That's a screen shot (below) of the BitBucket repository for commits to ongoing development of dwb (dynamic web browser).
Oh, that's nice. What's my point?
dwb is 100% pure Gnu Public Licensed code. That means, you, anyone, developers, users, the world, can see it, change it, for free. That has always been the basis for GPLv2 and the primary reason for why I opt to use dwb. Want to know what's going on with their code? Help yourself -- look around. Only, don't forget to turn the lights out when you leave. ;)
|dwb (dynamic web browser) BitBucket repository commits page|
You don't get that with Google's Chrome. Nope. Sorry. They won't let you see their code base. Of course, they are within their legal rights to do so, but, that doesn't mean I have to use their browser if I cannot know what it is doing, do I?
Ask yourself this question: Notice lately how Google Plus will periodically 'freeze' with the cpu utilization at 100%?
You see, 'proprietary code' (not open source) often leads to some level of exploitation for commercial or 'other' purposes. Because Chrome is 'closed source', we cannot know for certain 'if' Google cooperates in some capacity with governmental information collection and sharing. That's because there is no public access for review of their code base, unlike dwb.
Taking the overt step to use dwb is my personal choice. Yours may be different, but, if you truly believe in the power we (Humanity) hold over the "n'er-do-wells" of the world by embracing Open Source, then I urge you to make it your policy to not use proprietary software. Take a stand and fight back. Set an example for others to follow and use open source applications only such as dwb, Mozilla Firefox, for the sake of security through transparency.