felarof

10 ms·

61.
by felarof 1y ago
Thank you!
62.
by felarof 1y ago
Thank you for the support! So far our patches have not conflicted with chromium updates. But there are viable ways to do patching and keep up with the pace (Brave Browser has pretty example infra setup to do this).
63.
by felarof 1y ago
Sell licenses for enterprise browser
64.
by felarof 1y ago
Thank you for your support! Yes, we want to do some cool things that we can't do as extension. C++ APIs for dom tree, a11y. We eventually want to ship a small fine-tuned LLM and package with browser binary too. Just getting started!
65.
by felarof 1y ago
Also, ex-Google engineer here :) Rtrvr looks like great product too! Definitely understand that keeping up with security patches is important. And this is an engineering challenge and not implausible to do -- Perplexity is 1/1000th the
66.
by felarof 1y ago
Haha, thank you! As a small startup we cannot outspend Perplexity Comet in marketing, so we just said open-source alternative so that people get what we are building.
67.
by felarof 1y ago
> How does this make money? Surely this will have a cloud offering? Our plan is to make the consumer version of the browser for free and sell licenses for enterprise version. This is similar to how many open-source projects sustain devel
68.
by felarof 1y ago
+1, enabling uBlock origin could be a short term solution. But we are working on adding built-in adblockers just like Brave + enhancing it to detect more ad formats using lightweight local LLM.
69.
by felarof 1y ago
This was definitely a hard choice. We spoke to folks who had built browser on top of webkit and they spent nearly 2years just fixing random bugs and getting sites to work. I'm sure firefox/gecko engine would probably work better t
70.
by felarof 1y ago
This is very useful feedback, thank you! We will look into add a cursor movements; key typing should already appear like a human would (but probably we can slow it down a bit).
71.
by felarof 1y ago
Hmm, what do you mean? Could you elaborate? Thanks!
72.
by felarof 1y ago
It is just a warning. We working on getting Microsft Windows signing set up.
73.
by felarof 1y ago
thanks for joining! DMed you.
74.
by felarof 1y ago
Yes! We want to do this. We were thinking of implement MCP protocol into the browser, so the browser can be an MCP server (that exposes bunch of tools -- navigation, click, extract) and you can connect that to your agent, would that work? W
75.
by felarof 1y ago
Yes! We are excited to build BrowserOS-OS! I think with agents the whole UX can be re-imagined. I'll check out FydeOS!
76.
by felarof 1y ago
True, there are plenty of libs already available to do such an automation if you are (or can hire a) dev. But for non-technical folks, agentic browsers seems like a good UX to build such and many more automations.
77.
by felarof 1y ago
Brave Browser (70M+ users) has validated that a chromium fork can be viable path. And it can in fact provide better privacy and security. Chrome extensions is not a bad idea too. Just saying that owning the underlying source code has some s
78.
by felarof 1y ago
Yes, right now using Gemini API on our liteLLM server (we can't expose API key on client side). We are working on smaller, fine-tuned model too, which will be the default soon! It should be much faster and precise at navigation tasks.
79.
by felarof 1y ago
Great points! For sure, the whole agentic browsers space is still super early. We are also just getting started and trying to narrow down on a high-value niche use-case. There are few repetitive, boring use-cases where time saving could be
80.
by felarof 1y ago
We working on it! Should have pretty soon!
81.
by felarof 1y ago
Good question, so far we have been building on top of chromium release that Google Chrome is based on.
82.
by felarof 1y ago
The default model is Gemini. You can bring your own API keys and change the default to any model you local. Or better run model locally using Ollama and use that!
83.
by felarof 1y ago
Oooh, that's a nice idea! We'll look into doing that!
84.
by felarof 1y ago
IIRC, Firefox's web extension API does not provide access to accessibility tree as well.
85.
by felarof 1y ago
Yes, we want to do this too! We'll expose much more richer APIs. What use-cases do you have in mind? like scraping?
86.
by felarof 1y ago
We just started cooking, very soon you should be able to do this!
87.
by felarof 1y ago
we support Mac (apple silicon and intel) and Windows. hardware requirements are minimal, same as Google Chrome, if you BYOK API keys for agents and are not running LLMs locally.
88.
by felarof 1y ago
Thank you! Browser wars have begun. > that OpenAI will be launching a (presumably not open source) browser of their own this summer. For sure, won't be open-source. I bet in some parallel world, openAI would be non-profit and actual
89.
by felarof 1y ago
The agent running by itself shouldn't impact battery life, it is similar to a lightweight chrome extension and if you think about it, it's an agent browsing the web like human would :) If you run LLMs locally (using Ollama) and us
90.
by felarof 1y ago
We don't mind upstreaming. But I don't think Google Chrome/Chromium wants to expose it as an API chrome extensions, if not they would've done this long time ago. From Google's perspective, extension are meant to be

More ›