Reply to post: But wait, Chrome can still "read the network requests made on the user's behalf"

But wait, Chrome can still "read the network requests made on the user's behalf"

If a user CHOOSES to use an extension to block ads "on the user's behalf", is that not identical to the user choosing Chrome to perform network requests "on the user's behalf"? Why does Big Google think it gets to dictate to user's who to trust and who not to trust?

This is similar to Big Google arbitrarily deciding that HTTPS sites are more important to users than HTTP sites, thus effectively forcing small businesses to have to pay for HTTPS certificates in order to satisfy Big Google -- not their potential customers -- when all the business may be doing is displaying a simple text menu of the food they sell.

I don't believe the INFORMATION on HTTPS sites are any more important to me than the information on HTTP sites, and a Google search is SUPPOSED to be based on the INFORMATION. Not whether the site is created in Big Google's image.

Big Google could just display an icon next to search listings letting the USER know if a site is HTTPS or HTTP so the USER can decide. Not Big Google dictating to the user. Big Google could even create a user setting so the user can specify if they're paranoid about HTTP sites. But instead, Big Google wants to dictate to users that the Internet shall be created in Big Google's image.