Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was easy for Google to deliver Chrome when the biggest work was done by Safari team... It was easy for Apple to deliver Safari, when biggest work was done by Konqueror team...
In terms of active development, Google is working on Blink and Apple is still working on WebKit. Every other browser depends on Google and Apple to do the heavy lifting for them.
IPFS Support in Brave
311–320 of 464 posts
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really is great to see challenger browsers pushing the web forward like this. Along with IPFS it's nice to see Tor integration, low-level content blocking, a privacy-respecting Zoom alternative ( https://together.brave.com/ ) and integrated MetaMask for Web3. Brave still has a small userbase (~24 million), but hopefully it creates the space / incentives for Firefox and others to play catch-up so we see a lot of th…
Brave is the new firefox...or should I say the old.
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a killer feature for me too. Works great between all my devices across Linux, Android, and iOS. If I see an interesting article I just ship it off to my desktop to read later instead of keeping the tab open for days on my phone.
I've unfortunately had the opposite experience with FF send, I still use it all the time (or try to) when I find links on mobile that I want to read on a big screen, or when I have an image url on my laptop that I want to send from my phone via SMS, snapshat, etc. But the delay is just unbearably long and inconsistent. Sometimes (most often when sending desktop to phone) the delay is 15 minutes or more. I've found it…
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is easier for Brave to deliver new features when the biggest work is done by Chrome team. Do you think Mozilla will ever switch to chromium? It is the linux of the web - would be nice if they could finally focus and stop dressing up their dead horse.
> Do you think Mozilla will ever switch to chromium? I don't think so. If they did, there wouldn't be much incentive for using Firefox. > It is the linux of the web - would be nice if they could finally focus and stop dressing up their dead horse. And what would they be focusing on exactly?
Ipfs for one
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#315Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#316Brave is becoming more and more compelling. How I wish they develop their own engine(I know, tough task), or at least use Firefox's. Chromium based browser is really a deal breaker for me
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#317Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
When you are short on funds to do all the things you want to do, you have to prioritize. It's my opinion that Mozilla is prioritizing the wrong things if they want to remain relevant.
What does it matter what good things they plan to do, if they will be gone in a year or two?
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is already the case with Uniswap: https://uniswap.org/blog/ipfs-uniswap-interface/ . Let's see if the underlying economic models can mature to be viable in the "real world," or at least the digital real world. BAT, for example, made Brave possible, but the tokenomics are bad and basically no one uses it. That said, it is an exciting time, for sure! JavaScript sure has grown from humble beginnings.
Anyone know why they didn't just use an existing cryptocurrency?
[0] https://medium.com/faast/brave-ico-review-600-in-6-days-b51d...
edit: added citation
Re: IPFS Support in Brave
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe he suffers the consequences of that then.
Like building a new browser that's actually innovating instead of stagnating?
His replacement at Mozilla by all accounts seems to be not great, but they could just as well have signed someone who was and we wouldn't be having this conversation.