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

Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 326 posts

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#131

Post by lawl »

mythz wrote: post #128
lawl wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi I'm not affiliated with Brave, but IIRC that requires opt-in from both the owner of the user AND the website. So it seems like a bit of a stretch to call it hijacking, when the website, ads are being "hijacked" from needs to opt-in to this.

It blocks ads by default and from all I've read replaces it with their own against publishers wishes: https://www.businessinsider.com/newspaper-publishers-send-ce... https://www.wired.com/2016/04/brave-software-publishers-resp... Where is the opt-in from the website who are getting their ads blocked/replaced?

Brave certainly blocks ads by default, I personally don't see a problem with that. Users can't install adblocker addons in browsers, not much different than downloading an adblocking-by-default browser.

I can't immediately find a source for the publisher opt-in thing. But brave definitely hasn't been doing anything like that in 2016 as your articles suggest, because they only just started now with beta testing brave ads[0]. From my personal testing of brave a couple of times, with the ad opt-in activated, I have also never seen this happening.

And publishers (now) seem willing to join[1].

[0] https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/20/blockchain-browser-brave-s...

[1] https://www.cnet.com/news/ad-blocking-brave-browser-gets-dow...

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#132

Post by mythz »

partiallypro wrote: post #127
mythz wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I really don't get it, Safari is the most dominant browser on iOS and on Android you can use whatever you want - so you never have to use Chrome anywhere.

I'm not sure what you don't get. It's not just about Chrome. Decoupling Google services from Chromium is more than about Chrome itself, it's a backlash against Google and data collection at large. You could just promote Firefox instead of Vivaldi, but you didn't. Why not? I assume because you like choice...and that choice should continue to extend on mobile platforms.

> I'm not sure what you don't get.

Because you're not clear on what exactly your grievances are with Vivalidi/Brave/Opera using the Blink rendering engine and how exactly does using Safari on iOS or Firefox on Android enforce Google data collection?

> It's not just about Chrome. Decoupling Google services from Chromium is more than about Chrome itself, it's a backlash against Google and data collection at large.

You need to read up on what Chromium is, its an Open Source Chromium browser Chrome is built on without Google Services (i.e. what Chrome is). A large differentiator for Vivaldi and Brave is their privacy first browsers that don't track you:

https://vivaldi.com/features/privacy-security/

https://brave.com/features/

> You could just promote Firefox instead of Vivaldi, but you didn't. Why not?

Because the whole premise of the article is for making a modified Chromium browser fork, when they could instead use one of the existing actively developed Chromium browsers founded by browser engineers. I have no issue with Firefox which I use as my secondary browser, but the replacement for my main browser Chrome would need to be another Blink-based browser.

But I still have no idea what the rendering engine used in Mobile browsers has to do with anything.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_(web_browser)

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#133

Post by TangoTrotFox »

mythz wrote: post #123
drb91 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. And it’s my choice to block them. Brave actually offers a way to pay for content, if I understand it correctly.

Sure, you can technically starve them of micro ad revenue if you want, but if you're not going to abide by Content creators implicit contract of having their content served with supporting ads then IMO it's best for all involved that you either subscribe for ad-free content directly from them or just stop consuming their content altogether. There are humans on the other side producing that content, they have as much…

That's more like wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Ad driven "free" material is chosen because it was (and mostly still is) seen to be more profitable than subscription based models. If it's not then the onus of change is not on the consumer to make ads more profitable, but on the producer to find what is.

I'm extremely satisfied that ad blocking is spreading ever more rapidly simply because I think that's the most direct way to get out of this current model of profit that leads to so many awful things. The fundamental problem is that with ad based model your customer is no longer the person actually consuming your material, but the advertiser. That, in turn, introduces 'sponsored' content, ads misleadingly ran as actual content, bias in views presented, external censorship of content to remain in the spirit of the advertiser, extensive tracking and data mining of users, and all these other lovely things. Good riddance.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#135

Post by snaky »

voltagex_ wrote: post #125
snaky wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Various efforts to include chromium or derivatives in Fdroid have failed. Fixed[1] in rattlesnakeos-stack[2] [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/RattlesnakeOS/comments/953dfj/v0025... [2] "A cross platform tool that provisions all of the AWS infrastructure required to build your own privacy focused Android OS on a continuous basis with OTA updates." https://github.com/dan-v/rattlesnakeos-stack

Heh, I wonder how much that costs. You certainly don't want to be building the whole Android tree on the free tier. Edit: that's really well done - https://github.com/dan-v/rattlesnakeos-stack#how-much-does-t...

Yes, that's well done. But it would be nice to port RattlesnakeOS build system from AWS to e.g. Nextcloud - because you pay for your Nextcloud VPS anyway, most of the time it's doing nothing, and most of the time you don't really care would it build in 2 hours or 2 days.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#136

Post by TangoTrotFox »

mythz wrote: post #128
lawl wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi I'm not affiliated with Brave, but IIRC that requires opt-in from both the owner of the user AND the website. So it seems like a bit of a stretch to call it hijacking, when the website, ads are being "hijacked" from needs to opt-in to this.

It blocks ads by default and from all I've read replaces it with their own against publishers wishes: https://www.businessinsider.com/newspaper-publishers-send-ce... https://www.wired.com/2016/04/brave-software-publishers-resp... Where is the opt-in from the website who are getting their ads blocked/replaced?

Check out the browser. By default no ads are shown. Everything is opt-in at all levels.

The idea is to remove the coercion from ads. Users will earn 70% of all gross ad revenue. The remaining 30% will be split between publisher and the browser.

Users can get paid to tolerate ads, or they can choose to see no ads. If users see ads then users, the browser, and sites all earn money. If they don't then nobody earns money and they get to experience an ad free internet.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#138

Post by swang »

brownbat wrote: post #124
mythz wrote: post #84

My preference for a well supported Chromium-based browser that's not Chrome would be to use one of the "Blink" based browsers: https://vivaldi.com https://brave.com https://www.opera.com Opera was purchased by a Chinese consortium, I'm not a fan of Brave's hijacking of ad spaces so my preference is currently vivaldi - which was founded by co-founder and former CEO of Opera and has been adding new innovative features…

Just installed Vivaldi. Wow. Thanks. You can hold shift to select multiple tabs and then do all these operations, like mute them all, group them, display them tiled... and I feel like I'm just scratching the surface. It feels like the last time there was a big feature competition between all the browsers. Feature snapshots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4wyvKMRVeY&list=PL72e6dBabY...

you can do this in chrome though...

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#139

Post by mythz »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #133
mythz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, you can technically starve them of micro ad revenue if you want, but if you're not going to abide by Content creators implicit contract of having their content served with supporting ads then IMO it's best for all involved that you either subscribe for ad-free content directly from them or just stop consuming their content altogether. There are humans on the other side producing that content, they have as much…

That's more like wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Ad driven "free" material is chosen because it was (and mostly still is) seen to be more profitable than subscription based models. If it's not then the onus of change is not on the consumer to make ads more profitable, but on the producer to find what is. I'm extremely satisfied that ad blocking is spreading ever more rapidly simply because I think that's th…

> That's more like wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

What cake and eat it too? There is just Content producers producing content that they want to be compensated for and the industry agreed upon best way to do that for serving a mainstream audience is to publish free content with supporting ads.

> the onus of change is not on the consumer to make ads more profitable, but on the producer to find what is.

Wait so instead of doing what they're good at, content producers should individually be tasked with investing their resources in experimenting with different economic models to try find a viable alternative to serving content without ads? The sites with a large enough content catalog are already doing this with subscriptions, some others are using patreon, consider utilizing their ad-free content alternative when available instead of cutting off their only revenue source.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#140

Post by voltagex_ »

snaky wrote: post #135
voltagex_ wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, I wonder how much that costs. You certainly don't want to be building the whole Android tree on the free tier. Edit: that's really well done - https://github.com/dan-v/rattlesnakeos-stack#how-much-does-t...

Yes, that's well done. But it would be nice to port RattlesnakeOS build system from AWS to e.g. Nextcloud - because you pay for your Nextcloud VPS anyway, most of the time it's doing nothing, and most of the time you don't really care would it build in 2 hours or 2 days.

I don't know enough Go - but it'd be awesome to port it to packet.net in particular for the 24 core Epyc boxes.

Most people's VPS won't have enough RAM to run the Android builld process.

Post reply on HN