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

371–380 of 441 posts

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

#371

Post by vardump »

rplnt wrote: post #342
eriknstr wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>removing dev tools Hold your horses! The introduction of dev tools was one of the best things to happen to browsers. Removing them would take away opportunity from a lot of people in learning web development, and would also lead to websites having more bugs.

You can hardly see source in Chrome without the dev tools. The Ctrl+U "functionality" just generates huge HTML document (a table filled with spans to highlight syntax) and it is very slow on large websites (both generating it and rendering I'd assume).

I'm using Chrome and pressed Ctrl-U. Nothing happened. What was supposed to happen?

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

#372

Post by BrendanEich »

stephenr wrote: post #166
smsm42 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eich resigned because his political views made it difficult for him to continue doing his job. This is a very disingenuous way of describing it. More proper way to describe it would be that a group of political activists put pressure on Mozilla to fire Eich because of his political views, for political reasons, and Mozilla as organization caved. There was no instance of Eich's views ever influencing anything on his…

He resigned, stating that it's because he "couldn't manage effectively". Basically: the staff didn't respect him. As I said elsewhere, if you can't get yourself out of a situation like that, you probably don't have the chops to be CEO of the organisation anyway.

Pay attention: I said "... under the present circumstances, I cannot be an effective leader." (https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2014/04/faq-on-ceo-resignatio...).

I did not say "the staff doesn't respect me". That would have been a lie.

Why don't you comment on things that you know about directly, or even just on reliable testimony?

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

#373

Post by BrendanEich »

byuu wrote: post #65
hartator wrote: post #46

Firefox is not really a good company anymore, they care more about politics than doing something awesome. Cf. the firing of their CEO.

He was not fired. Straight from Mozilla themselves: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat... "On April 3, 2014 Brendan Eich voluntarily stepped down as CEO of Mozilla." He could have stayed if he wanted to. Yes, it would have hurt their brand if he did, and yes it should have. Because yes, I and many others care very much if the CEO of a product donates to strip a minority of equal rights. Than…

Why don't you link to our past interactions on HN? Here's a last in thread link, so people can read up:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10660792

Hey, weren't you in Ohio the whole time, and not subject to California law in any event? Federal tax forms are not bound by California law. Nor are Ohio tax laws.

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

#374

Post by markman »

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…

What are your thoughts or impression of OPERA? It has private browsing etc.

They really restructured their whole browser several years ago specifically to switch to the chromium platform. I apologize I didn't mean to butt in I was just curious.

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

#375

Post by stephenr »

BrendanEich wrote: post #372
stephenr wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He resigned, stating that it's because he "couldn't manage effectively". Basically: the staff didn't respect him. As I said elsewhere, if you can't get yourself out of a situation like that, you probably don't have the chops to be CEO of the organisation anyway.

Pay attention: I said "... under the present circumstances, I cannot be an effective leader." ( https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2014/04/faq-on-ceo-resignatio... ). I did not say "the staff doesn't respect me". That would have been a lie. Why don't you comment on things that you know about directly, or even just on reliable testimony?

It's called reading between the lines. "I cannot be an effective leader" is pretty vague and given your prior support which was then publicised by Mozilla staff, it's pretty easy to imagine that they did not respect you.

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

#376

Post by justratsinacoat »

vardump wrote: post #371
rplnt wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can hardly see source in Chrome without the dev tools. The Ctrl+U "functionality" just generates huge HTML document (a table filled with spans to highlight syntax) and it is very slow on large websites (both generating it and rendering I'd assume).

I'm using Chrome and pressed Ctrl-U. Nothing happened. What was supposed to happen?

Usually, a new tab opens whose address is "view-source:$URL_OF_PREV_PAGE". Obviously, it's not terribly hard to replicate by hand, but that's weird. As has been said since the days of old, "it worked on my machine".

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

#377

Post by AgentME »

majewsky wrote: post #301
AgentME wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a few months now, Bank of America's site has been including a giant alert at the top suggesting that I use a supported browser, such as Firefox, Chrome, or IE. ... Except I'm already using Firefox. I'm not customizing the user agent or anything.

Maybe their regex checks for Firefox on Windows and you're on some other OS?

Oh, that's probably it. I'm on Linux.

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

#378

Post by BrendanEich »

stephenr wrote: post #375
BrendanEich wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay attention: I said "... under the present circumstances, I cannot be an effective leader." ( https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2014/04/faq-on-ceo-resignatio... ). I did not say "the staff doesn't respect me". That would have been a lie. Why don't you comment on things that you know about directly, or even just on reliable testimony?

It's called reading between the lines. "I cannot be an effective leader" is pretty vague and given your prior support which was then publicised by Mozilla staff, it's pretty easy to imagine that they did not respect you.

First you misquote me and add your own words against me not justified by facts in evidence. Now you say it is just "reading between the lines."

Reading between your lines, I see malice and mendacity. Have you a better excuse?

I remember a blog post by @tofumatt, flip-flopping from pro- before to con- after I left. That is neither "staff" (plural) nor "Basically: the staff didn't respect him" evidence. It's a post from one person, who was not inside the room with C-level and board members, which assumed the worst: that I couldn't figure out how to lie my way through the crisis, so clearly didn't merit CEO. I can produce multiple others who supported me all the way from appointment to well past exit, including @christi3k and @lsblakk.

But really, what's your point? You weren't even at Mozilla, whether on the outside of the C-suite or on the inside. To assert "Basically, ..." as you did stinks of malice and mendacity. There's a five letter word for someone who assumes the worst about out-group members in advance of facts, who finds it "pretty easy to imagine" the worst of adversaries. It starts with "B" and ends with "T".

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

#379

Post by eatbitseveryday »

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…

Two years ago a Chrome dev commented on these points[1] and claimed that Chrome "does not spy on you" and that the only binary blobs are codecs and a PDF reader, not any other secret browser code. He/she states the fear is misplaced and unwarranted. Any thoughts on this?

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/comments/1xsxjv/best_browser...

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

#380

Post by vog »

Spakman wrote: post #255
vog wrote: post #220

My only issue is that GotoMeeting doesn't work with Chromium, only with Chrome. Otherwise I would already have removed Chrome a long time ago.

The GoToMeeting web client works in Chromium on Arch for me. Perhaps it's worth another go?

I retry GoToMeeting wtih Chromium from time to time, using Debian/Testing just to be sure it isn't too old. Still, no luck. Most parts of the page do work, but there is no audio.
Post reply on HN