Google Ends Support for Lynx Browser

2 days ago

Accessing google.com in Lynx now shows:

  Google
  Update your browser
  Your browser isn't supported anymore. To continue your search, upgrade to a recent version. [Learn more]

42 comments

zhenyi

Reply
salted-fry  2 days ago

I just tested changing user agents in Chrome - setting UA to a random string like "fff" gets a search page, but setting it to "Links" or "Lynx" gets "Your browser isn't supported anymore" - which is to say, this doesn't look accidental, but more like these UAs are specifically being blocked.

EDIT: Forging user agent in Links (with links -http.fake-user-agent) gets a usable homepage, but the results page just sends you to a turn-on-your-javascript page.

  • eimrine  10 hours ago

    Google loves to search the result with a real URL but since I make any click on that result Google replaces it with some referral link. For example, if I want to open the result not from my connection but from Tor I need to clean each link by hand or even type it from scratch. I am sure this ban was made for poisoning UX for console guys too. What a pity I didn't know I could search from console browser and having more easy life.

  • extraduder_ire  1 day ago

    My impression is that support for less common browsers and other unusual uses of google products has survived due to pet interest by individual googlers and not any sort of widespread policy.

    • kn0where  15 hours ago

      A lot of those individual googlers are longtimers who are now leaving after 15, 20 years. Google has been offering voluntary exit packages this year and I suspect the kind of people who would value Google.com working in Lynx are also the type who have made plenty of money and are disillusioned by what the company has become.

ryao  2 days ago

I wonder to what extent visually disabled internet users are affected by this, since I can imagine at least some of them using lynx with an on-screen reader for a terminal emulator.

  • duskwuff  1 day ago

    Not to any meaningful degree. Lynx (or other terminal-based browsers) would be an extraordinarily poor choice of browser for a non-sighted user, as it lays text out visually in the terminal (e.g. using color and indentation to distinguish between types of text) and does not provide accessibility cues. Those users are much better served by standard GUI web browsers.

  • bitpush  2 days ago

    What's the advantage of using lynx as opposed to Chrome/Safari and using the read aloud features?

    • ryao  2 days ago

      Ask someone who is visually impaired. I know that they historically use browsers that do not support JavaScript. I also am acquainted with one developer who uses software for reading his terminal outloud, although I never asked the specifics of what he uses for web browsing or IRC for that matter. I do know that he loves the iPhone.

      That said, I just found this post by a blind person who uses Lynx and complained about it the last time Google broke Lynx support:

      https://blind.guru/blog/2019-11-25-endofgoogle.html

      1 reply →

RAM-bunctious  2 days ago

I don't feel it's particularly controversial to think that Javascript shouldn't be a requirement to use the internet. This is one step towards making that the case.

  • rgreekguy  2 days ago

    From a normal browser (don't ask me what I mean by that), with its normal/default user agent, Google search does not work without Javascript. I think at all, any more, but at some point I had got rate limited of sorts, after using the search without Javascript for a little, I got a prompt to enable it.

SnuffBox  12 hours ago

I noticed this the other day as I (previously) used an old Firefox UA to get a more simple, streamlined legacy interface. I don't know why they did this.

maltelandwehr  2 days ago

This is more about requiring JavaScript that blocking specific browsers. I think all the new LLM labs (plus all the tools offering SEO services for LLM-based search and answer engines) finally reached a limit of scraping that Google no longer can sustain.

xacky  12 hours ago

Internet Explorer versions below 11 are getting the message too. Impacting those who use legacy Windows versions.

flaptrap  2 days ago

The most efficient way to search is to read the text. Waiting for images to download and then admire them cannot improve that. It looks like Google has lost relevance and is telling us, again.

  • hulitu  1 day ago

    > The most efficient way to search is to read the text.

    "Maybe for you"

    > Waiting for images to download and then admire them cannot improve that.

    "It does improve the way we track you"

    > It looks like Google has lost relevance and is telling us, again.

    They just got patted on the back by regulators in US so they don't give a fsck.

samtheDamned  2 days ago

maybe this is a knee-jerk reaction but I don't see any good reason for this. At it's core Google's job is to take an input and list outputs. The marketshare of people using lynx is small enough that whatever advertising or ai extras they want to squeeze in won't be meaningfully impacted by not working on lynx.

Edit: corrected spelling error

userbinator  2 days ago

I wonder if an Invidious or Nitter-like solution will be coming soon, as no doubt me and countless others, although still a minority, are now truly motivated to do something about it.

These bastards have truly ruined what's left of the open Internet. Google, FUCK YOU!

ChrisArchitect  2 days ago

Related discussion earlier this year:

Google begins requiring JavaScript for Google Search

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42747092

  • TorstenK  1 day ago

    When resources are an issue, this does matter. I use to store previous Lynx/ Links search results in history lists, to allow browsing within local files later. Creating such lists with Firefox is a mess. (This browser tends to block my Thinpad for hours.) Really sad. Google was a key to the internet. Torsten