Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 441 posts

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#361

Post by hrez »

hrez wrote: post #359
nikcub wrote: post #208

Removing Google's binary blobs is mitigating one issue, but replacing it with an entire binary blog from an anonymous github user might be introducing new ones. On that note - can you tell us more about the project? ie. if you plan on keeping this updated long terms (i've watched a lot of promising chromium forks fade after an initial big splash), what your plans are, if you'll you accept contributions, how the binar…

"Anonymous github user" part is very true. I am not about to install random binaries from the internet. I wish there was reputable org behind the builds. I'll stick with google binaries unless somebody knows a good alternative.

Down the thread somebody mentioned Iridium project. That looks way more trustworthy https://iridiumbrowser.de

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#362

Post by petre »

echelon wrote: post #82

Is there a decent alternative to Chrome on Android? I am absolutely, nauseatingly sick of ads on mobile. Almost every news website I visit fills the browser with full screen ads that are infuriatingly difficult to close, change the scrolling behavior and viewport in an entirely unusable way, or try to launch Google Play Store links in the background. It's so annoying, and definitely to the point of being one of my to…

I'm using Opera. It has an integrated ad blocker. I also use a 4Mb hosts file to block ads and malware domains, but you need to root your phone in order to install that.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#363

Post by amyjess »

bad_user wrote: post #333
amyjess wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add this to the fact that Edge is still the only browser on Windows that's suitable for use on a device with a touchscreen, and it's downright insulting. I have Chrome on my Surface. I choose to use Edge instead because Chrome is unusable without my Type Cover plugged in, and I'm not doing that while laying on the couch. Hey Google, want me to use Chrome on my Surface? Then give me the Android version of Chrome runni…

If you ask me, insulting is having a desktop OS pretending to also work on tablets and releasing that to consumers. You can't blame companies for not releasing apps that can work in tablet mode. It takes time, because that's basically like developing for a whole new OS. And Microsoft could do it because they are the ones developing the freaking OS.

I very specifically got my Surface for a road trip where I needed a device that would be a fully-functional laptop in my hotel room but would be comfortable for reading comic books (and other things) on while sitting in the back seat of a car for hours on end.

Windows tablets were my only option. An Android tablet (or an iPad) might work fine in the car, but it would make a terrible laptop in the hotel room, and a conventional laptop would be unusable in the car.

After my road trip, my Surface found continued use as my couch computer, effectively replacing my phone. Honestly, as long as I have a web browser that works I don't need much else. Edge works; it might be more minimalistic than I like, but the vast majority of what I want to do with a computer on my couch is satisfied by Edge. Oh, and the Facebook app for Windows 10 is awesome. It's everything I've wanted out of the Android app, which has been a constant disappointment for me.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#364

Post by alphapapa »

tracker1 wrote: post #161
alphapapa wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to agree with you: Firefox is definitely more user-focused than Chrome or Chromium. However, Firefox's user-centric development model has been declining for years now as Mozilla has grown and become accustomed to raking in hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Mozilla has been actively imitating Chrome for some time now. It is becoming less unique. Mozilla's future plans for Firefox continue to make it les…

XUL failed... and while I really appreciate what XUL (and even XULrunner) offered, nobody really used it much in practice. XPCOM while interesting wasn't very widely used either... Neither got traction outside the Mozilla sphere of software dev. I would actually love to see some more work on creating consistent extension APIs so that a single add-on is easier to write against the big 4. I know that FF is caving in fa…

> XUL failed... and while I really appreciate what XUL (and even XULrunner) offered, nobody really used it much in practice. XPCOM while interesting wasn't very widely used either... Neither got traction outside the Mozilla sphere of software dev.

Whether it "failed" is entirely a matter of perspective. From my perspective it has been a wild success, providing a flexible, powerful foundation for Firefox and Thunderbird, as well as some other projects. It enabled Firefox to be the most powerful, customizable browser by empowering extension developers to meet users' needs.

So, no, it has not failed. What has happened is that a new generation of Mozilla developers has arisen who are not enamored with the old code. They don't want to work on it; they want to make something new and shiny, users and extension developers be damned.

Just like all the OS vendors went for flat UI in a mindless herd mentality, so Mozilla is following Google and mindlessly imitating Chrome--first in UI, now in architecture. Then in 5-10 years (if Mozilla is still around), another generation of programmers will come up and want to throw out that baby as well. Meanwhile, browsing web pages will still be browsing web pages, and users will have to waste time on useless churn.

> It's not just "the voice" of the community... it's millions of voices screaming for different things, and those stearing paying attention to the majority for most of them.

Firefox did not dethrone IE by paying attention to a majority of screaming voices. It led the way with a vision of empowering users to take control of their web browser, going against the commercial, corporate grain.

Mozilla is no longer leading, but following, chasing, like a jilted lover who pines, "Please, don't go with Chrome, come back, I can be like Chrome too!" What they don't understand is that, if they act like Chrome, there will be no reason to go with Firefox.

What will attract users is a strong, unique browser that knows what it wants to be, that takes care of and empowers its users--in contrast to a browser project dominated by an enormous corporation which profits from exploiting its users. Only when Mozilla groks this will it turn around and reverse its decline.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#366

Post by diggan »

swsieber wrote: post #350
odbol_ wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPFS already has a peer-to-peer chat room that can share messages, files, and streaming videos without a central server . This means users have a way to share content without worrying that it could fall into the wrong hands or be censored by big entities like corporations or governments. And it all depends on tech like WebRTC. That kind of infrastructure is crucial to the freedom of information and therefore the free…

I would be interesting to make a browser where these things are by default unloaded plugins with the ability to detect when they are needed. Then the best of both worlds are present... no? Some people wish they didn't have to pay the costs for these things because they never use them.

I think you would like Beaker Browser (https://github.com/pfrazee/beaker) that comes with out-of-the-box support for normal HTTP, Dat and IPFS

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#367

Post by craigsmansion »

magicalist wrote: post #360
craigsmansion wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm afraid that's my clumsy phrasing. 1st Chrome release: 2008-09-02 1st Chromium release: Dec 17th, 2012 So even though current Chrome might be based on Chromium, Chromium was initially derived from Chrome. That means somewhere down the line someone at Google must have suggested making a free version, probably out of enthusiasm for open source, and even though it buys Google little, the project was okay'ed. I have n…

> 1st Chrome release: 2008-09-02 > 1st Chromium release: Dec 17th, 2012 > So even though current Chrome might be based on Chromium, Chromium was initially derived from Chrome. Not sure where you got that second date, but Chromium was definitely released the same day as Chrome: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2008/09/google...

https://www.chromium.org/developers/calendar "previous release information"

but obviously, I stand corrected.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#368

Post by groby_b »

fandango wrote: post #284
groby_b wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since I work on Chromium, I kind of care about this... We're still an open source project. We still take a lot of external contributions, as far as I know. Can you point to concrete cases where Chromium has not taken contributions (without giving a good reason, that is)?

It's probably hard to point out a specific case, but I think the biggest objection is that most Chromium developers have a tight connection with Google (if not employees anyway). They have mostly incentive to keep their employer happy. Google keeps the shareholders happy and they just want more money. (At the cost of privacy or open standards for example). Now this may be a simplified view, since this may apply to an…

It's a simplified view :)

The team works really hard both on privacy and on open standards. But let's set that aside for a moment: There are many other companies contributing as well. (Opera, Samsung, Intel pop out when I just browse through the commit logs, but I'm sure I'm missing more).

And you as an individual, are free to contribute as well. We welcome OSS devs who want to help make Chrome better. Send me a ping if you ever get stuck, should you choose to contribute.

Yes, the project does not accept all changes. We can't, and no OSS project can. Some don't make sense ("Render all text blinking!" ;), some don't work for what the general idea for Chromium is ("Let's remove JS!"). But in general, the team tries to be accommodating when somebody wants to land a change.

I can understand when people say "Hey, Mozilla aligns more with what I want, I'll contribute there". It's awesome. You should work on something you believe in, and I'm glad you've found a project that works for you.

But Chromium is certainly happy to accept contributions, contrary to what the OP said.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#369

Post by khedoros »

SimeVidas wrote: post #356
khedoros wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A subset of the tiles are paid advertisements. "Completely harmless" depends on your point of view. Personally, if I have a choice, I'll opt for the browser that doesn't show me "sponsored content" on first boot, just out of principle.

IIRC, the sponsored tiles only appeared on new installations and they weren’t targeting the user (i.e. the user’s privacy wasn’t compromised). I dunno, I remember reading about this and thinking how meaningless it really is and how grotesque the negative response is.

People overreact. When I saw that, I sighed and went on with my day. I consider unsolicited advertisements an unconditional negative, and for Mozilla to say that they included them because they think I'd like to see them is mildly offensive. I've got some similes in mind, but they all seem too over-dramatic.

Mozilla's done a few other things that I mildly dislike, and they tend to clump together in my mind. Nothing that's a big deal, but enough that I usually keep a copy of Pale Moon on the machines I use most often.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#370

Post by ux-app »

nathancahill wrote: post #330
ux-app wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

unfortunately for Firefox, performance issues are a case of death by a thousand cuts. Here's a product that I'm working on https://www.ux-app.com/dev/editor?m=trial In Chrome it's buttery smooth on any decent computer made in the past 5 or 6 years. In Firefox it's usable on a powerful computer, but notably worse than Chrome. On an under powered laptop Chrome is still very usable, not quite 60fps, but probably 30-40fp…

Impressive app.

Thanks :)
Post reply on HN