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

UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 441 posts

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#321

Post by Karunamon »

kuschku wrote: post #292
Karunamon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This probably got downvoted for snark, but it's true. The worst Chrome might do is help Google target ads better (if you don't change the defaults). The worst Firefox might do is get your machine pwned.

> The worst Chrome might do is help Google target ads better (if you don't change the defaults). Chrome is the one running any x86 binary the website presents it with, only trying to run a static verification that it won't do anything evil. Chrome is far more at risk of pwning you (and NaCl sandbox breakouts have been quite common).

You mean "the website" which is accessed over HTTPS and more likely than not has its key pinned internally?

Point is, Chrome falls every year at Pwn2Own just like every other browser, but only Firefox has been excluded because it's too easy.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#322

Post by trimbo »

nathancahill wrote: post #5

Great start. Although I think we need to reverse the trend of Chrome becoming the single browser web developers use. The amount of sites that unnecessarily[0] work only in Chrome is growing daily. And that's not even counting browser extensions. I think this, more than anything else, will determine if Chrome becomes the "Internet Explorer"[1] of this decade or not. Skipping testing in IE is one thing. Skipping testin…

> Skipping testing in IE is one thing. Skipping testing in Firefox is a sin

By most measures, an equal or larger number of people use IE than Firefox.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#323

Post by bobajeff »

koolba wrote: post #280

Is there a browser build or plugin extension that has a separate cookie jar for each tab that follows the tab? My ideal browser has zero persistence and each tab maintains its own cookies. Links opened as new tabs would share the parent's cookie jar, but separate tabs loaded to the same page could both be logged in at the same time.

Firefox is working on Container Tabs feature and similarly Brave has Partitioned Tabs feature.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#324

Post by rotten »

Zarkaos wrote: post #281
koolba wrote: post #280

Is there a browser build or plugin extension that has a separate cookie jar for each tab that follows the tab? My ideal browser has zero persistence and each tab maintains its own cookies. Links opened as new tabs would share the parent's cookie jar, but separate tabs loaded to the same page could both be logged in at the same time.

I think you'll love ghost browser ;) https://ghostbrowser.com/

Interesting, I can open that page in Chrome, but when I go to open it with Vivaldi, I get a 403.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#325

Post by erikpukinskis »

nikcub wrote: post #208

Removing Google's binary blobs is mitigating one issue, but replacing it with an entire binary blog from an anonymous github user might be introducing new ones. On that note - can you tell us more about the project? ie. if you plan on keeping this updated long terms (i've watched a lot of promising chromium forks fade after an initial big splash), what your plans are, if you'll you accept contributions, how the binar…

> a lighter browser (without canvas, webgl, webrtc etc.)

Please do not do this. Webgl and Webrtc are fundamental technologies needed to efficiently do basic activities like process an image or send sound data to another user.

I am all for a "lighter" browser, by removing UI, removing dev tools, etc. Get rid of the stuff that's not required to make a web page work well. But WebGL and WebRTC are cornerstone technologies for the web to thrive. WebRTC is critical for allowing open source software to thrive in particular (allows apps that don't need a central server) and WebGL is critical in particular for web software to compete in the AR/VR age. We need 100% browser support on these two APIs, and we need it yesterday.

I realize these technologies are not currently doing anything for you. I sympathize. But we need them in browsers now so that we can use them in 10 years.

Please, please, please jetsam other parts of the ship before you cut those features.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#326

Post by ptomato »

byuu wrote: post #291
ptomato wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then you're basically saying that the entire board and Eich himself are liars. I see that the board claim he was not asked by the board to resign. You can differentiate I guess between "You see which way the wind is blowing, better do what needs to be done" and "Resign or we'll fire you" but that's really a distinction without a difference and would seamlessly segue into the other state, I expect. > but it would co…

> I see that the board claim he was not asked by the board to resign. Well, you're free to your own opinions (and conspiracies), but not to your own facts. Preface your statements with, "I believe he was secretly (fired)", and that's fair enough. But us arguing about it without any evidence is basically Russell's Teapot. > Can you cite an instance of apologizing quelling an outrage mob? It would have certainly worked…

> It would have certainly worked here

So no, you can't cite an example?

> "I believe he was secretly (fired)"

I see no reason to believe that what both the board and Eich are claiming is technically false. If you define "fired" to include "you know where this is going, get out now and save some face by resigning" then yes, sure, I believe he was secretly fired.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#327

Post by striking »

RandomlyGen wrote: post #311
striking wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not extreme at all. All you have to do is install a distro with a good packaging system. Arch is wonderful, and I've heard good things about Void and Gentoo. Imagine a package system where you could ask to download node.js, and you'll get the latest version. And that's it. Better yet, imagine having to build a package from source and installing it. You could do it by hand, leaving orphan files all over your syst…

There's literally nothing special about arch or pacman. It's just like any other package manager with newer packages.

You're right. It's just that the people who manage packages for those distros are actually sane. I can't believe people are still on kernel 4.4, or nodejs 0.10, or whatever.

Although there is something special about the PKGBUILD ports system. Here's how a well-behaved open source package is built: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/.... And here's how Arch Linux's kernel is built: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/P...

It's pretty fantastic. And it means that if a package isn't available in the repos or on the AUR, you can package it yourself in less than an hour.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#328

Post by eriknstr »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #325
nikcub wrote: post #208

Removing Google's binary blobs is mitigating one issue, but replacing it with an entire binary blog from an anonymous github user might be introducing new ones. On that note - can you tell us more about the project? ie. if you plan on keeping this updated long terms (i've watched a lot of promising chromium forks fade after an initial big splash), what your plans are, if you'll you accept contributions, how the binar…

> a lighter browser (without canvas, webgl, webrtc etc.) Please do not do this. Webgl and Webrtc are fundamental technologies needed to efficiently do basic activities like process an image or send sound data to another user. I am all for a "lighter" browser, by removing UI, removing dev tools, etc. Get rid of the stuff that's not required to make a web page work well. But WebGL and WebRTC are cornerstone technologie…

>removing dev tools

Hold your horses! The introduction of dev tools was one of the best things to happen to browsers. Removing them would take away opportunity from a lot of people in learning web development, and would also lead to websites having more bugs.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#329

Post by CaptSpify »

Springtime wrote: post #103
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much this. While on Firefox, Google only pulls that on you once, they constantly reoffer it to Edge users on a nearly weekly basis. And recently, they actually made the bar bigger and more obtrusive. I filed an issue on the Chromium bug tracker, they assigned someone to look into it, and of course, nothing has been said since.

> While on Firefox, Google only pulls that on you once To this day, and for years, I continue to receive these messages from Google sites informing me to upgrade to Chrome. I've even had them pop-up on Chromium.

I actually put in a ublock rule to filter out that message because I was so tired of seeing it all the time. Definitely not a one-time thing.

Re: UnGoogled Chromium: Chromium with enhanced privacy, control and transparency

#330

Post by nathancahill »

ux-app wrote: post #120
callahad wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can isolate that DOM performance bottleneck or point me to a live example, I'm happy to pare it down to a minimal test case and make sure it gets fixed. (We have some enormous architectural changes inbound which should help, but I'd still love to make sure we have a test to prevent regressing)

unfortunately for Firefox, performance issues are a case of death by a thousand cuts. Here's a product that I'm working on https://www.ux-app.com/dev/editor?m=trial In Chrome it's buttery smooth on any decent computer made in the past 5 or 6 years. In Firefox it's usable on a powerful computer, but notably worse than Chrome. On an under powered laptop Chrome is still very usable, not quite 60fps, but probably 30-40fp…

Impressive app.
Post reply on HN