4 ms·

Google already made Chromium completely open source. Anybody's free to fork it and move it in any direction they want. As for Chrome, it's likely worth many 10

Google already made Chromium completely open source. Anybody's free to fork it and move it in any direction they want. As for Chrome, it's likely worth many 10's of billions of dollars. It would be absolutely indefensible to throw it away, especially when there are so many yet unexplored avenues to improve the web without requiring such massive and unneeded sacrifices.

jacquesm 9y ago
Spinning something out is not the same as throwing it away. Chrome is already 'non profit' because it does not cost money to the end user.
- cm2187 9y ago
  So ad companies are all non profit organisations then?
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    I really don't understand your comment. Ad companies are all for profit. Browsers tend to not be a profit center for the companies that make them (Microsoft, Mozilla (a non profit), Google and Apple being the main ones).
    - y4mi 9y ago
      > Chrome is already 'non profit' because it does not cost money to the end user. a) non-profit is a clearly defined term [1] which doesnt apply to google, nor any of its products b) by your definition, any website which utilizes ad revenue is a non profit, because the end user doesn't have to pay money for its use. i'm pretty sure this was the point the parent was trying to convey. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        > non-profit is a clearly defined term [1] which doesnt apply to google, nor any of its products Mozilla is a non-profit, they make a browser. > by your definition, any website which utilizes ad revenue is a non profit, because the end user doesn't have to pay money for its use That's nonsense and you are well aware of it. The customers there are the advertisers, not the users of the product but that does not mean there is no payment. And if you put a value on data then you could argue that there is a payment of sort from those end users as well. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve with all this flak you're throwing up, it is pretty clear that no large browser manufacturer is selling browsers, that a large chunk of the web is at present ad supported and that it would be possible for Google to move Chrome into a non-profit.
        wand3r 9y ago
        Chrome is the googlebot crawler so they can't bin it. Is it a non-profit? No. Is it a profit center? Potentially. It saves them money using their own machines to do it and has powerful lock in and tracking ramifications. > Mozilla is a non-profit Ya. They don't run an ad network or search engine. This doesn't make any sense. Basically: Is MacOS a non-profit because Linux is free? Apple does not charge for it but it's the bloody platform
        Crespyl 9y ago
        I generally agree with your point, Mozilla is very much the odd one out being a non-profit browser vendor, but that last line is just weird. MacOS is a product, not a company, and I don't think you can even buy it if you wanted, it just happens to come with the hardware you buy from the for-profit Apple company. MacOS also has nothing to do with Linux, except that they're both POSIX-y.
    - pcwalton 9y ago
      A not-for-profit company is different from a company that doesn't make any profit. A nonprofit company just means a company in which profit is not a goal for its own sake. It is quite possible for a nonprofit to make a profitable product, and this is what Mozilla does.
pcwalton 9y ago
In practice, Google controls everything that goes into Chromium, and without being able to fund comparably enormous manpower, this will not change. Forking it over ad policies perceived to be unreasonable is not a feasible option.
xg15 9y ago
So how do I go about e.g. removing telemetry from Chrome's mainline?
- dkns 9y ago
  Chrome isn't open source. I'd say that if you decide to use Chrome you're accepting fact that you're using closed source program with Google's proprietary telemetry baked in.
  - xg15 9y ago
    That's basically my point re GP's claims that it is open source (1) and therefore no split were needed (2)

jacquesm 9y ago

Spinning something out is not the same as throwing it away. Chrome is already 'non profit' because it does not cost money to the end user.

cm2187 9y ago
So ad companies are all non profit organisations then?
- jacquesm 9y ago
  I really don't understand your comment. Ad companies are all for profit. Browsers tend to not be a profit center for the companies that make them (Microsoft, Mozilla (a non profit), Google and Apple being the main ones).
  - y4mi 9y ago
    > Chrome is already 'non profit' because it does not cost money to the end user. a) non-profit is a clearly defined term [1] which doesnt apply to google, nor any of its products b) by your definition, any website which utilizes ad revenue is a non profit, because the end user doesn't have to pay money for its use. i'm pretty sure this was the point the parent was trying to convey. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      > non-profit is a clearly defined term [1] which doesnt apply to google, nor any of its products Mozilla is a non-profit, they make a browser. > by your definition, any website which utilizes ad revenue is a non profit, because the end user doesn't have to pay money for its use That's nonsense and you are well aware of it. The customers there are the advertisers, not the users of the product but that does not mean there is no payment. And if you put a value on data then you could argue that there is a payment of sort from those end users as well. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve with all this flak you're throwing up, it is pretty clear that no large browser manufacturer is selling browsers, that a large chunk of the web is at present ad supported and that it would be possible for Google to move Chrome into a non-profit.
      - wand3r 9y ago
        Chrome is the googlebot crawler so they can't bin it. Is it a non-profit? No. Is it a profit center? Potentially. It saves them money using their own machines to do it and has powerful lock in and tracking ramifications. > Mozilla is a non-profit Ya. They don't run an ad network or search engine. This doesn't make any sense. Basically: Is MacOS a non-profit because Linux is free? Apple does not charge for it but it's the bloody platform
        Crespyl 9y ago
        I generally agree with your point, Mozilla is very much the odd one out being a non-profit browser vendor, but that last line is just weird. MacOS is a product, not a company, and I don't think you can even buy it if you wanted, it just happens to come with the hardware you buy from the for-profit Apple company. MacOS also has nothing to do with Linux, except that they're both POSIX-y.
  - pcwalton 9y ago
    A not-for-profit company is different from a company that doesn't make any profit. A nonprofit company just means a company in which profit is not a goal for its own sake. It is quite possible for a nonprofit to make a profitable product, and this is what Mozilla does.

pcwalton 9y ago

In practice, Google controls everything that goes into Chromium, and without being able to fund comparably enormous manpower, this will not change. Forking it over ad policies perceived to be unreasonable is not a feasible option.

xg15 9y ago

So how do I go about e.g. removing telemetry from Chrome's mainline?

dkns 9y ago
Chrome isn't open source. I'd say that if you decide to use Chrome you're accepting fact that you're using closed source program with Google's proprietary telemetry baked in.
- xg15 9y ago
  That's basically my point re GP's claims that it is open source (1) and therefore no split were needed (2)