it feels slightly faster, therefore I have no choice but to use it." Such people pretending to be victims is complete nonsense.

Firstly, the examples you gave are dissimilar; GP is pointing out a positive action (choosing a specific browser) while you're emphasizing negative ones (not doing specific things to contribute to Firefox). Secondly, they did not say that the user is to blame for the situation, merely that they are part of the problem, which is trivially true; Google would not be able to do what they are without a large number of people choosing their browser. Thirdly, the way to effect change through fora like this one is to identify what an audience, personally, can do and encouraging them to do that thing. People can choose what browser they use. They cannot meaningfully change Google's behavior.

> choosing a specific browser

Most people "choose" a specific browser like I "choose" my landlord when I move in to a new place. It's what's there.

> an unlimited marketing budget for.

I never seen a single chrome add. I'm sure we're in different part of the world and in different add segments, but seems to me chrome marketing in not that widespread, is it ?

As a retired FE engineer, the top reason I used chrome and test with it was the powerful yet light devtools.

There was a campaign on Twitch not long ago. Also, I watch F1 and they have a really premium position on the McLaren cars.

>I never seen a single chrome add

Try browsing Google from a browser other than Chrome.