> Perhaps it is because of your time investment in your test that you weight
your test far too heavily.
No. It is because it shows something actual, not ideological or theoretical
like "would be better... if". As soon as Firefox (or a derivative) shows a
better behavior and overall security I would be happy to leave Chromium for a
fully free program.
FWIW in EU GDPR which starts to apply in May 2018 the IP address is now
considered personal data, legally and must be anonymized. So software vendors
who provide such "features" or who close tickets because they are not in the
mood will perhaps be forced to comply with all that. Or who knows what other
tricks they may have to escape from that.
> Meltdown has been patched in the Linux kernel, but Abrowser is based on 57
anyway,
As I said before - I have never tried Abrowser and haven't find a way to. As
for Meltdown - maybe, but Spectre is considered more malicious and top
security experts only shrug at it and comment that these are issues which
have never been seen so far and they cannot be certain that a patch on
software level will be effective.
> and unlike Chromium has no profit incentive to violate your privacy and no
history of doing so in a very serious way.
I am unaware of that history for Chromium especially. As long as there is no
proof that the _current_ versions of Chromium do anything malicious refusing
to look at actuality because of something in the past makes no sense. It
would be like rejecting to trust SSL because in the past there was Heartbleed
or anything along these lines. The actuality is: Firefox leaks data and
Mozilla rejects to look at it. Chromium does not leak data and Chromium devs
agree there should be a setting to tighten it even more. Both FF and Chromium
are similarly non-free, so let's not get back to all this.
> I value freedom and privacy over convenience.
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/some-questions-about-various-distros#comment-126496
> Security and privacy are both important but are different.
You won't find many people who would agree they feel secure when they can't
have privacy.
> They have no reason to seek security solutions that protect your privacy,
and be avoiding them it gives them an excuse to violate your privacy in the
name of "saftey." It's a trap.
I think you are too quick. They have all the reasons to create trust because
trust is what allows them to break privacy deeper. And it would be absolutely
silly on their side to do it blatantly in an open source project like
Chromium. These things work more subtly. They are not stupid, that's why they
rule the world.
> since they have a better track record and their business model does not
rely on violating your privacy
I think you should really face the present and leave the past in the past.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMALm1VthGY
> probabilty...
doesn't work for privacy and security. Privacy and security are about
certainty. It is not about having only 1 spy camera in your bedroom compared
to 3. It is 0 or anything else.
> (see screenshot)
Speaking of privacy and security: Please remove it. I prefer my email address
not to be publicly visible. :)
And yes - this discussion is pretty much finished.
