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

171–180 of 326 posts

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#171

Post by h1d »

ReverseCold wrote: post #111
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…

Note that Vivaldi is closed source. If you're looking for open source only, consider Firefox.

For projects large like a browser, not sure how having everything open sourced helps users. No one can audit it well enough anyway. Only track record can tell its security and stability.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#172

Post by theNextEpisode »

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…

Thanks for this, what do you use for password syncing?

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#173

Post by nambit »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #136
mythz wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yeah but brave controls all these levers.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#174

Post by dbdjfjrjvebd »

mythz wrote: post #102
drb91 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re monetizing with ads, you’ve already lost control of your revenue.

Whatever monetization strategy Websites choose to fund their content is up to them. If ads are the best way to support free content then that should be their choice.

Fine. BUT sites should be responsible for the ads running on their site and held financially or criminally responsible. Adtech is infested with intrusive tracking which is legally dubious in my jurisdiction. To say nothing of the security implications of allowing random unvetted transient 3rd parties to run code. At this point I see a good content blocker as a security measure more than an ad blocker.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#175

Post by lucb1e »

lettergram wrote: post #7

You could always switch to Firefox and use something like fastmail or protonmail. Did that a year ago, and actually it works better on mobile imo

What does email have to do with switching browsers? Last I heard Gmail also works on Firefox.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#176

Post by h1d »

sandov wrote: post #72
tdb7893 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem for me is that no one I know has a mac (I think their market share is like 10 percent). It's too expensive for many of the people I know and the rest play video games so they can't use a mac.

And in this forum, I would guess the OS being proprietary is a deal braker for many, including me.

That is a pure assumption. I don't use Linux for desktop.

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#179

Post by orionblastar »

Zarel wrote: post #105
orionblastar wrote: post #80

What about SWARE Iron? https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php It is supposed to be the version of Chromium without the Google crap, right? I use it at times to test it out as I test out different websites on different browsers. They have it for different platforms: https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_download.php

SRWare Iron is a scam: http://www.insanitybit.com/2012/06/23/srware-iron-browser-a-... Basically any other privacy-oriented Chromium fork would be better. Iridium seems nice?

Thank you I did not know. Someone recommended it to me one day as an alternative to Chrome.

Iridium is this the one? https://iridiumbrowser.de/

Re: Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google integration

#180

Post by snaky »

bubblethink wrote: post #163
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

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

That's sad Chromium cannot being built without binary Google blobs for now, but that would be much better to have Chromium (ungoogled) in f-droid - with a 'anti-feature' sign - than to not have it at all.
Post reply on HN