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

No to Chrome

notochrome.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 319 posts

Re: No to Chrome

#251

Post by monkeynotes »

nine_k wrote: post #99
monkeynotes wrote: post #91

Losing Chrome doesn't necessarily stop you being tracked. If you make a vacuum it will be filled by someone else. I am not suggesting apathy but opting out just makes holes for someone else to fill. And as we have seen in the past competition is great but it quickly gets amalgamated behind the scenes, just look at the alcohol industry. All those brands look like healthy competition, but it's largely one parent compan…

The logic is simpler. The makers of Firefox (and apparently Safari) do have an incentive to keep your privacy. The makers of Chrome have an incentive to keep you tracked. So it's not the technology, it's business models. (Basically it's the rude awakening to TANSTAAFL.)

What I am hearing is it's not right/fair/moral for businesses to compete with personal data as their primary asset. The proposed solution is for a small subsect of the technical elite to walk away. That really, really does not solve anything except an individual's problem.

The solution is to put pressure on legislators to prevent companies like Google and Facebook trading your data to fund their business. This could result in Google/Facebook charging for their services, and maybe that's a really good thing. People would have to think about how much social media means to them and not ignore the hidden cost of their privacy.

Re: No to Chrome

#252

Post by vxNsr »

saagarjha wrote: post #32

Their browsers website ( https://notochrome.org/find-a-new-browser/ ) makes it somewhat difficult to understand that Firefox is also available as an option on macOS and iOS. Plus it has a link to Midori that looks like it's been taken over by scam.

The midori thing is weird... the page appears to be unfinished, checking wayback archive shows that the whole project went through a rough patch and is likely on life support if even alive anymore. for a while the homepage was regular wordpress blog feed. sometime at the start of this year they updated it to its current state. They also claim to have merged with the Astian Foundation, but that website also appears unfinished, with lorem ipsum throughout and a gmail email address.

Re: No to Chrome

#253

Post by cpeterso »

jm4 wrote: post #143
rusk wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Originally” if I recall correctly, Chrome was a fork of firefox right? That is a long time ago though!

Nope. It was a fork of WebKit which was a fork of KHTML, the engine powering Konqueror. KHTML was developed by the KDE team. Edit: It was widely speculated that Apple would use gecko for Safari and a shock when they announced they would use the relatively little known KHTML engine. The decision was based on KHTML having much cleaner code. I haven't looked at the Mozilla code in many years, but it was pretty gnarly ba…

Ken Kocienda's book "Creative Selection: Inside Apple's Design Process During the Golden Age of Steve Jobs" has more details about the Safari team's evaluation of Mozilla code and KHTML. Ken was engineer #2 on the Safari team.

Re: No to Chrome

#254

Post by jakelazaroff »

Karunamon wrote: post #131
jakelazaroff wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But on the other hand, it prevents malicious extensions from exfiltrating your browsing data.

A powered off computer is completely unhackable. This idea of removing usability in the name of safety has gone way, way too far. It was crap when Mozilla did it, it's crap when Apple does it.

Privacy is half the point of an ad blocker. I don’t think it’s ridiculous to enforce privacy constraints on something that ostensibly protects your privacy.

Re: No to Chrome

#255

Post by StacyRoberts »

I've never installed chrome unless I had to to test and fix a bug in it. I always use ff except on my android phone. By the second out third click ff crashed on my android phone. It makes me so sad that I can't use it on my phone.

It makes me so happy that people are finally realizing how evil Google is and pushing to end them.

They are so bad.

Re: No to Chrome

#256

Post by StacyRoberts »

oefrha wrote: post #137
azdv wrote: post #76

Interesting, I just moved back to Firefox after many years of using Chrome. I have to admit, it has gotten a lot faster recently, Firefox sync is working very well, and the Firefox Android app is a pleasure to use (being able to install uBlock origin is a huge plus). Anything else I missed on Chrome was easily solved by an addon, or a small tweak on userChrome.css (customizing the browser interface by overriding its…

I can’t solve highlighting search results in the scroll bar, and apparently I search a surprising amount and am absolutely crippled without scroll bar highlighting, so I’ll stick to Chrome until I can’t (e.g. when content blocking is crippled).

Super evil Corp is evil but this one feature is overrides all that so I choose them.

Really? That's not true. That's not why. That is not worth it. That math does not work out.

Re: No to Chrome

#257

Post by martokus »

aethros wrote: post #227
oefrha wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t solve highlighting search results in the scroll bar, and apparently I search a surprising amount and am absolutely crippled without scroll bar highlighting, so I’ll stick to Chrome until I can’t (e.g. when content blocking is crippled).

I use chrome strictly for work nowadays. Hard to beat its speed and search features, like you mentioned. I'm mostly just visiting stack overflow, git repos, the occasional random site from a google search. I don't login anywhere (including the browser itself) I don't need to for work, I don't use any extensions, and I don't mix work with personal stuff. For anything not work however, Firefox all the way. Keep the dat…

This. I've tried using FF for work as well but given I work a lot with Google web properties, Firefox is just a drag there. Don't know if Google's deliberately slowing it down or what but there's a very solid performance difference there.

Re: No to Chrome

#258

Post by pyython »

Switching to Brave has worked out great for me. All of my extensions work, browsing experience is almost exactly the same, etc. I love the built-in privacy features (Tor is a keyboard shortcut away!). The one issue that I've run into is that the built-in ad blocker is a little aggressive sometimes to the point where it breaks page functionality. At those times, I just deactivate it for that page and go about my business.

Re: No to Chrome

#259

Post by nytesky »

Is there anyway to do multiple profiles on iOS firefox or any non-chrome browsers? That is one feature I will miss from Chrome on iOS.

And honestly, the profile manager on Firefox is annoying, since you have to start from command line to access and it can't run multiple instances/profiles in parallel.

Re: No to Chrome

#260

Post by Analemma_ »

nytesky wrote: post #259

Is there anyway to do multiple profiles on iOS firefox or any non-chrome browsers? That is one feature I will miss from Chrome on iOS. And honestly, the profile manager on Firefox is annoying, since you have to start from command line to access and it can't run multiple instances/profiles in parallel.

The profile manager is annoying, but at least for me, Containers do about 95% of what I used profiles for, and they are much more manageable: you can right-click a link and use "Open in new container".
Post reply on HN