Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

64% Positive

Analyzed from 2138 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#google#chrome#brave#firefox#pay#browser#don#https#chromium#still

Discussion (91 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

CrzyLngPwdabout 1 hour ago
It seems to me that adding AI to desktop apps and sending the data back to the mothership for processing is an amazing way to collect data from people who, for the most part, would be completely unaware it's even happening.

Heck, most of them think the Internet is Chrome.

rishabhaiover30 minutes ago
It would be a reasonable deduction for someone who doesn't have the time or interest to understand the internals.
Animats32 minutes ago
When Google did that, did they default the "sending data" feature to off?

Do I even need to ask?

SunshineTheCatabout 2 hours ago
I know that I'm in a bit of a bubble with this one, but I am surprised there is still anyone using Chrome instead of Brave. I get the dependency on Gmail other Google-specific tools, but the built-in ad blocking and Google-free aspects of it made me switch instantly and haven't look back after years.
plopzabout 2 hours ago
Brave started off incredibly sketchy and with terrible reputation, for example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999

I haven't ever considered it since and I assume many others are in the same boat.

rideontime17 minutes ago
Same here. I don't care how they responded to the backlash, the fact that it happened in the first place was enough for me.
ifh-hnabout 2 hours ago
I'm similar but instead of brave, which I don't trust, prefer Firefox.
tardedmeme35 minutes ago
I don't trust Firefox either, so I use Zen, which is based on Firefox and also changes the UI.
ifh-hn9 minutes ago
skocznymrocznyabout 1 hour ago
I switched to Firefox when Chrome started messing with the ad blockers. Haven't really had any issues. I prefer developer tools on Chrome but I rarely need to use them anyway.
xackyabout 1 hour ago
The trouble is that Mozilla has admitted they can't survive without Google's revenue. You are basically using Google by proxy unless you use a truly independent browser engine of they get blocked by Cloudflare for not having enough fingerprinting tech.
hparadizabout 1 hour ago
(Ungoogled) Chromium and Firefox are both projects that are open source and readily available. The code is sitting there ready for you to compile. More users = more donations. You can be the change you wanna see.
close0413 minutes ago
> You are basically using Google by proxy unless you use a truly independent browser engine

This conclusion doesn't follow your premise. Google has to pay because if Mozilla dies, so does the claim of any real competition on the browser engine market. So everyone agrees Firefox's engine is truly independent. Google pays so Firefox users don't use anything that has to do with Google.

If you think about it, the only real way to not hurt Google is for Firefox to stop existing. Chrome would like end up being spun off from Google.

unethical_ban37 minutes ago
I don't agree that you are using Google by proxy when Firefox has more technical independence from Google than Chrome and can be quickly decoupled from the few Google defaults it has, search and safe browsing.
vehemenzabout 2 hours ago
Ok, why Brave though? There's Safari, Chromium, LibreWolf, Ladybird, and plenty of others.
bloqs31 minutes ago
1. Because it's most popular. Guaranteed support and "monkey see monkey do".

2. The adblocking is preconfigured, and non technical users trying to find the right extensions has a very bad history of unintentional malware. Ad block? Adblock plus? Ublock? Ublock origin? This is a great example of what floors a lot of technical folk who would be "why not just install ublock origin" and fail to understand the "why should I when I can just get Brave one and it works"

3. Most people don't use macs

Gander57396 minutes ago
Librewolf meets 2 and 3 (it comes with ublock origin preinstalled), but admittedly fails 1 quite badly.
fg137about 1 hour ago
Not everyone is on Mac. In fact, most people use Windows. So Safari and Ladybird are out of the question, that's two gone.
nazgulsenpaiabout 2 hours ago
They mentioned the built-in adblock
rolymathabout 2 hours ago
Brave is has pre-configured as block that works on everything, also a polished sync experience.
g8ozabout 1 hour ago
Vivaldi's sync experience is nice as well. Top notch customization too.
amatechaabout 2 hours ago
I'm just surprised people use Chrome at all. Google has proven over and over they can't be trusted and will exploit you every chance they get.
e40about 1 hour ago
Because some things only work in Chrome. It's a fact. It's terrible.

We're the frogs being boiled, over the last decade. People sounded the alarms, but they were looked at like they had tin foil on their heads. Now, it's clear they were right.

I'm speaking generally, of course. I use Firefox for all my personal stuff, except for those situations where it doesn't work.

tcp_handshakerabout 1 hour ago
>> Because some things only work in Chrome.

What things? Looks like an urban myth.

mrguyoramaabout 1 hour ago
95% of people who use Chrome have no clue what browser they are using.

They got Chrome when it was bundled with every single installer ever for about a decade (which was so prolific and scummy that Microsoft had to make the "default app" picker system more defensive, because Chrome was abusing it more than microsoft apps were).

When you installed Java, you also got Chrome set as your default browser with no interaction.

Or they one click downloaded it from Google.com because of a giant banner saying "You gotta download chrome"

It's insane to me how rarely people on HN seem to actually know the history of this. Everyone who worked in tech support in the 2010s experienced this.

It was an identical strategy that most spyware and adware used at the time.

coldpie28 minutes ago
I want to use a browser engine that is not developed/owned by Google, so I use Firefox. I also don't want to support Brave's CEO's politics, so I would not use Brave regardless.
touristtamabout 1 hour ago
After years of using alternative to chrome (Firefox, Chromium, Brave, Opera, Vivaldi, Edge, etc ...) I have stopped fighting the choice of IT for installing and setting Chrome as the default browser on a Mac. I still use Firefox when I can and religiously reroute URLs to it where possible, but this is beating me down and I would rather spend time playing with LLMs rather than continue this struggle.
jeffgrecoabout 2 hours ago
I was very vehement about needing to stay in Chromium — until I tried Zen browser and it turns out I didn’t! (Unless I wanted to watch Prime Video)
maxlohabout 1 hour ago
I find Brave's UI uglier than Chrome's.

Unfortunately, there is no way to switch back to the stock Chromium look.

frizlababout 1 hour ago
I use Safari personally. It’s good.
afavourabout 2 hours ago
You’re definitely in a bubble. Google advertises Chrome on TV. Most users haven’t even heard of Brave.
Markoffabout 2 hours ago
why would you use brave with annoying crypto and no customization over superior Vivaldi?
tcp_handshakerabout 1 hour ago
Why did I had to come so much down this thread, before seeing a mention of my favorite browser?
shevy-javaabout 2 hours ago
Well, why would I want to use Brave?

Brave is the Google empire aka chromium.

I use thorium, which also belongs to the empire, so it is not really any different to Brave - but I can use ublock origin still, so that's better. I think we are all in the Google empire here. Praising Brave as alternative, simply does not make a whole lot of sense really.

Firefox is a bit outside of it but it basically got rid of most of its users. When I use firefox, I can not play audio on youtube videos. It works fine with thorium. I tried to convince the firefox developer who said everyone on Linux must use pulseaudio (I don't) but there is no reasoning with Mozilla hackers here. He thinks he knows better than everyone else does. (I could recompile firefox from source, but Mozilla uses mozconfig still: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/xsoft/firefox... - they are too incompetent to transition into meson or cmake. A failing project, no wonder it lost most of its users. Titanic got nothing on the Firefox team.)

RobRiveraabout 2 hours ago
I have never heard of Brave, please tell me more

Edit: downvoting a request for insight on something? Mediocre

bix6about 2 hours ago
+1 for Brave. Been on it for years and it’s fantastic. Strongest security settings without issue.

O no they gave you BAT for visiting websites. Ahhh crypto everyone run!

bloqs24 minutes ago
I'm not familiar with this?
newsofthedayabout 2 hours ago
My theory is that, since I'm going to do things like banking in my browser, I want one that has a lot of skin in the game. Chrome being backed by Google has trillions of dollars on the line should they ever do anything truly evil. Though this sneaky 4GB download comes close.
bix6about 2 hours ago
Google is not liable for your banking.
SecretDreamsabout 2 hours ago
There's no skin in the game if they do not think they'll be meaningfully punished by government or consumers for their wrongdoings.
AlecSchuelerabout 2 hours ago
And they have trillions riding on milking you for all your data and ad impressions.
iAMkenoughabout 1 hour ago
Edge and Chrome could both be eliminated tomorrow and those trillions would be safe.

You’re the product, not the browser.

avdelazeriabout 3 hours ago
baqabout 2 hours ago
Taken completely by surprise, no one could have predicted this /s
ubermonkey3 minutes ago
I still don't understand why so many people have accepting using an ad company's browser.

The motivation vectors exist here to ensure that, over time, Chrome behaves in ways the end user DOES NOT WANT.

jeffcoxabout 3 hours ago
As soon as "don't be evil" became a topic for debate it was over, if you're surprised you haven't been paying attention.
wafflemakerabout 1 hour ago
Since the thread evolved into browser comparisons, I'd like to endorse a better uBlock ('s fork) - AdNausem.

It doesn't block ads. It clicks them first, and then blocks them.

I don't want websites to loose revenue because of my adnlocker. I want them to make extra money because of it!

I'm not affiliated, but would like the project to get more followers. This can stop ads once and for all.

robhltabout 1 hour ago
These "clicks" are likely identified as fraudulent and dropped by the ad network. So you still pay the cost of downloading and running all the advertising JS and you still get tracked by the ad networks, all for nothing.
wafflemaker25 minutes ago
https://github.com/dhowe/AdNauseam/wiki/FAQ#how-does-adnause...

You seem more knowledgeable in how browsers and js work than me. Does the below text still mean that AdNausem is downloading and running all the advertising JS?

Here's what's in the link: >AdNauseam 'clicks' Ads by issuing an HTTP request to the URL to which they lead. In current versions this is done via an XMLHttpRequest (or AJAX request) issued in a background process. This lightweight request signals a 'click' on the server responsible for the Ad, but does so without opening any additional windows or pages on your computer. Further it allows AdNauseam to safely receive and discard the resulting response data, rather than executing it in the browser, thus preventing a range of potential security problems (ransomware, rogue Javascript or Flash code, XSS-attacks, etc.) caused by malfunctioning or malicious Ads.

tardedmeme32 minutes ago
What metrics does the ad network use to identify the clicks as "fraudulent"?
BrenBarnabout 1 hour ago
How will it stop ads if it rewards them with money?
wafflemaker23 minutes ago
It makes them burn money with no effect. Doesn't work every time, but still sends a message.
stronglikedanabout 1 hour ago
It rewards Google with the advertiser's money, and the advertisers don't like paying for extremely low conversion rates.
dsr_about 1 hour ago
Because it could eventually be detected as click-fraud, and ad networks hate paying out for click-fraud.
tcp_handshakerabout 1 hour ago
You question is the answer to your query
ScoobleDoodleabout 2 hours ago
For someone with more knowledge than me: How does this affect other Chromium based browsers?

I did some web searches and see Brave has its own AI thing “Leo” that is intended to preserve privacy. But I don’t think that is on device. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

I use Firefox myself but have family and friends who use various Chromium based browsers.

Thank you.

josefcubabout 2 hours ago
Brave's "Leo" AI is configurable enough to specify local endpoints for processing, instead of going wherever they want it to go. I've set it up to use my own systems, and it works just fine like that.

If you have a beefy enough device, then yes this can be done on-device.

sheeptabout 1 hour ago
My guess is that this falls under a Google service and the models themselves wouldn't be added to open source Chromium. Even if it were, Chromium forks would likely exclude it like they did for FLoC because of its unpopularity.
pier25about 2 hours ago
Also, does this affect Chrome for iOS, Android, and iPadOS?
sheeptabout 1 hour ago
The docs say "not yet."[0] My guess is that for Android they probably plan to enable it for high end phones, and for iOS they'll probably just stick to non-API AI features.

[0]: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/prompt-api#hardware-req...

Fairburnabout 1 hour ago
Use anything BUT Chrome or Edge.
stronglikedanabout 1 hour ago
I've tried them all but nothing so far beats the UX of Chrome.
squidsoupabout 1 hour ago
Has anyone found a browser with comparably good dev tools to Chrome?
things41 minutes ago
You could try Helium (https://helium.computer/), it's a de-googled chrome and has the same devtools.
arian_about 1 hour ago
"on-device" is doing a lot of heavy lifting when the device is a thin client to Google's servers wearing a trench coat.
Advertisement
akomtuabout 1 hour ago
It's on-device AI spyware, really. It collects intelligence about the user, summarizes it and sends it to Google, all paid by the user's electricity bill. Deviously clever.
shevy-javaabout 2 hours ago
What we learn: we can not trust Google.
saintfireabout 1 hour ago
Doesn't look like that has been or will ever be (generally) learned.
TranquilMarmotabout 1 hour ago
You're just now learning this? There are whole books about it (check out "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism" by Shoshana Zuboff)
Zambyteabout 1 hour ago
Everything made by Google is a liability.
greenavocadoabout 3 hours ago
ChrisArchitectabout 3 hours ago
Al or AI?
ulfwabout 3 hours ago
It's Google. It's AIs
ChrisArchitectabout 3 hours ago
Google weighs in on Chrome's weights.bin controversy https://www.androidauthority.com/google-chrome-weights-bin-f...
askonommabout 3 hours ago
I mean to be expected of Google. Even their Google Pay sends data to their servers whenever you use it to make payments, effectively also making it so you can't even use it without service. Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device, and not only is private, but as a result also enables payments entirely offline.
acheong08about 2 hours ago
> Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device, and not only is private, but as a result also enables payments entirely offline.

Apple Pay still does send a lot of telemetry about your payments though. https://duti.dev/randoms/wip-location-services/

fsckboyabout 2 hours ago
>Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device

so when I use the physical card that is also on Apple Pay, and Apple Pay tells me I just made a transaction as if I had used Apple Pay, that is all happening on my device? what online service is my phone using to track my account with Visa or my credit card issuer, and it's polling or push?

Hamukoabout 2 hours ago
You get a notification from Apple Pay when you pay with your physical card? Because I only get a notification from my bank's app whenever I use my physical card. Apple Pay notifications only pop up when using Apple Pay itself.
cyberaxabout 2 hours ago
> You get a notification from Apple Pay when you pay with your physical card?

I do. Which is sometimes annoying if somebody else is looking at my screen.

jazzypantsabout 2 hours ago
I'm willing to bet that it's just for telemetry, but this kind of stuff just lends credence to the crazies claiming Google wants to create some kind of absurd botnet with people's devices.
gchamonliveabout 2 hours ago
Maybe it sends the payload after coming back online, but for I can for instance leave with only my galaxy watch 6, which doesn't have esim, and I'm able to make payments as long as I connect it with my phone before leaving the house.
waterloserabout 2 hours ago
If your phone doesn't have connection does it still work on your galaxy watch? Or if you leave the phone behind?
iamjackgabout 2 hours ago
I think the comment's saying that they leave the phone at home, and the watch works by itself as long as it was connected to the phone before leaving the house.
Hamukoabout 2 hours ago
Google Pay works for a limited amount of uses in offline mode.

https://9to5google.com/2023/12/20/google-wallet-without-inte...

newsofthedayabout 2 hours ago
Wow...that seriously may change my long standing anti-Mac disdain to pro-Mac advocacy, very interesting, even Gemini confirmed what you're saying.
jcgrilloabout 3 hours ago
They're probably doing some degenerate form of [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_computing

footyabout 1 hour ago
I too am surprised anyone uses Chrome, but I will admit to feeling similarly surprised by how many people use Brave. The company seems so sketchy to me, and I wonder why people who presumably care about web standards are so willing to use Chromium-based anything too.