>No. The browser is not fully open source like open in open source. It is a common myth and misconception about Kiwi Browser. If it will be on F-droid, then it will be good cause have to provide full source code about everything without hiding anything.
>My 2 cents: the bigger issue is that this repository here does not contain all the patches needed to build Kiwi :) so Kiwi is not open source, but by having the github repository here it looks like it is.
>I think it would be fair to mention somewhere that the source code used to build Kiwi is not available anywhere (which is required to call it open source); I have seen it already mentioned together with Bromite as "open source browsers" in many places online, hence my comment here.
SEVERAL PEOPLE IN THE KIWI GITHUB PAGE ARE COMPLAINING THAT THE DEV IS NOT ACTUALLY OPEN SOURCING HIS CODE. HE PROVIDES THE CHROMIUM CODE BUT NOT THE CODE TO THE PATCHES THAT HE APPLIES TO MAKE CHROMIUM INTO KIWI BROWSER. THAT IS WHY YOU CANNOT COMPILE KIWI FROM THE SOURCE CODE. HE IS ONLY USING GITHUB TO HOST HIS BINARIES AND PATCHES.
STICK TO BRAVE OR BROMITE AS THEY ARE ACTUALLY OPEN SOURCE.
>STICK TO BRAVE Fuck off with your thinly veiled advertising thread, you absolute subhuman.
Easton Garcia
nice try kiwi shill. your browser isn't even open source.
Elijah Morales
I've never heard of kiwi in my life, I'm just not a fan of browsers that >inject headers for advertising purposes >intentionally fingerprint users >send info to google You already have 2-3 more threads up advertising your garbage, you don't need another one. Get a real job, faggot.
Ian Williams
>shill projecting. We've already seen you shill Brave today >muh open source!!!1 fuck off Brendan. Brave devs are hypocritical cunts.
John Rogers
samefag
Julian Young
>KIWI BROWSER Literally fucking who? >STICK TO BRAVE lol no. Fuck off with your crapware.
Juan Allen
Do we really need people advertising these startup Chromium based browsers? No one here would seriously consider using them over Chrome/Chromium or Firefox/derivatives.
Parker Young
>illiterate Jow Forums user unable to identify a reply if it's not directly quoted the absolute state of this board
Dylan Cooper
That reminds me of sept by atmosphere >free and open source
Owen Anderson
>No one here would seriously consider using them over Chrome die
Charles Rivera
>Brave Oh great so you're retarded.
Jaxon Rogers
I must interrupt here. The term "open source" is a misleading one, which was coined by a group of secessionists in the 90s who felt like the mission of the Free Software movement was restricting their ability to collaborate with the publishers of proprietary software. They invented software licenses that allow the user to view the source code of their programs, claiming that this would respect the user's freedoms. But that is not the case! Just being able to read the source code is not enough. "Open" software still restricts some of the user's basic software freedoms. There are four of them: >To run the program as the user wishes (freedom 0) >To view and modify the source code, so that the program does what the user wishes (freedom 1) >To help your neighbor by sharing copies of the software with them (freedom 2) >To help the software community by sharing modified versions of the software (freedom 3) Note that none of these software freedoms require the program to be provided gratis; the term "free" in "free software" is derived from freedom, not free as in "free of charge". Programs which do not respect these four software freedoms are a means to subjugate the user. Get are immoral. We call those oppressive programs "proprietary" or "non-free" software. Using the term "open source" conjures up an illusion of freedom where there is none, which is even more morally wrong than admitting that the user is being oppressed. Therefore, I would ask that you categorize software not based on technical issues like source code availability, but the ethical and sociological issue of software freedom. Please, stop using the term "open source" and call software "free" or "proprietary" / "non-free" where appropriate. Should confusion about the term "free" arise, use alternatives such as "libre" (Spanish / French for "free as in freedom", unambiguous) or FOSS ("Free and Open Source Software", although the "Open" part is redundant).
Thomas Butler
>Have been using lightning for years even though it keeps crashing if you use the url bar and you have to search for the url instead.
Grayson Richardson
How about using the only good and ACTUALLY open source android browser instead? >kiwi >brave Both botnet and both have unusable UI.
