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

191–200 of 464 posts

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#191

Post by jorvi »

jonathansampson wrote: post #89
0-_-0 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another. Is that similar to First Party Isolation in Firefox?

I suspect so, but don't know the details of FPI in Firefox. We don't permit cookies and storage access by third-parties, while also blocking known bad-actors entirely. We also "farble" APIs to create noise for those who do have access. If there are any specific scenarios or questions you have in mind, I'd be happy to discuss further.

> We also "farble" APIs to create noise for those who do have access

Does this effectively do the same as the 'Canvasblocker' extension does for Firefox?

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#192

Post by aarpmcgee »

jjordan wrote: post #174
aarpmcgee wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My sense is that this blog post is objectionable to you but I can't quite figure out why.

It's a statement in support of suppressing speech, and it's needlessly political. Mozilla leadership has mostly rested on their laurels (read: Google money) while Firefox consistently slid in market share. I've been a loyal FF user for 17 years, and this was the final straw. In the process of switching to Brave.

I don't see anything in that post about suppressing speech—can you help me see it? The main bullet points in the article don't seem to have anything to do with suppressing speech (unless that is how you are framing the bullet point which reads: "Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation."

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#194

Post by jejkfmgmgk »

arsome wrote: post #25
jejkfmgmgk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the one by the Mozilla CEO, "We need more than deplatforming"[1] 1: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-d...

That headline is certainly inflammatory, but I don't think the actual content of the post is nearly as bad - they're not suggesting web browser start flagging/blocking sites or anything similar like it initially made me think. They're simply suggesting further transparency in algorithmic suggestions and research be conducted. You could even argue that they're suggesting that deplatforming simply isn't the ultimate so…

The conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. They take the banning of Trump and conclude that there needs to be transparency in advertising? I mean, I agree, but it's certainly a weird article. I'm not sure if they're just piggybacking on a hot issue and inflammatory title to push this message. Whatever it is, I don't like it very much.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#195

Post by simmanian »

joshuakelly wrote: post #29

Massive. I have a project that assumed ipfs:// would eventually exist natively within a mainstream(-ish) browser, and I'm very pleased to discover that after updating to 1.19.x it all just works. Excited for the forthcoming DNSLink support too, even if it's just a bridge to something even better. Best of luck to everyone who wants the web to stay bundled inside of the corporate state.

I wrote this somewhere below as well but I'm honestly confused. It seems like I can load ipfs:// links just fine on my firefox. Is there something I'm missing?

Edit: you guys are right. it seems i have installed the add-on some time ago and forgot about it.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#196

Post by kickscondor »

Ok ok - check this out.

ipns://k51qzi5uqu5dlusethckbaq0kf1udrhaq99lvrd21krkbnjukthfbv3hu4wkk8/ [Brave] (edit: got ipns://kickscondor.com/ working.)

hyper://f8f860772e5e489beaf5c00390ab5b42703f8dd2a57d74e4d563433834208543/ [Beaker]

http://kickscofbk2xcp5g.onion/ [Tor]

https://kickscondor.com/ [Plain]

Needs a Gemini version.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#197

Post by miguelmota »

I recommend Pinata [0] for IPFS pinning if you do not want to host your own IPFS node. I'm not sure when they'll start charging but it's been free since they launched and I believe Infura [1] also has free pinning. Cloudflare [2] is a good alternative gateway to use. For deployment I use this deploy tool [3] which makes it as simple as `ipd -p pinata my-app` to host a static frontend.

[0] https://pinata.cloud/

[1] https://infura.io

[2] https://blog.cloudflare.com/distributed-web-gateway/

[3] https://github.com/ipfs-shipyard/ipfs-deploy

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#198

Post by pseudalopex »

jjcon wrote: post #189
bawolff wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> against a single company (google) controlling the rendering engine of most users That isn’t really applicable here though. That’s kinda like claiming we should be against Linux because it runs all the web servers. There is a difference between centralization and standardization.

Linux isn't controlled by an advertising company.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#200

Post by Jayschwa »

kickscondor wrote: post #196

Ok ok - check this out. ipns://k51qzi5uqu5dlusethckbaq0kf1udrhaq99lvrd21krkbnjukthfbv3hu4wkk8/ [Brave] (edit: got ipns://kickscondor.com/ working.) hyper://f8f860772e5e489beaf5c00390ab5b42703f8dd2a57d74e4d563433834208543/ [Beaker] http://kickscofbk2xcp5g.onion/ [Tor] https://kickscondor.com/ [Plain] Needs a Gemini version.

Ha, very cool. The HTTPS version does not load for me right now, but the IPFS version does (somewhat slowly). Supporting all the hot protocols could be a good subject for a blog post or guide.
Post reply on HN