Hacker News Reader

Comment by Wowfunhappy | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand how your statement contradicts the GP's?

There is no hardcoded whitelist. It's all based on the browser user's use of websites. See chrome://media-engagement/

It is based on a global population of browser usage, which is effectively a (dynamic) hardcoded list, that is also specifically filtered for a certain level of popularity and above.

Your interactions influence the default list, minutely, but also only if it’s a popular site. The distortions remain.

Apologies if we have different definitions of hardcoding. I’m not suggesting this list is a compiler argument. Just saying that a Google list decides whether a domain can autopsy video, instead of a more open web approach like “HTTPS can do this”, which is used for many features like WebRTC.

"a (dynamic) hardcoded list" that's an oxymoron.

It's not about how popular the website is, rather how video-centric it is.

what about disabling by default and letting us opt-in?

Chrome is weak about providing options, generally (and to the extent they do occasionally provide useful options, weak about keeping them from release to release).

Only the top X sites are included in the preloaded list. Google designed an explicit popularity filter.

If it was interaction only (so my site with 50 users that all interact with video make the list), that’s fine.

So, now you've gone from your original claim about a hardcoded list of sites with autoplay to a hardcoded list of sites which get MEI "preloaded" and an "explicit popularity filter".

Do you have either of those things to show us?

Yes:

https://blog.google/products/chrome/improving-autoplay-chrom...

"Chrome does this by learning your preferences. If you don’t have browsing history, Chrome allows autoplay for over 1,000 sites where we see that the highest percentage of visitors play media with sound. As you browse the web, that list changes as Chrome learns and enables autoplay on sites where you play media with sound during most of your visits, and disables it on sites where you don’t. This way, Chrome gives you a personalized, predictable browsing experience."

The inclusion of the "over 1,000 sites" list is what creates a distortion.

But that's not a hard coded list but instead "sites where we see that the highest percentage of visitors play media with sound" exactly as you supposedly wished they should do.

But only popular sites are even in the running for consideration. That benefits incumbents and harms new entrants. If you want to go out and make your own video platform, you'll have to do it without autoplay, even if 99% of your visitors play media with sound.

No? But it is _fascinating_ who thinks this.

Let's take a very popular site indeed. Google.com. Does it get autoplay? Nope. Why not? Because people keep visiting without clicking on any videos.

If I create a new video site tomorrow, let's say I set up a new music label and the whole site is just music videos for our label's artists. That site will start with zero index value, and visitors will need intent to watch the videos. But visitors who come back dozens of times will be eligible for autoplay, because the MEI quickly elevates for them.

But if Google added that same feature to a new tab of the main search site it'd never get MEI high enough to autoplay because most visitors to this popular site of Google.com don't play videos. That's not what they expect this site to do so it doesn't get autoplay.

Most sites I visit which have high MEI don't even use autoplay, but a lot of sites I visit which have very low MEI do use it (and of course Chrome blocks it on those sites). Both causes are the same - the people giving me quality content are also polite enough not to try to shove it down my throat, and those shovelling everything they can down people's throats don't care about quality.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com