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

Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 510 posts

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#71

Post by oefrha »

MarsIronPI wrote: post #36
oefrha wrote: post #19

I’m skeptical. Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web. People have been fiercely debating whether that’s a terrible thing, or whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners. I don’t want to make a judgement on that, but I don’t think the observation that CF is pushing us in that direction is very controversial. But an ind…

By your argument, this could still be interpreted as Cloudflare approving Ladybird. I don't see how indie genuine browsers (i.e. not bots) are "against the ethos" of restricting the web to approved browsers only.

"Approved browser" in this context have technical restrictions on user freedom, e.g. https://developers.cloudflare.com/fundamentals/reference/cry... I'm not talking about someone at CF just adding a random browser to an approved list. More empirically speaking, a browser can't be considered approved if you can freely fork it and not revoke the approved status.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#72

Post by blibble »

oefrha wrote: post #19

I’m skeptical. Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web. People have been fiercely debating whether that’s a terrible thing, or whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners. I don’t want to make a judgement on that, but I don’t think the observation that CF is pushing us in that direction is very controversial. But an ind…

a wide rollout of remote attestation would mean cloudflare becomes completely redundant

so I doubt they want that

a murky world where you "need" a guardian middle-man is what they want to preserve

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#73

Post by bdn_ »

pelagicAustral wrote: post #26
lavela wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Openly aligning with DHH is certainly a choice. After all being created by DHH is the only feature they list on their website. Didn't care for the DHH controversies for a long time but if you start writing white national blog posts[1] I don't know what to say anymore. [1] https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64

[flagged]

Of course you can, nobody is claiming otherwise. Freedom of speech does not come with freedom from the consequences of what you say.

I have the freedom to scream "FIRE" in a crowded building when there really isn't a fire, does this mean I should be excused from the consequences? DHH has the freedom to post racist and intentionally divisive BS on his own site, and we have the freedom to let people who care about being anti-racist know to stay away from him and his work.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#74

Post by jorvi »

oefrha wrote: post #43
oefrha wrote: post #19

I’m skeptical. Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web. People have been fiercely debating whether that’s a terrible thing, or whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners. I don’t want to make a judgement on that, but I don’t think the observation that CF is pushing us in that direction is very controversial. But an ind…

Responding to a dead comment from a banned account: > The big new game for them is AI crawler metering. Don’t think browser matters much anymore from their perspective. Truly open browsers are easy to spoof. Approved browsers with whatever attestation features they champion builtin are hard to spoof. So browsers do matter. Edit: authentication => attestation for accuracy.

Browser attestation doesn't really matter, its device attestation. Browser attestation is downstream from that.

Google with SafetyNet attestation (whatever the hell its called these days) has pretty much locked down Android as tightly as iOS at this point.

Hell, Apple device users already get to go in the internet "approved" fast lane because of attestation. iDevices and M-series Macbooks can send out a special response that bypasses all captchas.

Windows 11 has a requirement for TPM2, which features hardware attestation too.

Linux of course cannot be locked down in a similar manner, thus cannot attest and will have to suffer for it.

It would probably be illegal for CloudFlare + Google to outright block you from accessing the internet, but they can just drown you in a sea of captchas until you give up and join the attested crowd. Hell, YouTube outright forces you to sign in if they detect a VPN, they won't even offer a captcha.

Like 'Amusing Ourselves to Death' points out, it isn't a 1984-esque brutal fascist control that will erode our freedoms, but rather a Brave New World-esque situation where people will sign away all (digital) control because the dopamine must flow.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#76

Post by robinhood »

oefrha wrote: post #19

I’m skeptical. Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web. People have been fiercely debating whether that’s a terrible thing, or whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners. I don’t want to make a judgement on that, but I don’t think the observation that CF is pushing us in that direction is very controversial. But an ind…

I don't understand why we always assume bad faith. I wish more companies were like Cloudflare actually - trying to balance the need of revenues while trying to do good for internet and open source as a whole.

As a normal user with a few sites, I'm glad they provide what they provide to block bots, attacks and everything AI.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#77

Post by thewebguyd »

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #35

I cannot for the life of me understand the Omarchy hype. The Linux community has been theming their distribution installs for decades. What distinguishes this from that?

It's popularity I think comes from a) it's brain dead easy to get running while also being a very usable and nice hyprland config b) it's from DHH which has cult following status

I'd argue there's a fairly big niche of people who want a tiling WM but also don't want to have to start from scratch, figure out what accompanying utilities and programs they want to satisfy things like runner/menu, status bar, etc.

Other dots aren't as opinionated, or don't come with such a detailed user guide that Omarchy does, nor a set up script.

I'd even argue that Omarchy isn't really for other Linux users looking to distro hop, but like Omakub, it's for mac users curious about Linux, wanting an equally opinionated set up.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#78

Post by oefrha »

tonyhart7 wrote: post #69
oefrha wrote: post #19

I’m skeptical. Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web. People have been fiercely debating whether that’s a terrible thing, or whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners. I don’t want to make a judgement on that, but I don’t think the observation that CF is pushing us in that direction is very controversial. But an ind…

why you acting like cloudflare forced people to use their services???? there are a alternative on the market like akamai and fastly people free to use their favorite cdn over CF lol

> People have been fiercely debating

> whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners

> I don’t want to make a judgement on that

I explicitly said I don't want to debate that. Take a deep breath, no one is taking away your favorite CDN.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#79

Post by bonoboTP »

tasn wrote: post #24
justusthane wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s one of the very, very few independent browsers built from the ground up and not on top of one the few existing engines (Gecko, Chromium, WebKit), which is extremely important to the health of the open web. Imagine a world where Chromium is the only browser engine. Standards wouldn’t matter and Google could just do whatever they wanted — we’re pretty close to that as it is.

To combat a Chrome hegemony you need strong opposition, not a long-tail of weak opposition. Or in other words: Firefox needs to become more competitive. I (unfortunately) don't think having another 0.1% market cap browser is the solution, at least not for now. Just to clarify: I'm in favor of Cloudflare donating to Ladybird, and I'm in favor of them building it! I just don't think that's the solution to combating Chr…

Firefox is also sustained by Google. So you have a choice between Google and Google.

Re: Cloudflare is sponsoring Ladybird and Omarchy

#80

Post by nurbel »

zarzavat wrote: post #64
rs186 wrote: post #37

The post does not mention how much money they are giving. Maybe I am a pessimist, but unless the number is in tens of millions or hundreds of millions (very unlikely), I don't think it helps the development of an independent browser very much. Google probably has poured over billions of dollars into Chrome development over the years, and if you look at what Chrome supports, it's massive. I seriously doubt anybody els…

LuaJIT was developed by one person. Ladybird doesn't need hundreds of millions of dollars, it needs interpreter specialists who are willing to lend their time to the project, and an army of volunteers to work on the rest of the rendering engine.

why do you think the js interpreter is that special compared to all the rest? AFAIU, CSS is a much more complex beast, as the spec has not been written to reflect the way it could be implemented
Post reply on HN