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

161–170 of 326 posts

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#161

Post by danvittegleo »

voltagex_ wrote: post #146
danvittegleo wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

For sure. I'd love to have this script be able to run standalone as a local build process that would be portable across platforms and only run the AWS specific bits if you passed a flag for example. Anyways, happy to chat - you can shoot me an email dan@vittegleo.com

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#163

Post by bubblethink »

snaky wrote: post #97
bubblethink wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Just bite the bullet and run the 2h compilation process yourself. I don't think that's the best use of everyone's time or energy. Not to mention, it may be more error prone, or even insecure depending on what your base system is like. And you'll have to track updates. It seems like chromium is problematic to build in general. Debian hasn't marked it as reproducible. It is also not clear if it is possible to build it…

> 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

No, that doesn't fix it. It has always been possible to build chromium, just not in a way that meets fdroid's requirements (i.e., build with a foss stack on their debian vm).

This is the most current fdroid issue from what I can tell: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/rfp/issues/378

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#164

Post by eps »

astonex wrote: post #141
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 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.

Is it decoupled from Google?

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#165

Post by h1d »

partiallypro wrote: post #113
mythz wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only iOS forces you to use WebKit which is why it's used by Chrome/Edge/Opera. It's not impossible to decouple them, you're prohibited by the license from using an alternative browser engine. Android doesn't have any such restrictions so Firefox on Android are able to use their Gecko engine.

Thanks for the correction, either way, I view it as a problem that you can't (easily?) decouple in iOS. Some of these browsers listed have no mobile version, at least not ones fully baked. That alone forces people into the hands of the mobile defaults like Chrome and Safari.

> I view it as a problem

What kind of problem? It makes web browsing stable as the internal engine is tested by Apple without third party bringing their own with updates at random moments and from web developer's perspective, they get a predictable result within iOS without effort and from those, I don't see a problem from users' perspective too.

Maybe you work for Mozilla.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#166

Post by jeena »

jyrkesh wrote: post #104
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #55

Anyone know how this differs from https://chromium.woolyss.com who has been building Chromium, for all major platforms, without Google features for years?

I use the woolyss binaries on purpose because they have Chrome Sync support on desktop (which I use for recent tabs and bookmarks). On mobile, no Chrome Sync without the official builds, so I cede all my privacy there. :'(

I use Firefox on mobile and desktop because it is the only browser which lets you to run your own sync server: https://jeena.net/firefox-sync-15

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#167

Post by astonex »

eps wrote: post #164
astonex wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is it decoupled from Google?

Yes there is nothing Google in it. And if you happen to use Naver services, you won't be automatically logged in like Chrome is doing.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#168

Post by astonex »

h1d wrote: post #159
astonex wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Browser is such a security nightmare, how would one want to trust from a random vendor? What is it's selling point?

We're actually the largest tech company in South Korea, not a completely random vendor. We also own LINE messenger which is probably more known.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#169

Post by snaky »

danvittegleo wrote: post #142
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...

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

That's amazing the Chromium is almost 3 times longer to build than AOSP.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#170

Post by sgustard »

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…

I don't "know" as a viewer how ad-based business models work. In fact I generally assume that ads have to be clicked on to make money. Since I haven't clicked on an ad in years, does that make me a freeloader? I'll assume that once eye-tracking is commonplace then publishers will get paid only when viewers look at their ads. If I avert my eyes, am I stealing? On the other hand: why can't an ad-blocker plugin still trigger a payment for the ad view, while preventing me from seeing it?
Post reply on HN