Live data from Hacker News

Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

github.com

141–150 of 326 posts

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#141
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 to add my company's browser too, http://whale.naver.com/

Chromium-based, actively developed, and has Android+iOS browsers. You can use chrome extensions with it too.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#142
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...

I actually recently added a feature to search for the cheapest spot instance price across a number of different regions. Right now for example the cheapest price for the instance type used c5.4xlarge is ~$0.15/hour in us-east-2. This equates to a full AOSP build with Chromium build included (~5.25 hours) costing $0.80 and without Chromium (~1.75 hours) costing $0.30

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#143
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…

[deleted]

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#144
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you were looking to just do something similar but running on another platform, knowledge of Go isn't required. The core build process is a shell script, which just has some variables injected through Go templates: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dan-v/rattlesnakeos-stack/...

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#145
post #123
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…

> There are humans on the other side producing that content, they have as much right for being compensated for their efforts as we do.

They have a right to ask for compensation, and a right to require it. They have no right to be compensated, if they choose to give away the content for free. That would be saying they have a right to force people to be generous.

Whining about ad-blockers is simply being manipulative, it's trying to guilt-trip people into abandoning their self interest for free. The implicit social contract of the Web, the way HTTP protocol and Web browsers were designed, is precisely what allows for ad-blocking. Browsers are user agents, and what you send in response to a HTTP request is mine to render how I like. Publishers have a proper, correct way to ensure compensation on the Web - it's called a paywall. I pay, then I get content. But they prefer ads, because it's easier. It's easier to bleed people out of their sanity (and privacy) than to ask for money. It's easier not having to write quality content that would be worth paying for. But that's a choice publishers make.

This is the most important point: nobody is entitled to their business model working. If ads aren't working for you, change your business model.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you were looking to just do something similar but running on another platform, knowledge of Go isn't required. The core build process is a shell script, which just has some variables injected through Go templates: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dan-v/rattlesnakeos-stack/...

I'd definitely like to talk to you further about this - it still looks like there's a lot of hardcoded AWS stuff in there, and your terraform code assumes AWS, but it's super cool - thanks.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#147

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...

I actually recently added a feature to search for the cheapest spot instance price across a number of different regions. Right now for example the cheapest price for the instance type used c5.4xlarge is ~$0.15/hour in us-east-2. This equates to a full AOSP build with Chromium build included (~5.25 hours) costing $0.80 and without Chromium (~1.75 hours) costing $0.30

How do you handle spot instances being shut down mid-build? Can you recover any built artifacts before the system goes down? IIRC you get a 2 minute warning.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#148
post #134

Why does this add various flags an knobs to disable ipv6? Disabling ipv6 has nothing to do with de-googling Chrome. What is it with people disabling rather than fixing their ipv6 config (and then possibly complaining about slow adoption)?

Are you refering to `--set-ipv6-probe-false`? This change might be motivated by the probe sending a request to a Google-owned IPv6 address.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#149
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you don't really care would the build take 2 hours or 2 days, using swap on SSD might solve the RAM problem.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#150
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> What cake and eat it too? There is just Content producers producing content that they want to be compensated for

And I want to be compensated for writing HN comments. Alas, just because I want to be compensated for something, doesn't mean I will be. Content producers feeling entitled to compensation for their free and public content are kind of forgetting the content consumers have agency too.

> and the industry agreed upon best way to do that for serving a mainstream audience is to publish free content with supporting ads.

Just because it works, doesn't mean it's not wrong. Just because it worked for now, doesn't mean it'll keep on working. Nobody is entitled to their business model working forever, or at all.

> 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?

Yes. They have the content, and want to exchange it for money. It's literally their job to figure out how to do this.

> The sites with a large enough content catalog are already doing this with subscriptions, some others are using patreon

Good. As it should be.

> consider utilizing their ad-free content alternative when available instead of cutting off their only revenue source.

Again, not my responsibility. Especially given that the social contract of the Web is, by design, that if your server responds with 200 OK + data, I get to render that data however I like.

Post reply on HN