How many of you have moved away from Botnet Chrome to a better browser

Because the Foundation browser sends my searches to Foundation Analytics, who displays adverts on Foundationtube to sell me Foundation OS Phones.

...

I keep telling people - IceCat is just as much of a "botnet" as Firefox. It makes the same unsolicited connections. You've been fooled.

Which unsolicited connections?
Last time I checked it disabled a bunch of unwanted things from Firefox. That was a while ago, though. I stopped using it when I discovered how slow they are with merging upstream security patches.

What are you talking about? M$oft will never endorse free software, but they have supported open sores -- same with jewgle.

They're embracing the software, even if not the philosophy.
Open source software is almost exactly the same as free software. It's the philosophies that are different.

...

What are people's thoughts on vivaldi? The community are a bunch of ass-sniffing morons but it otherwise seems alright.

Attached: vivaldi-browser-logo-stforum-300x300.png (300x300, 32.16K)

I bet the LARPing OP is on Windows 10 and uses Gmail. Browser threads are cancer.

GNO.

I haven't used anything google related in a very long time, with the exception of Android.

ｄｅｌ

I use manjaro

forum.manjaro.org/t/getting-ms-office-online-to-work/32995

I use firefox because it's the only browser written in rust!

Attached: 0cf6414592b75b746bbe2facd9b53735b4ab3b03b13af0e13bab9cc7aa3d9ed9.png (420x420, 398.91K)

I will never understand why anyone switched to Chrome in the first place.

Their favorite websites told them to and their favorite programs installed it and set it as default.
Also they want to sync it with their mobile chrome

I use Iridium

That's because Icecat isn't fucking concerned with our privacy. Icecat is 100% purely and only concerned with legalism. It's the worst kind of FOSS masturbation possible, where instead of caring about actual problems they invent fake problems with regards to "licences" and "copyright". You know one of the big selling points for Icecat is the fact that they removed all Firefox branding? That's like a huge thing for them.

The homepage lists multiple privacy features:
gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/

...

Oh and while I'm at it, let's talk about the "LibreJS" too. Let's take a look at my 100% freedom respecting LibreJS implementation.

// @license magnet:?xt=urn:btih:1f739d935676111cfff4b4693e3816e664797050&dn=gpl-3.0.txt GPL-v3-or-Later(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');ga('create', 'UA-XXXXX-Y', 'auto');ga('send', 'pageview');// @license-end

Why shouldn't they use the thing that's designed for third parties to add features to the browser with a semi-stable API?

They also change the default settings to disable a lot of privacy-infringing features. Maybe they even strip them out of the source code, I'm not sure. I don't use it any more.

Doing that is probably illegal, and SpyBlock would block it anyway.

You are a retard. It was always the goal to create and preserve freedom for all users, not just the developers. Copyleft is a means to that end.

The Firefox name and logo are trademarked by Mozilla who do not allow redistributing them with modified software. That is why Debian had to rebrand Firefox as IceWeasel, although Mozilla recently backed down somewhat to get the brand awareness.

"Freedom" as defined by the lawyers and framed in the legal context only. Privacy has nothing to do with communist-borne "Freedom" like these GPL jews spread. They literally do not care one little tiny bit about privacy as long as it adheres to their licencing rules.

This is your argument?

You just want want everyone else to use submissive licenses so you have to do less work to make your proprietary software. The only purpose of submissive licenses is to allow proprietary forks.

Attached: 9ff8daaeafd74ffe1088ff8aa18efd097d89cbb998d52b7ba0647be81c6ec64b.png (471x559, 69.38K)

I use ublock and no script and https everywhere, I did and chrome and do now I have switched to firefox

You are also simply a liar. After Free Software, privacy is literally what the FSF cares about the most, and the former is a precondition for the latter.
fsf.org/campaigns/surveillance

Check the ghacks user.js to disable phoning home and anti features.

insecure because stuck at FF 56 which is not supported anymore
probably insecure because nobody among security researchers gives a fuck about them, you have to use one of the mainstream browsers or use it in a fucking VM which would be slow and inconvenient.

if it's free but botnet, someone will fork it and remove botnet. so it's not a big deal.

The FSF does care about freedom more than about privacy, and privacy was not the value that originally triggered the whole freedom thing.
But they do care a lot about privacy.

That is what I meant but maybe I should have worded it better.

I use ESR with a custom user.js, at least it delays the modern cancer.

Utterly typical communist mindset right here.

really?
why?

Goddamn newfags

Because you're claiming Google's work is licensed under a license it doesn't actually have. It's probably copyright infringement, the same way taking a proprietary ebook owned by someone else and slapping a creative commons license on it would be.
By putting it between those tags you're applying the GPLv3 to it, which means you're granting people permission to redistribute it and modify it and all that stuff. I think you're also promising anyone who receives it to provide the unobfuscated code ("preferred form of the work for making modifications to it") on request, but you can't do that.

really?
where?
the fact that LibreJS interprets it like that is their problem, not mine. :^)

That's on the tier of "when I said 'this is a robbery' I was actually talking in a private language that I only I speak and I had no way of knowing that these English-speaking people would interpret it as an English sentence". It's just not how it works.

You are the one breaking copyright, not LibreJS.

There isn't any plain english text explaining that the license is what it is.
the problem is, nope, not really.
also it obviously won't save you from exploits, etc.: they are already illegal so for those who would do it, it won't matter if they need to do one more illegal (and trivial) thing.

it's like it won't stop a gangman from robbing you on the street if they have to spit on your face for some reason before getting your stuff.

Why does there have to be plain English text? Do you think that using a (not even secret) code magically makes things legal?
There's no reasonable way to claim you didn't intend it to be LibreJS tags or shouldn't be expected to know what attaching the LibreJS tags means.

>There's no reasonable way to claim you didn't intend it to be LibreJS tags or shouldn't be expected to know what attaching the LibreJS tags means.
Do I have to know about all autistic browser extensions? :^)

No, but there's no other possible way you'd make somethting that's compatible with this particular one.

by chance
by copying from stackoverflow
by delegating the work to some clueless faggot
by accidentally reading a misleading tutorial on the web

You're baiting, go back to >>>/tv/ you mongrel.

Iridium

thinks moving to sorosfox is an even better option

I'm not sure if that's a valid excuse, but even if it is, it stops being valid the moment someone informs you.

so do i use sjwfox or join the chromium botnet?

only if you actually read their information
email doesn't have guaranteed delivery, that's pretty convenient btw

I have been using Gnome Web as my main browser and it is very comfy.
Nice lightweight and stable software.

Attached: Screenshot from 2018-02-25 14-57-08.png (1380x755, 154.1K)

It's just chrome with a skin, almost all of these "alternative" browsers are.

It's WebKit, try to understand what you're talking about before speaking about a subject.

They are very similar and only split recently.

Not him but you clearly don't know anything about it. It started as KHTML at KDE and then was forked and heavily developed by apple. Google contributed a bit to it and then forked off again and added it to chrome. So no, its not chrome with a skin, its a different project entirely.

No, not at all. There are several degrees of chromeness.
Web and surf are not Chrome reskins at all. They use Webkit, which means their engine and Chrome's engine have a common ancestor, but nothing more.
Qupzilla and qutebrowser use QtWebEngine. That means they use Blink, Chrome's engine, but don't share any code otherwise. As far as privacy and freedom goes, that's completely fine.
Vivaldi and Opera are Chrome reskins. They don't just use Chrome's engine, they're forks or supersets of Chromium. They're not fine.

sure i did

you missed a big one :^)

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-02-25 at 10.09.43 PM.png (773x405, 48.79K)

Thank you for the differentiated explanation.

QtWebEngine uses much more of Chromium's code than just Blink (like its JavaScript engine or its network stack). It's using the Chromium content/embedder API, similar to Electron or Muon (which Brave uses).

Never even used it in the first place

My bad, I thought Blink was the name of more than just the layout engine.

oh yeah
apple.stackexchange.com/questions/316096/how-to-screenshot-netflix

What is the best browser?

Attached: moe.jpg (169x169, 8.79K)

Your own brain after memorizing all W3C standards

I thought qute used webkit?

It still supports it, but QtWebEngine is the goal. I think it's the default on all platforms now.

holy shit

Is Brave any good? I just use surf atm but it’s got some problems I wish they’d fix... might just fix them myself if I can find the time...
I hate tabs and history and cookies and JS and I pretty much just want a simple no-frills browser that displays html5 decently and nothing else

how do i unsubscribe?

Attached: a6d.png (2550x1650, 376.96K)

Theyre embracing free programmers work and free software. While charging for their own.

I never fell for it in the first place. I started on Firefox v2.0 and nothing compared to its customizability and features for a long, time, certainly not dumbed down hipster shit for simpletons like Chrome. I finally moved to Palemoon when Mozilla betrayed everything Firefox ever stood for because they wanted Chrome's market share so badly.

Attached: 1427595177101.jpg (407x286, 11.05K)

Free software is about freedom, not price. You can give proprietary software away for free, or sell free software.
Richard Stallman is stubborn and bad at naming things.

>>>/4chan/
>>>/g/

When I go down to the free market, I pick up one of everything without paying because free market means I pay no money.

Brave is the least pozzed out there. Unfortunately it isn't polished yet.

...

The only thing keeping me on Chromium is because Firefox and its derivatives have terrible HW Accel. performance for me on both Wayland and X with my HD 2000, has anybody here had issues with HW A on Sandybridge/Ivy Bridge and managed to solve it?

Attached: sandy-bridge.jpg (300x334, 25.73K)

Brave is a Chrome reskin with a built-in adblocker that doesn't block ads but replaces them with other ads.
But it fights the (((SJWs))), so it's the best browser ever

>But it fights the (((SJWs))),
how exactly?

it's not sorosfox :^)

and? where is the fight?

the guy heading the project was kicked out of jewfox because he donated to a nohomo marriage charity years earlier.

sad story, but not a good enough reason to use a crappy browser

better than a botnet tbh

the statement that FF is botnet is a strong statement.

i never even used chrome. firefox is basically botnet as well since around 2010 or so. now i use framebuffer Links and palememe

literally no technical merit. would you suck cock because it fights the SJW? wow nvm half the stormfags here would literally answer yes

lol he's butthurt because his corportate overlords are all SJWs

Go back to leftypol, communist