WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Author Topic: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"  (Read 2377 times)

Offline PDP-8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 915
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2021, 06:12:55 PM »
Well, how about this solution:

Instead of relying on blockers - or js shamers for us og's like me running LibreJs, try this method:

Allow javascript to run.  But instead of blocking, identifying, or shaming the code, put a virtual firewall around the API's used.

https://jshelter.org/

So js runs, but if a site doesn't work with this container about what JS can and cannot do, then you REALLY don't want to support that site.

For now, it can also be seen as Javascript Restrictor too, but that name may go away.

This solves the question for those who simply don't care about computing freedom, yet at the same time might wonder at how well the browser makers themselves are determining what restraints (if any) that javascript can do.

Jshelter allows js to run, making most modern sites work, but puts the kibosh on bad-actors with algorithms, rather than just use somebody else's simplistic blocklist.

This is also a line in the sand kind of thing.  If a site objects to you using this, then it really wants unfettered access and wants total dictatorship 1984-dystopian style.

The best part is that it easily uncovers them.

« Last Edit: November 04, 2021, 06:31:18 PM by PDP-8 »
That's a UNIX book! - cool  -- Garth

Offline hiro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #16 on: November 05, 2021, 04:29:51 AM »
more band-aids that don't solve the underlying issue. and in that only solve a very negligibly small part of the bad symptoms.

over 99% of the websites at this point *openly* include services that are meant to infringe on your privacy and good taste and waste your computer's resources (e.g. through general inefficiency.

in return - apart from, or instead of some actual content that you would have liked to spend your time learning about - you get useless cosmetic games, animations, ... if not plain out obstructions, paywalls, captchas, and random errors (due to the overburderning complexity that they also fail to manage any more at this point).

i don't need to analyse the javascript to figure out that a service is evil or harmful. it's just one of *many* symptoms.
and sadly even websites that don't intend to be evil still use third party services, that might be evil, for the basic functionality of the website.

it's a bigger issue and sadly, even though i spent ages learning about ways to block all this evil at a very very fine-grained level with umatrix, the end result is that when i don't embrace all they force upon me, i am barred access, and this happens more and more often over time.

i used to run opera7 with javascript disabled by default. for quite a long time this was good enough, maybe 5% of websites didn't work at all as a result, but 10% ironically worked *better* without javascript and the useless games.
but then it became common to not provide any more html/text/image content without javascript being involved, so you basically get a mostly empty canvas when you don't enable javascript.
because of this change, more than 30% of the websites are completely unaccessible if you properly protect against all those evil techniques;
another 30% of all websites load media incompletely as a result (e.g. without images or videos);
and another 20% at this point has become interactive and (maybe even deservedly) requires javascript for your form inputs and other actions.
The little rest that is left doesn't leave enough choice to most people.

And I only see it getting worse over time.
It used to be that I had to enable one or maximum 2 third-party ressource exceptions in umatrix to get some javascript dependencies and the website would be running just fine...
Nowadays it happens quite often that there are so many third-party domains it would take too much time to enable them all, and most of them are domains i have never seen before, so not the top10 most common CDNs or javascript frameworks, but something else entirely.
Nearly impossible to tell which domain is needed only for tracking, analytics and advertisement, and what is meant to actually provide an important service in terms of site functionality.
And then there's the whole sabotage where website owners deliberately ensure that you cannot use their website if you disable any of their ad or tracking dependencies...

The only way to win this is not to play, seriously, it's not even an arm's race any more, the fight is so over.

also, the existence of jschelter just shows that it's not only the website owners, it's also the browser vendors that don't care about your privacy, else these privacy leaks would have been disabled *by default*.
this is all systematic, and chrome (google) or it's fake "competitor" firefox (funded by google), are deep in the game (or should i say  advertisement money, hell... world domination?)
« Last Edit: November 05, 2021, 04:33:21 AM by hiro »

Offline nick65go

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #17 on: November 05, 2021, 06:32:09 AM »
So, if is game-over, then what "common" user could do today to read (vital) info? Because we still need some critically news (volcano, earth-quake, covid/travel restriction, major climate revolts, new revolutionary OS/technology, medical research, etc).

What are our MAJOR problems about? To keep individual privacy or to lower CPU/resources waste? Both could be "improved" but not totally solved. Or else cave-man path -> go offline. It will work for some time, but then will be like the fail of the Great Chinese Wall. (China was very technologically advanced and build a wall to protect their IP. World evolved even without them, and when china "open" the wall, they realize that they were behind world inventions. So now they embrace USA technology build on their site).

For pseudo-privacy I use A virtual machine (Qemu) and/or firejail sand-box. https://firejail.wordpress.com/

For lower CPU waste in Firefox I use add-on "ublock" in expert mode (modern version of umatrix). And after I downloaded few tens of pages, just go offline to read them peacefully from RAM.

Any constructive up-to-date solutions are welcome, if you want to share. Thanks.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2021, 06:39:51 AM by nick65go »

Offline hiro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #18 on: November 05, 2021, 02:23:57 PM »
what the common user should do is not run after more technological solutions for a societal problem.
especially computer-savvy people should keep it in mind.

there are always hacks around certain symptoms, but yes, our major problems are not computer problems anyway. there's worse things happening on the world than what is on-topic here of course :)

for us nerds, maybe it's best to at least attempt a parallel strategy, fight both the technological and the underlying offline societal problem at the same time. we can't be just opportunistic about this as is common in programming.

Offline PDP-8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 915
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #19 on: November 08, 2021, 01:31:23 PM »
The societal aspect is pretty simple - be VERY selective about where you visit, like in real-life. :)

Show people that so-called social-media is anything but merely living(?) in a corporate-sponsored fantasy and sometimes demonstrably dangerous world.  Would you send a child into a late-night bar?  Go outside.  Read a book.  Visit a friend in person.  Enjoy a hobby like a "personal pc" that doesn't *demand* being online.
 While we still can.

Remind people to exercise their free-will and simply turn off the 'tube, which has simply transitioned from the classical device to pc's.  Which is ironic, since the personal-computer is not so "personal" anymore. :)

Although some may laugh at web-pages like these from the past, did they not get their message across, provide valuable information, and even serve as kind of a template for those who may want to do the same with some other subject matter?

https://linuxgazette.net/issue61/index.html

Wow, 20 years later it still works.  And not a red-flag thrown.  The whole thing could be simply emailed and enjoyed without having to use forum software or subscribe to any "service".  Nerds like us could look at the underlying html markup if we wanted our own material to look or act differently.   A learning experience if one chose to do so.

The point is - it still works.  And we could make that work just as well today.  But only if we choose to do so.



That's a UNIX book! - cool  -- Garth

Offline hiro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2021, 04:28:22 PM »
of course. i do chose to do so.
and that's why we few hang out here for example.
and are interested in what others consider archaic technology and archaic community.

yet i'm affected by what they are building sometimes, no matter how much i try to shield myself off.
they try to force me to have a smartphone for everything (banking, renting a car, etc.).
it's a grey area whether i'm allowed to eat in a restaurant without smartphone. so far nobody checked me, but officially i'm supposed to "check in" the qr code into my smartphone, which i don't own...

Offline PDP-8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 915
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2021, 01:42:02 PM »
Heh, I wouldn't call it archaic, but TC is an example of good purposeful engineering designed to fit the objective well.  On old, and even *new* machines.

It's just a matter of perspective.  Those who would call TC and the like archaic are just drinking the cool-aid of $marketing.

But it's always been that way for those who don't idolize only money.

Sorry - history time - the Berkeley BSD 2.x series.  What was that about?  It was mainly trying to backport the features of BSD4.x from the then current VAX / MicroVax line of computers to the aging PDP-11's which were still running V7 research and were getting little use as they became obsolete comparatively.

Apparently a nightmare to work on 2.x.  And for most, seemingly unworthy of doing at all when the PDP-11's should have been taken to the scrap heap.

ARCHAIC! some would exclaim.  But those who had a different outlook felt it worthwile and rewarding no matter how difficult it was to do that.

It's all about the perspective one is tuned into, and the ability not to be discouraged by the marketers who ONLY see the world in $$ signs.
That's a UNIX book! - cool  -- Garth

Offline mocore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
  • ~.~
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #22 on: November 17, 2021, 01:31:06 AM »
over 99% of the websites at this point *openly* include services that are meant to infringe on your privacy and good taste and waste your computer's resources (e.g. through general inefficiency.


was just reading this *slightly comical* (allways look on the bright side)
 dothq/browser/issues/594 - telemetry * during uninstall
issue
and was reminded of this post ... js on pages is perhaps the thin end of the

resource and associated infringement wedge


Quote from: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_Mode_Browser
One of the fundamental concepts of the "World Wide Web" projects at CERN was "universal readership"
« Last Edit: November 17, 2021, 01:51:24 AM by mocore »

Offline gadget42

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
Re: Would anyone use an "anti-browser"
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2022, 04:02:52 AM »
...
over 99% of the websites at this point *openly* include services that are meant to infringe on your privacy and good taste and waste your computer's resources (e.g. through general inefficiency.
...
The only way to win this is not to play, seriously, it's not even an arm's race any more, the fight is so over.
...
this is all systematic, and chrome (google) or it's fake "competitor" firefox (funded by google), are deep in the game (or should i say  advertisement money, hell... world domination?)

WORLD DOMINATION

so...Much...THIS!!!

...mic drop...

sharing is caring

also see: http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,23891.0.html

20220402-0610am-modified: added link to another forum thread

added more...sigh...

this opened in dillo:
https://www.thedrive.com/news/44967/audi-owner-finds-basic-hvac-function-paywalled-after-pressing-the-button-for-it

but slashdot?!? fails to open successfully in dillo:
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/22/04/01/2138219/audi-owner-finds-basic-hvac-function-paywalled-after-pressing-the-button-for-it

smh...wth...

20220402-0624am-modified: added more
« Last Edit: April 02, 2022, 04:24:27 AM by gadget42 »
The fluctuation theorem has long been known for a sudden switch of the Hamiltonian of a classical system Z54 . For a quantum system with a Hamiltonian changing from... https://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,25972.msg166580.html#msg166580