[ / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / girltalk / htg / hwndu / maka / polk / strek / tijuana ]

/tech/ - Technology

Winner of the 8chan Attention-Hungry Games
/kemono/ - The Superior Lifeforms

HWNDU: Searching for the flag
Comment *
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 3 per post.

Added new banners. Enjoy

File: b02301e75b8bc65⋯.jpg (1.1 MB, 2928x2216, 366:277, browsers.jpg)


Friendly reminder that if you're a person who respects their individual privacy and freedom, there is no reason to be using the products created by the botnet that is the Google company.

There is a plethora of options available for you to replace your Google apps that are lighter, faster and better in general, including respect for freedom and privacy.

>search engine?

SearX, DuckDuckGo, StartPage, Yandex (Soviet Botnet)


Pale Moon, Waterfox, Brave, Vivaldi


Self Host, cock.li, Proton Mail, Hotmail (Still Botnet) Yandex (Soviet Botnet)

>cloud storage?

Syncthing, ownCloud, Nextcloud

app store?

F-Droid, Yalp for Play Store front end


NewPipe for mobile, not signing in on desktop


XMPP, Signal.


Nextcloud, ownCloud, RadiCAL,


NextCloud, keep it in your emails.


RSS client, Librenews

List of Software you can Self-Host


NextCloud Providers


OwnCloud Providers,


WebMail Comparison



>Excellent tier

>Proprietary browser #43



File: 6d3d7f77f5e969d⋯.png (1.77 MB, 1000x7440, 25:186, 6d3d7f77f5e969d07336bc02fe….png)

The whole point of GNU Icecat is to subvert the telemetry/nonfree/privacy-violating things in Firefox while remaining as similar to the source as possible. The fact that you dismiss all Firefox forks as though they are just inherently comprimised without any grasp for what the point of the project is just shows your ignorance.

Also, the article you cite is totally misleading. Mozilla's "war" on fake news is easily one of the least concerning things Firefox has ever done. If you're making an infograph on secure browsers, you could have easily cited articles talking about Mozilla's telemetry and much more discernable, technical bullshit, not to mention pretty much everything gHacks as ever covered on Firefox. So, even on the needlessy paranoid front, your list still manages to suck more than it ever should.

Also, Uzbl is a webkit browser, not a text browser. So it just shows us that you clearly have never used all of the browsers you're shit talking here.

And you didn't even mention Dooble, a project that is incredibly vocal about making their browser both free and privacy-protecting.

So here you are, needlessly mentioning all these proprietary, blatantly malicious browsers that no one would have known about anyway, but you aren't even willing to acknowledge free projects that are actually making a concerted effort to do something good for the World. That would easily fit your criteria of what a good, safe browser could be.

What is wrong with you?


To be fair, Brave is actually open-sores.



>To be fair, Brave is actually open-sores.

That's nice to know, when did this happen?



I don't think it was ever proprietary, although I can understand how you were probably swayed by the rumors and misinformation--all of which probably stemmed from their business model, which, admittedly, reeks of the musk of venture capitalists and startup culture; but the software in itself is licensed under MPL, just like Firefox. But it's built on Blink.

I'm not trying to justify Brave, here. Just stating facts.



So you would rather use a proprietary browser than a free browser just because you don't agree with their agenda? And how does that make it more secure?



You're on /tech/ , don't expect too much rational thinking .


>god tier (no privacy issues): icecat (can't be trusted)

>excellent: brave

>does not mention that brave is made by javascript creator and mozilla co-creator

this is bait



Bad infograph. You shouldn't recommend proprietary software, unless there is no FLOSS alternative at all, such as Youtube. I haven't used Youtube at all for 6 about years.


Very good post. The Google analytics hidden in the addons page is way worse than virtue signalling.


Why shouldn't we trust GNU/Icecat?



Most of this is good advice, except for:

>>cloud storage?

>Syncthing, ownCloud, Nextcloud

Syncthing is a bit of a battery hog on android. Not unusably so, but something to be aware of. Also, Owncloud and Nextcloud's android clients do not allow the user to sync arbitrary folders, aside from photos in DCIM. You can manually upload/download files and folders outside of DCIM, but there's no way to do it automatically.

And speaking of Nextcloud... screw Nextcloud. They fucked over a lot of people on residential connections with their cute little stunt a few months back, all that "sending warning letters to ISP abuse deparments about home users running old versions" bullshit. https://archive.fo/3IZSX



Chromium isn't libre, that's why it isn't in the trisquel repository.




find .mozilla -type f -perm /100 -ls



That's some disgustingly inaccurate graph you have in here, kid.




>just shows your ignorance

Checked and agree on the fact that OP is a dumb illiterate faggot.

It's quite clear to me that this post has been made by a mongrel /pol/ack following the degoogle meme and not from anyone near being a tech savvy.



>The fact that you dismiss all Firefox forks

>Palemoon is in the recommended

I don't understand where you got the idea that he was dissmising all firefox forks.



Every other Firefox fork has a huge, red asterisk next to it. Pale Moon, while you're technically true, isn't really a Firefox fork in the same way that a browser like Waterfox is, since it was forked from a waaay older version, and it's deviated so far from its source it's really become its own, independent project and thus not affected by the actions of Mozilla in the way other forks are.



I am not saying it cannot be trusted, OP's picture is saying that.



A fork is a fork regardless of whether it happened recently or many years ago. A fork is always an independent project because changes generally do not return upstream.



You're right. I think calling those other browsers forks was misleading, because those projects can and do in fact still have the capacity to exchange code between each other and are pretty much cross-compatible as a result. The main difference, really, for most of these browsers is mostly ideological, but they still rely heavily on upstream.

So they aren't really forks. They aren't even independent projects in the way that Pale Moon is. So there's a difference between those Firefox-based browsers and Pale Moon.



Here are a list of forks from Firefox:







It doesn't matter if these projects contribute nothing to Firefox, they are independent of Mozilla and of Firefox. What makes them forks is that they are all derived from Firefox.



> can't trust the guy who got unpersoned by the morality police at Mozilla

>can't trust the guy who created the only surviving client-side scripting language who will be around long after flash is permanently killed and Microsoft's "here, virus site, have root access to the OS" and StateBook's framework for sites that want to risk getting sued into oblivion react are gone.




Goddamnit, I'm trying to agree with you. You know what I mean.


is SeaMonkey a viable option? it's the only other browser than Firefox I've used that I actually like and doesn't feel broken/shitty, despite looking old.



If you like it, then use it. It works, so why not? You might want to consider using SeaMonkey for all of its potential, though, and not just as a browser.

What I mean is that SeaMonkey is also a viable eMail client, RSS reader, IRC client, etc. . Basically, it's a lot of things. If you aren't going to use those, then maybe it's not worth using for the space and resources it consumes.



YouTube is FLOSS since it requires no proprietary software to watch. They run proprietary software, but that's their loss.

torsocks -i youtube-dl -o - <VIDEO> | mpv -



You're wrong.

I don't remember the details, but there was something regarding proprietary JS to watch/download from YouTube.


File: 556cfc9d2a00380⋯.png (1.78 MB, 2343x1316, 2343:1316, mozilla firefox.png)

but what has the redshield done to ff?



It just parsed it, not executed it, it's for the "protected videos".


File: de64707dd5e4eff⋯.jpg (9.63 KB, 300x163, 300:163, ComodoBrowserLogo.jpg)

Hey all, I am currently using Comodo Dragon as my main browser however It is ranked pretty low on tier list infographics such as the one in the OP, could anyone please explain to my -why- Comodo Dragon is bad? I have been using it for awhile now so I could be free from Google's Telemetry which is what Comodo advertises it as doing, so it seems to me like Comodo Dragon is chrome but without google connections and spying in it.


File: c0953684472bb14⋯.png (55.9 KB, 1493x323, 1493:323, cuckodo dragon.png)


>why is comodo dragon considered bad?

I wonder why. Spying is spying, no matter who's doing it. Comodo Dragon is even worse with it than Google and that's something to behold. Not to mention that they are lying and use Google Analytics anyways, spiced up with their own and their (((partners))) spyware. One of the worst browsers. Also obviously, it's proprietary, which should be a good enough reason by itself to stop using it.


File: 85f904f55572fa5⋯.jpg (29.3 KB, 600x375, 8:5, d4196dde3207f42694bed852ea….jpg)


Most free browsers are shit, Vivaldi works great although some bugs in Linux

Funny since a decent amount of anons liked Opera before 12.8(?)cant remember, yet something similar comes out, but because they won't give out the full source its automatically shit. don't get me wrong, I prefer open source programs over proprietary and encourage people to do it, but saying no good proprietary programs exist is lying to themselves.





Nah. DRM, Pocket, and telemetry stuff is removed. Basically a straight FF clone, without the bits of botnet. Found right on the front page https://www.waterfoxproject.org/



nobody is saying all proprietary programs are bad, just that you can never actually know if they are BECAUSE they're proprietary.


>nobody is saying all proprietary programs are bad

actually a lot of people do say that



Who mad this graphic?

<Iron is not a scam! It doesn't have ads. It's just a better Chrome based on Chromium. And it's open source. You can download the code right now!

And why do you hate browsers which run in terminals like w3m?

Brave is taking the chromium and replacing the ads and share a little bit of profit with the user. It's what should be under scam tier.

The CEO seems to be a jew too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich

Firefox is also a botnet. It collects users browsing histories.

B-but that's okay because it's anonymous!

Pale Moon is ... outdated Firefox. It's okay that this guy tries but it separated from Firefox and is a one person project.

I never tries Iridium. probably just another chromium fork.

I also haven't tried IceCat.

Best browsers I know: Iron and Waterfox with basic plugins.

[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / girltalk / htg / hwndu / maka / polk / strek / tijuana ]