• mtchristo@lemm.eeEnglish
    515·
    1 year ago

    The DRM will be so interwoven into the core engine that they won’t be able to remove it. chromium is a sinking ship

      • GustavoM@lemmy.worldEnglish
        71·
        1 year ago

        Amen. I’m just waiting for them to screw everything up and I’ll follow along.

        t. Currently using Brave

        • PlantJam@lemmy.worldEnglish
          17·
          1 year ago

          No need to wait, Firefox is already a strong competitor (in terms of features, not market share). Adblock on Firefox mobile makes mobile sites so much easier to use.

          • moitoi@feddit.deEnglish
            12·
            1 year ago

            I don’t know how people navigate the internet without adblock on mobile. Each website is a nightmare with the majority of the screen being ads.

            • capacitor@reddthat.comEnglish
              1·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, ff mobile may be complete garbage UX/security wise, but its the only usable mobile browser IMO, simply because of ublock support.

                • capacitor@reddthat.comEnglish
                  2·
                  1 year ago

                  According to the GrapheneOS docs

                  Firefox does not have internal sandboxing on Android.

                  Apparently Firefox’s sandbox is still substantially weaker than chromium and it is currently much more vulnerable to exploitation.

                  • d3vnu1l@programming.devEnglish
                    3·
                    1 year ago

                    Oh that’s right. I read the same thing some time ago and had completely forgotten. Thanks for bringing it up.

          • Black616Angel@feddit.deEnglish
            32·
            1 year ago

            It really isn’t though. I also started using Firefox recently and I miss tab groups on mobile as well as on my PC. Yes, there is the simple tab groups add-on, but it just doesn’t compare.
            Brave is also easier to set up ad-blocking, because it comes with ad-block enabled and script-blocking two clicks away.

            Don’t get me wrong, I will continue to use FF, but Brave has some features, FF does not have (yet).

            • Cavemanfreak@lemm.eeEnglish
              7·
              1 year ago

              Tab groups is the biggest thing I’m missing after I made the switch the other week. I’m used to having loads of tabs open, so not being able to easily minimize the ones I’m currently using is annoying to say the least.

              One plus is containers. Only opening Meta sites in their own container, same with Google/Youtube is pretty neat.

              • elscallr@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                Tab groups and container tabs are the two things I want. Tab groups I’m missing a lot. The extension is not available on mobile.

                • Cavemanfreak@lemm.eeEnglish
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Remembered one more thing; in Firefox I can only have 31 tabs open before the scroll bar appears. In Chrome it’s closer to 90-100! That’s kinda huge imo.

              • reksas@sopuli.xyzEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                time to return using bookmarks, at least those can be categorized much better

                • Cavemanfreak@lemm.eeEnglish
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Oh I hate bookmarks for that purpose, I already have too many as is. Found a way to make the tabs even smaller though, so not having a scroll bar for them will be very nice!

            • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.mlEnglish
              1·
              1 year ago

              The more that use Chromiun, the more likely WEI will be rolled out and the death of ad blockers comes quicker.

    • aksdb@feddit.deEnglish
      23·
      1 year ago

      It might be interwoven, but at the end there are three interfaces:

      1. the headers or tags that trigger it to be enabled for a website
      2. the API towards the attester
      3. the headers that are added to subsequent call to include the verdict of the attester

      It should be enough to disable/sabotage nr. 1. If not, you can sabotage nr. 2 so it simply doesn’t attest shit. And finally you can suppress adding the verdict to the responses.

      If the actual “fingerprinting” or whatever else is in there is still intact doesn’t matter if you just don’t trigger it.

      Of course webservers would simply deny serving brave then. But it’s still a good move. The more browsers get “denied”, the easier it will be to make a case against websites for some kind of discrimination.

      • 4z01235@lemmy.worldEnglish
        217·
        1 year ago

        “Just” fork it. Right.

        It’s a massive undertaking to maintain a fork of something that large and continue pulling in patches of later developments.

        Not to say that Brave doesn’t have the resources to do so - I really don’t know their scale - but this notion of “just fork” gets thrown around a lot with these kinds of scenarios. It’s an idealistic view and the noble goal of open source software, but in practical and pragmatic terms it doesn’t always win, because it takes time and effort and resources that may not just be available.

        • fernandofig@reddthat.comEnglish
          18·
          1 year ago

          Did you read the tweet from Brendan Eich linked in the OP? According to him, Brave already is a fork, and he provides a link to a (surprisingly) extensive list of things that are removed / disabled from chromium on their browser.

          • fartsparkles@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            51·
            1 year ago

            This is correct - any “Chromium-based” browser is literally a fork unless it’s completely unchanged from upstream (even rebranding and changing the logo and name would require maintaining a fork).

          • 4z01235@lemmy.worldEnglish
            31·
            1 year ago

            Sure. And the further a fork diverges from upstream the more difficult maintenance becomes. My point is that relying on the open source model to fork projects making hostile changes only works so long as the community is actually able to maintain the fork(s), and so long as those forks actually have a reasonable chance of being adopted. It’s equally important, if not even more important, to try to ensure these large projects steer in consumer friendly directions than to react and fork to try to remove anti-consumer features.

            Google has enough market and mind share that they can push this and it’s a real risk of becoming an anti-consumer standard regardless of any attempts to maintain a fork.

            So what do I think we, as a body of users of the Internet, should do? Simple. Stop using Google Chrome and any other Chromium based browsers. Google has the ability to push these changes and make them defacto standards (and later, codified standards) because we collectively give them the power to by using Chromium downstreams.

          • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            1 year ago

            That may be true, but it’s a fork where I doubt any company has the capability to do the engine development needed to be totally independent from Google. There is a reason Apple and Mozilla are the only two alternative engines left. It costs a lot to develop a browser

        • Synthead@lemmy.worldEnglish
          01·
          1 year ago

          “Don’t like it? Just fork it!” is the software equivalent of “Are you sad? Just be happy!”

        • dangblingus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          Yes, and Brave employs software developers that do this sort of thing as a primary task of their job.

    • viliam@feddit.chEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      I believe someone will make a patch and add a big WEI on/off switch. It’s open-source, hey!