NHacker Next
  • new
  • past
  • show
  • ask
  • show
  • jobs
  • submit
Chrome removes claim of On-device Al not sending data to Google Servers (old.reddit.com)
wafflemaker 1 minutes ago [-]
Since the thread evolved into browser comparisons, I'd like to endorse a better uBlock ('s fork) - AdNausem.

It doesn't block ads. It clicks them first, and then blocks them.

I don't want websites to loose revenue because of my adnlocker. I want them to make extra money because of it!

I'm not affiliated, but would like the project to get more followers. This can stop ads once and for all.

SunshineTheCat 1 hours ago [-]
I know that I'm in a bit of a bubble with this one, but I am surprised there is still anyone using Chrome instead of Brave. I get the dependency on Gmail other Google-specific tools, but the built-in ad blocking and Google-free aspects of it made me switch instantly and haven't look back after years.
plopz 47 minutes ago [-]
Brave started off incredibly sketchy and with terrible reputation, for example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999

I haven't ever considered it since and I assume many others are in the same boat.

michael9423 6 minutes ago [-]
You are assuming wrong, since Brave with >115 million MAU will likely overtake Firefox in the near future, with roughly 100k new users every day on average, while Mozilla has been bleeding users at the rate of around 500k - 1 million every month for the last years.

Brave is what many Mozilla fans wanted Firefox to be - independent and quality search, privacy as primary focus, and monetary incentives aligned with user interest as much as economically viable (premium search, Brave Origin, etc.).

ifh-hn 57 minutes ago [-]
I'm similar but instead of brave, which I don't trust, prefer Firefox.
skocznymroczny 8 minutes ago [-]
I switched to Firefox when Chrome started messing with the ad blockers. Haven't really had any issues. I prefer developer tools on Chrome but I rarely need to use them anyway.
vehemenz 30 minutes ago [-]
Ok, why Brave though? There's Safari, Chromium, LibreWolf, Ladybird, and plenty of others.
fg137 8 minutes ago [-]
Not everyone is on Mac. In fact, most people use Windows. So Safari and Ladybird are out of the question, that's two gone.
nazgulsenpai 24 minutes ago [-]
They mentioned the built-in adblock
rolymath 24 minutes ago [-]
Brave is has pre-configured as block that works on everything, also a polished sync experience.
amatecha 42 minutes ago [-]
I'm just surprised people use Chrome at all. Google has proven over and over they can't be trusted and will exploit you every chance they get.
e40 6 minutes ago [-]
Because some things only work in Chrome. It's a fact. It's terrible.

We're the frogs being boiled, over the last decade. People sounded the alarms, but they were looked at like they had tin foil on their heads. Now, it's clear they were right.

I'm speaking generally, of course. I use Firefox for all my personal stuff, except for those situations where it doesn't work.

maxloh 17 minutes ago [-]
I find Brave's UI uglier than Chrome's.

Unfortunately, there is no way to switch back to the stock Chromium look.

jeffgreco 57 minutes ago [-]
I was very vehement about needing to stay in Chromium — until I tried Zen browser and it turns out I didn’t! (Unless I wanted to watch Prime Video)
afavour 27 minutes ago [-]
You’re definitely in a bubble. Google advertises Chrome on TV. Most users haven’t even heard of Brave.
shevy-java 36 minutes ago [-]
Well, why would I want to use Brave?

Brave is the Google empire aka chromium.

I use thorium, which also belongs to the empire, so it is not really any different to Brave - but I can use ublock origin still, so that's better. I think we are all in the Google empire here. Praising Brave as alternative, simply does not make a whole lot of sense really.

Firefox is a bit outside of it but it basically got rid of most of its users. When I use firefox, I can not play audio on youtube videos. It works fine with thorium. I tried to convince the firefox developer who said everyone on Linux must use pulseaudio (I don't) but there is no reasoning with Mozilla hackers here. He thinks he knows better than everyone else does. (I could recompile firefox from source, but Mozilla uses mozconfig still: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/xsoft/firefox... - they are too incompetent to transition into meson or cmake. A failing project, no wonder it lost most of its users. Titanic got nothing on the Firefox team.)

Markoff 57 minutes ago [-]
why would you use brave with annoying crypto and no customization over superior Vivaldi?
RobRivera 51 minutes ago [-]
I have never heard of Brave, please tell me more

Edit: downvoting a request for insight on something? Mediocre

newsoftheday 56 minutes ago [-]
My theory is that, since I'm going to do things like banking in my browser, I want one that has a lot of skin in the game. Chrome being backed by Google has trillions of dollars on the line should they ever do anything truly evil. Though this sneaky 4GB download comes close.
bix6 34 minutes ago [-]
Google is not liable for your banking.
iAMkenough 6 minutes ago [-]
Edge and Chrome could both be eliminated tomorrow and those trillions would be safe.

You’re the product, not the browser.

SecretDreams 43 minutes ago [-]
There's no skin in the game if they do not think they'll be meaningfully punished by government or consumers for their wrongdoings.
AlecSchueler 23 minutes ago [-]
And they have trillions riding on milking you for all your data and ad impressions.
bix6 33 minutes ago [-]
+1 for Brave. Been on it for years and it’s fantastic. Strongest security settings without issue.

O no they gave you BAT for visiting websites. Ahhh crypto everyone run!

avdelazeri 2 hours ago [-]
baq 1 hours ago [-]
Taken completely by surprise, no one could have predicted this /s
arian_ 10 minutes ago [-]
"on-device" is doing a lot of heavy lifting when the device is a thin client to Google's servers wearing a trench coat.
Fairburn 11 minutes ago [-]
Use anything BUT Chrome or Edge.
jeffcox 2 hours ago [-]
As soon as "don't be evil" became a topic for debate it was over, if you're surprised you haven't been paying attention.
ScoobleDoodle 1 hours ago [-]
For someone with more knowledge than me: How does this affect other Chromium based browsers?

I did some web searches and see Brave has its own AI thing “Leo” that is intended to preserve privacy. But I don’t think that is on device. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

I use Firefox myself but have family and friends who use various Chromium based browsers.

Thank you.

sheept 9 minutes ago [-]
My guess is that this falls under a Google service and the models themselves wouldn't be added to open source Chromium. Even if it were, Chromium forks would likely exclude it like they did for FLoC because of its unpopularity.
josefcub 37 minutes ago [-]
Brave's "Leo" AI is configurable enough to specify local endpoints for processing, instead of going wherever they want it to go. I've set it up to use my own systems, and it works just fine like that.

If you have a beefy enough device, then yes this can be done on-device.

pier25 1 hours ago [-]
Also, does this affect Chrome for iOS, Android, and iPadOS?
sheept 6 minutes ago [-]
The docs say "not yet."[0] My guess is that for Android they probably plan to enable it for high end phones, and for iOS they'll probably just stick to non-API AI features.

[0]: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/prompt-api#hardware-req...

shevy-java 39 minutes ago [-]
What we learn: we can not trust Google.
Zambyte 18 minutes ago [-]
Everything made by Google is a liability.
greenavocado 1 hours ago [-]
ChrisArchitect 2 hours ago [-]
Al or AI?
ulfw 1 hours ago [-]
It's Google. It's AIs
ChrisArchitect 2 hours ago [-]
Google weighs in on Chrome's weights.bin controversy https://www.androidauthority.com/google-chrome-weights-bin-f...
askonomm 2 hours ago [-]
I mean to be expected of Google. Even their Google Pay sends data to their servers whenever you use it to make payments, effectively also making it so you can't even use it without service. Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device, and not only is private, but as a result also enables payments entirely offline.
acheong08 27 minutes ago [-]
> Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device, and not only is private, but as a result also enables payments entirely offline.

Apple Pay still does send a lot of telemetry about your payments though. https://duti.dev/randoms/wip-location-services/

fsckboy 56 minutes ago [-]
>Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device

so when I use the physical card that is also on Apple Pay, and Apple Pay tells me I just made a transaction as if I had used Apple Pay, that is all happening on my device? what online service is my phone using to track my account with Visa or my credit card issuer, and it's polling or push?

Hamuko 41 minutes ago [-]
You get a notification from Apple Pay when you pay with your physical card? Because I only get a notification from my bank's app whenever I use my physical card. Apple Pay notifications only pop up when using Apple Pay itself.
cyberax 23 minutes ago [-]
> You get a notification from Apple Pay when you pay with your physical card?

I do. Which is sometimes annoying if somebody else is looking at my screen.

jazzypants 58 minutes ago [-]
I'm willing to bet that it's just for telemetry, but this kind of stuff just lends credence to the crazies claiming Google wants to create some kind of absurd botnet with people's devices.
newsoftheday 52 minutes ago [-]
Wow...that seriously may change my long standing anti-Mac disdain to pro-Mac advocacy, very interesting, even Gemini confirmed what you're saying.
gchamonlive 1 hours ago [-]
Maybe it sends the payload after coming back online, but for I can for instance leave with only my galaxy watch 6, which doesn't have esim, and I'm able to make payments as long as I connect it with my phone before leaving the house.
waterloser 58 minutes ago [-]
If your phone doesn't have connection does it still work on your galaxy watch? Or if you leave the phone behind?
iamjackg 47 minutes ago [-]
I think the comment's saying that they leave the phone at home, and the watch works by itself as long as it was connected to the phone before leaving the house.
Hamuko 40 minutes ago [-]
Google Pay works for a limited amount of uses in offline mode.

https://9to5google.com/2023/12/20/google-wallet-without-inte...

jcgrillo 2 hours ago [-]
They're probably doing some degenerate form of [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_computing

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact
Rendered at 18:38:41 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.