Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IPFS Support in Brave

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 464 posts

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#151

Post by leppr »

gnud wrote: post #97
DenseComet wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not just about having tabs from different profiles in a single window. Firefox containers allows things like automatically opening a specific site in a certain container. It allows for extensions such as the Facebook Container and Temporary Containers. There's a huge amount of functionality it provides.

> Firefox containers allows things like automatically opening a specific site in a certain container. I use this a bit. But the configuration GUI (provided by an extension) is soooo bad. So I only use it for about 10% of the sites I _ought_ to use it for. I wish Firefox would work on these features, instead of for example messing around with the address bar on every other release.

Agreed. I use containers everyday including multiple add-ons that layer over it, but the whole UX still feels incomplete/hackish. Given the number of people who seem to swear by them, polishing it should be a priority before another browser releases a version that's just better.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#152

Post by wolverine876 »

jonathansampson wrote: post #91
caycep wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of wonder how many Mozilla developers/engineers jumped ship to Brave over the years?

We have quite a few engineers whose roots lie within, or have passed through, Mozilla. We even have several engineers and team members who pioneered much of the Web at Netscape and prior :)

Are you sure you want to participate in a discussion badmouthing Mozilla? You're not directly saying those things, but you are taking part in the dialog. That sort of behavior makes me pretty angry about Brave.

Focus on Brave. You have nothing to do with Mozilla.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#153

Post by chr1 »

dsissitka wrote: post #103
hobo_mark wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhm, no? https://vivaldi.com/source/

Only part of their source is available. > Of the three layers, only the UI layer is closed-source. ... The Vivaldi UI is truly what makes the browser unique. As such, it is our most valuable asset in terms of code. https://vivaldi.com/blog/vivaldi-browser-open-source/

Being able to contribute to ui code, or to customize ui without going through the minified code would be the main benefit of browser being open source. For discouraging forks, using a non-permissive license for js code, would be as effective as minification.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#154

Post by rmm »

mikece wrote: post #63
agilob wrote: post #40

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

Does Brave have an implementation of Multi-Account Containers? This is the ONE killer feature in Firefox that makes it impossible for me to leave for Brave completely: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

For me, somewhat embarrassingly, the one killer feature is the "Send to Device" feature from firefox on iOS. Being able to send links to browser for later reviewing is super useful. Not sure why Edge or other browsers don't implement

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#155

Post by webmaven »

BrendanEich wrote: post #149
jjd33 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peter Thiel (Palantir) is one of their main investors. that should raise all alarm bellas for a product that advertises itself with "privacy"

Peter Thiel is not personally an investor in Brave. The firm he's a partner in (Founders Fund) has a small seed series investment, which was led by Cyan Banister. Some first floor engineers at Brave have more equity than that small investment constitutes. Repeating falsehoods once you know they are false is lying, so please don't.

> Some first floor engineers at Brave have more equity than that small investment constitutes.

Is "first floor engineers" an SV-ism (or Brave-ism) that indicates something like "early employees"?

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#156

Post by bawolff »

killingtime74 wrote: post #127
Legion wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the person's point is that Mozilla is making a complete browser, rendering engine and all, while Brave is basically a shell of stuff on top of Chromium/Blink.

I don’t think the customer cares as long as you can use it

The type of people who are into decentralizing the internet are also usually against a single company (google) controlling the rendering engine of most users.

If you're talking about typical user of the average web browser, they care about IPFS as much as they care about the rendering engine - i.e. not at all.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#157

Post by VoxPelli »

adkadskhj wrote: post #60

Can anyone compare Brave to Beaker Browser? I've long been interested in Dat vs IPFS, so i'm curious how their browser counterparts behave. I suppose right off the bat, Brave is a "normal" browser - so it just supports +1 protocol. That's really cool.

Just a note that it's nowadays not `dat:` but `hyper:`, a rename of the protocol, that's used by Beaker: https://hypercore-protocol.org/

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#158

Post by wolverine876 »

josteink wrote: post #32
iknowstuff wrote: post #5

Lovely. Mozilla should be advancing the web in similar ways in Firefox.

They’re too busy taking down MDN, firing talented engineers, diverse-hiring non-developers and funding feminist Wordpress-setup camps these days for that to ever happen. Mozilla today is not the Mozilla we knew.

Well that assumes that inclusion in the open Internet is a bad idea. I think it helps the Internet, Mozilla, the industry, our society, and provides opportunity to talented people who otherwise wouldn't have it.

Also, as you probably know, many of those things you mention are caused by lack of funds.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#159

Post by bawolff »

wolverine876 wrote: post #152
jonathansampson wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have quite a few engineers whose roots lie within, or have passed through, Mozilla. We even have several engineers and team members who pioneered much of the Web at Netscape and prior :)

Are you sure you want to participate in a discussion badmouthing Mozilla? You're not directly saying those things, but you are taking part in the dialog. That sort of behavior makes me pretty angry about Brave. Focus on Brave. You have nothing to do with Mozilla.

I think its a little extreme to call this bad mouthing. People switch jobs. It does not reflect negatively on firefox that some of their employees now work at other companies in the same space. That is how jobs work - its not a life long commitment.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#160

Post by wolverine876 »

1996 wrote: post #27
iknowstuff wrote: post #5

Lovely. Mozilla should be advancing the web in similar ways in Firefox.

Yes, Firefox need to focus on a usecase. It may not be able to beat chromium right now, but a working IPFS and TOR right inside your "vanilla" Firefox would give a compelling reason to keep it, when you can install chromium/chrome/edge and get better features - except this one!

> working IPFS and TOR right inside your "vanilla" Firefox would give a compelling reason to keep it

For 3 people? I don't think IPFS is going to impact market share.

Firefox does provide privacy.

Post reply on HN