Chromium browser for 13.1 on 13.0 - How to?
in [Slackware]
|
From: Mike Jones on 13 Aug 2010 13:38 Responding to David: > 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? Yup! You do indeed. :) Now guess what the missing variable is? -- *=( http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/ *=( For all your UK news needs.
From: David on 13 Aug 2010 15:45 On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:38:20 +0000 (UTC), Mike Jones <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> typed furiously: >Responding to David: > >> 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? > > >Yup! You do indeed. :) > >Now guess what the missing variable is? Lack of anything better, eh! -- Regards David fundamentalism (n.): fund = give cash to; amentalism = brainlessness
From: Mike Jones on 13 Aug 2010 18:34 Responding to David: > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:38:20 +0000 (UTC), Mike Jones > <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> typed furiously: > >>Responding to David: >> >>> 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? >> >> >>Yup! You do indeed. :) >> >>Now guess what the missing variable is? > > Lack of anything better, eh! Close. Thats in there, but its not the key factor. -- *=( http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/ *=( For all your UK news needs.
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 3 Prev: Text file editing - remove trailing comments? Next: Alt.OS.Linux.Slackware FAQ pointer |