▲ 1186 ▼ Brave will not add Web Integration support (twitter.com) submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by mrmanager@lemmy.today to c/technology@lemmy.world 305 comments fedilink hide all child comments I think we need all support we can get to fight Google on this, so I welcome Brave here actually. Use this link to avoid going to Twitter: https://nitter.kavin.rocks/BrendanEich/status/1684561924191842304
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 11 points 3 years ago (9 children) Chromium is open source. Brave can just fork it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 22 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (6 children) "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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] fernandofig@reddthat.com 19 points 3 years ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years 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). permalink fedilink source parent [–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] younity@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [–] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Synthead@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago "Don't like it? Just fork it!" is the software equivalent of "Are you sad? Just be happy!" permalink fedilink source parent [–] iopq@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) What do you mean Brave "can" fork it? It's already a fork. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, and Brave employs software developers that do this sort of thing as a primary task of their job. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 22 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (6 children) "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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] fernandofig@reddthat.com 19 points 3 years ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years 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). permalink fedilink source parent [–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] younity@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [–] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Synthead@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago "Don't like it? Just fork it!" is the software equivalent of "Are you sad? Just be happy!" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fernandofig@reddthat.com 19 points 3 years ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years 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). permalink fedilink source parent [–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] younity@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [–] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years 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). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 4z01235@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] younity@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Synthead@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago "Don't like it? Just fork it!" is the software equivalent of "Are you sad? Just be happy!" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] iopq@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago (1 child) What do you mean Brave "can" fork it? It's already a fork. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, and Brave employs software developers that do this sort of thing as a primary task of their job. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago Yes, and Brave employs software developers that do this sort of thing as a primary task of their job. permalink fedilink source parent