Google’s Plan to DRM the Web Goes Against Everything Google Once Stood For
It seems Everyone is taking for granted the claim that this is about DRM. 
The claim is that websites (not Google) will use this signal to allow or deny access but this is already possible with various means. Google or any other Browser vendor do not have a say on how websites use or misuse features.<p>&gt; There is a tension between utility for anti-fraud use cases requiring deterministic verdicts and high coverage, and the risk of websites using this functionality to exclude specific attesters or non-attestable browsers.<p>This risk is already present and actually happening. What makes this not widespread is not that it is not possible (it is) but that it is unpopular. 
Websites that you are forced to use (many banks for example) do it every day and they get away it with it because you have no choice.<p>Many articles are just reapeating the &quot;DRM&quot; claim without explaining how is this different, what does Google have to do with how websites choose to treat their users or what solution they would propose. It seems to me just protest for the sake of it because it&#x27;s trendy to question every Google Initiative. And yes every Google Initiative must be questioned but I don&#x27;t see any questioning here beside just parroting in article after article what someone identified as a potential misuse without any critical thought going into it. Might as well autogenerate the contents with AI already because the utility of all articles i have seen on this topic is the same, just rearrange words without adding anything to it.