Prev: Text file editing - remove trailing comments?
Next: Alt.OS.Linux.Slackware FAQ pointer
From: Barnabyh on 3 Aug 2010 11:44
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:36:40 +0000 (UTC)
Mike Jones <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:

>Responding to Barnabyh:
>
>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
>> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Am trying to use the Chromium browser
>>>
>>>
>>>Why, with all the security advantages Linux provides, would you want
>>>to drill a great big hole in it by installing such a horrible chunk
>>>of blatent corporate spyware?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Barnabyh replies:
>>
>> Thanks for the warning. What I'm reading is that Chromium is the
>> open-source version underlying Google-chrome, much like Mozilla was
>> for Netscape.
>> So my impression was all the privacy invasive features would be
>> stripped out, not activated, not transmitting to Google at least?
>
>
>
>(Must - not -bwahahaha - Must not... Gnnn!)
>
>You ever tried to lock anything down with "mozilla" under the hood?
>
>Don't forget that Firefox\Seamonkey are "freebies" from
>Time\Warner\AOL.
>
>IOW, not much better than M$ Interest Exploiter, and then comes Chrime.
>
>
>Cynical? Moi? ;)
>


Barnabyh replies:

So what are you using? Links, lynx, dillo? IceCat any good if it's
essentially Firefox?

Thanks.




--
Barnaby.Hoffmann
Reg. Linux User #398054

From: Mike Jones on 3 Aug 2010 15:50
Responding to Barnabyh:

> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>
>>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
>>> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am trying to use the Chromium browser
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Why, with all the security advantages Linux provides, would you want
>>>>to drill a great big hole in it by installing such a horrible chunk of
>>>>blatent corporate spyware?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Barnabyh replies:
>>>
>>> Thanks for the warning. What I'm reading is that Chromium is the
>>> open-source version underlying Google-chrome, much like Mozilla was
>>> for Netscape.
>>> So my impression was all the privacy invasive features would be
>>> stripped out, not activated, not transmitting to Google at least?
>>
>>
>>
>>(Must - not -bwahahaha - Must not... Gnnn!)
>>
>>You ever tried to lock anything down with "mozilla" under the hood?
>>
>>Don't forget that Firefox\Seamonkey are "freebies" from Time\Warner\AOL.
>>
>>IOW, not much better than M$ Interest Exploiter, and then comes Chrime.
>>
>>
>>Cynical? Moi? ;)
>>
>>
>
> Barnabyh replies:
>
> So what are you using? Links, lynx, dillo? IceCat any good if it's
> essentially Firefox?
>
> Thanks.


Seamonkey, as at least it's stable and predictable (and so, containable,
to a degree).

If I want more control, Dillo, or even Lynx.

Privoxy helps, as does a hosts file full of known no-goes.

My problem with Icecat\IceWeasel is that they are not de-mozilla-erd,
just re-GNU-ed. They are still full of netscape.com links in many configs
and other files, probably including the binaries.

I did try Swiftfox, which is a nice project, but didn't like the drift
even further away from open GNU source code involved.


Mind you, all this got seriously screwed because my ISP (like most major
ones these days) has pimped all it's users out to "We own you and your
children" Google, and has a growing bank of data-raping parasite outfits
feeding off customer data too (at least 7 primary "strategic business
partners" feeding from Virginmedia on my last look).

Lets face it, unless somebody comes up with a protection scheme for
browsing, like G\PGP for email, we're all pretty much traded over an over
again like dependant hookers. No point in letting themhave us easy
though, and if there is enough pressure, some weight might build
politically to do something radical, likegovernments protecting their
citizens instead of feeding them to the highest bidders?

Maybe its time for fully encrypted web-node connections in a world where
ISPs cannot be trusted? There most be good money in that one, once the
killer stories get in the media and the public get worried about just who
knows what about us all?

Anyhoo, www.privoxy.org is a good start if you want to tighten things up
a bit. Have fun. ;)

--
*=( http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/
*=( For all your UK news needs.
From: Barnabyh on 3 Aug 2010 16:40
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 19:50:32 +0000 (UTC)
Mike Jones <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:

>Responding to Barnabyh:

>
>Privoxy helps, as does a hosts file full of known no-goes.

Yeah hosts file helps a lot to keep it stable, got one here too. I
recently posted about how stable FF has been for me over the years and
strange enough, come 3.6.8 it started crashing on me a few times. Might
have had to do with the long hosts file and adblock been disabled for
some project. It's back now and no crashes so far, will keep monitoring
it - obviously will be impossible to ignore.

>
>I did try Swiftfox, which is a nice project, but didn't like the drift
>even further away from open GNU source code involved.
>

Nice but not updated frequently enough.

>
>Mind you, all this got seriously screwed because my ISP (like most
>major ones these days) has pimped all it's users out to "We own you
>and your children" Google, and has a growing bank of data-raping
>parasite outfits feeding off customer data too (at least 7 primary
>"strategic business partners" feeding from Virginmedia on my last
>look).
>
....
>we're all pretty much traded over an
>over again like dependant hookers.

Haha, nice language here. I suppose we should be more careful what we
post when it's all archived on Googlegroups.

>
>Maybe its time for fully encrypted web-node connections in a world
>where ISPs cannot be trusted? There most be good money in that one,
>once the killer stories get in the media and the public get worried
>about just who knows what about us all?

Absolutely, I'ld sign up for that.

>
>Anyhoo, www.privoxy.org is a good start if you want to tighten things
>up a bit. Have fun. ;)
>

I've used tor and privoxy before. You probably heard the story by now
about the tor developer being detained and questioned about his views
on Afghanistan amongst others at the US border? Sorry, don't have the
link handy anymore.

Anyway, thanks. And you :)


--
Barnaby.Hoffmann
Reg. Linux User #398054
Now playing: Lightnin' Slim - I'm Him (1Club.FM - Blues Classics
Channel )

From: David on 13 Aug 2010 09:17
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 19:50:32 +0000 (UTC), Mike Jones
<luck(a)dasteem.invalid> typed furiously:

>Responding to Barnabyh:
>
>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
>> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
>>>> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am trying to use the Chromium browser
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Why, with all the security advantages Linux provides, would you want
>>>>>to drill a great big hole in it by installing such a horrible chunk of
>>>>>blatent corporate spyware?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Barnabyh replies:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the warning. What I'm reading is that Chromium is the
>>>> open-source version underlying Google-chrome, much like Mozilla was
>>>> for Netscape.
>>>> So my impression was all the privacy invasive features would be
>>>> stripped out, not activated, not transmitting to Google at least?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>(Must - not -bwahahaha - Must not... Gnnn!)
>>>
>>>You ever tried to lock anything down with "mozilla" under the hood?
>>>
>>>Don't forget that Firefox\Seamonkey are "freebies" from Time\Warner\AOL.
>>>
>>>IOW, not much better than M$ Interest Exploiter, and then comes Chrime.
>>>
>>>
>>>Cynical? Moi? ;)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Barnabyh replies:
>>
>> So what are you using? Links, lynx, dillo? IceCat any good if it's
>> essentially Firefox?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>
>Seamonkey, as at least it's stable and predictable (and so, containable,
>to a degree).
>
ROTFL. You complain about Mozilla and use Seamonkey. Do I detect some
inconsistencies here?
--
Regards
David
fundamentalism (n.): fund = give cash to; amentalism = brainlessness
From: Dan C on 13 Aug 2010 10:11
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 19:50:32 +0000, Mike Jones wrote:

> Responding to Barnabyh:
>
>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 15:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
>> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Mike Jones
>>>> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Responding to Barnabyh:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am trying to use the Chromium browser
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Why, with all the security advantages Linux provides, would you want
>>>>>to drill a great big hole in it by installing such a horrible chunk
>>>>>of blatent corporate spyware?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Barnabyh replies:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the warning. What I'm reading is that Chromium is the
>>>> open-source version underlying Google-chrome, much like Mozilla was
>>>> for Netscape.
>>>> So my impression was all the privacy invasive features would be
>>>> stripped out, not activated, not transmitting to Google at least?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>(Must - not -bwahahaha - Must not... Gnnn!)
>>>
>>>You ever tried to lock anything down with "mozilla" under the hood?
>>>
>>>Don't forget that Firefox\Seamonkey are "freebies" from
>>>Time\Warner\AOL.
>>>
>>>IOW, not much better than M$ Interest Exploiter, and then comes Chrime.
>>>
>>>
>>>Cynical? Moi? ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Barnabyh replies:
>>
>> So what are you using? Links, lynx, dillo? IceCat any good if it's
>> essentially Firefox?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>
> Seamonkey, as at least it's stable and predictable (and so, containable,
> to a degree).
>
> If I want more control, Dillo, or even Lynx.
>
> Privoxy helps, as does a hosts file full of known no-goes.
>
> My problem with Icecat\IceWeasel is that they are not de-mozilla-erd,
> just re-GNU-ed. They are still full of netscape.com links in many
> configs and other files, probably including the binaries.
>
> I did try Swiftfox, which is a nice project, but didn't like the drift
> even further away from open GNU source code involved.
>
>
> Mind you, all this got seriously screwed because my ISP (like most major
> ones these days) has pimped all it's users out to "We own you and your
> children" Google, and has a growing bank of data-raping parasite outfits
> feeding off customer data too (at least 7 primary "strategic business
> partners" feeding from Virginmedia on my last look).
>
> Lets face it, unless somebody comes up with a protection scheme for
> browsing, like G\PGP for email, we're all pretty much traded over an
> over again like dependant hookers. No point in letting themhave us easy
> though, and if there is enough pressure, some weight might build
> politically to do something radical, likegovernments protecting their
> citizens instead of feeding them to the highest bidders?
>
> Maybe its time for fully encrypted web-node connections in a world where
> ISPs cannot be trusted? There most be good money in that one, once the
> killer stories get in the media and the public get worried about just
> who knows what about us all?
>
> Anyhoo, www.privoxy.org is a good start if you want to tighten things up
> a bit. Have fun. ;)

Sounds like your tin-foil beanie is tightened up quite enough already...

It's funny that you claim Firefox sucks, and yet use Seamonkey. LOL!
Not too much difference between the two.

Get a grip, dood.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as Kanga sneezed in his honey pot.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: http://brandybuck.site40.net/pics/politica/thanks.jpg
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Text file editing - remove trailing comments?
Next: Alt.OS.Linux.Slackware FAQ pointer