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

Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

lunduke.locals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 777 posts

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#281

Post by rimunroe »

TheDong wrote: post #208
eitland wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome in itself is not the problem. Competition is good. Firefox is better now thanks to Chrome. Neither is Safari. Safari is actually part of the solution. Safari has saved Firefox and other browsers by being the only option on iOS for a long time and a better choice for many (because of battery usage) on Mac OS. Without Safari I am afraid we would all be locked into Chrome now. The problem is that Google, like Mic…

> Safari is actually part of the solution ... > Google, like microsoft, If you're going to complain about 1-3 for google and ms, I don't think you can praise safari in the same breath. Apple's abused their position with the iPhone to make safari relevant, and unlike Chrome and IE, users can't just install another browser. Apple's behavior is the only reason I can't run my own addons I've written for firefox on iOS (t…

Maybe I missed something but your arguments seem be about how Apple’s locking down of iOS/iPadOS and Safari are harmful to user freedom. That’s a very different argument from the one the person you’re replying to was making. They were saying that the popularity of Apple’s mobile devices coupled with their only running Safari holds back a Chrome monopoly in the browser space. If people don’t support Safari they lose out on a large portion of users.

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#283

Post by coldpie »

account42 wrote: post #273
coldpie wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish you luck, more competition in the browser space is sorely needed. But please, please spend more time thinking about your finances. The surface of planet "Startups That Will Figure Out A Business Model Later" is like 99.9% graveyard. You're going to be asking people to depend on your software for an extremely important part of their lives. If you don't have a path to sustainability, you're going to do a lot of…

A non-profit foundation taking donations is a "business" plan and IMO the only one that has a chance of building a true user agent in the long run. That doesn't mean that it is guaranteed to succeed but I don't think there is a better funding option thatwon't come with conflicting incentives.

No, "people give us money" is not a business plan. When you're starting a business (yes, non-profits are businesses) and employing people, you need to be thinking about marketing, user acquisition & conversion, pricing structures, corporate sponsorships, and so on. I know it's not as much fun as programming, but neither is eating out of your neighbor's trash because you can't pay your bills.

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#284

Post by adwn »

dataflow wrote: post #112
awesomekling wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks F3nd0! There are currently no plans to switch to a less permissive license. And we're perfectly happy using proprietary services like GitHub and Discord as long as they make our work easier and more enjoyable. We recently evaluated a number of alternatives, and found that they all introduced more friction than we were comfortable with. Although the task of building a browser is itself challenging, we're a prag…

> There are currently no plans to switch to a less permissive license. Hey, just a reality check: in the event that you actually do become wildly successful, this means that others (Google, Microsoft, etc.) will be able to fork the browser and then develop it faster than you - thus leaving you behind and taking away your users ! Would highly recommend leaving yourself some mechanism to prevent that, unless you're rea…

> Hey, just a reality check:

It's rather condescending of you to assume that the developers of Ladybird aren't fully aware of the consequences that their choice of license entails.

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#285

Post by Kim_Bruning »

Hrrm.

   legacyPackages.x86_64-linux.ladybird (0-unstable-2024-06-04)
Cool! Let's see if I can read HN.

  nix run nixpkgs#ladybird

  ...

  502144.831 Ladybird(1297933): WebContent process crashed!
  502144.831 Ladybird(1297933): WebContent has crashed 5 times in quick succession! Not restarting...

  ...
I didn't expect it to work very well yet in a distro, so that's ok. It's cool enough that nix(os) has already started tracking it.

I'll check back every few months and see how it's going!

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#286

Post by account42 »

moreofthis wrote: post #41
no_time wrote: post #2

Looks like the website of a startup that wants my email so they can "get back to me with a quote". Such soulless corpo design is not befitting of a project this nice.

I had a similar first impression. The previous logo and branding were pretty strong imo even if the SerenityOS and ladybird website was/is a bit scrappy. Very cute little ladybird, and the natural patterns of a ladybug gave a clear visual motif to build from. People talk about 'polish' in design as a signifier of quality but my mind always goes to conching, the process by which cacao nibs are ground down over days to…

I do like to add raw cacao nibs to my chocolate cakes and I also prefer the old web over much of the offensively inoffensive corportate approved web so maybe there is something to your analogy.

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#287

Post by account42 »

satyanash wrote: post #127

No talk of the license on the frontpage. Visiting the GitHub repo tells me it is 2-clause BSD license. It's high time we had a GPLv3 web browser, otherwise, this risks the same fate as the rest of the browsers with proprietary forks. This of course comes at the cost of not being able to support non-free parts of the web standard such as DRM.

> This of course comes at the cost of not being able to support non-free parts of the web standard such as DRM.

That would be a benefit, not a cost.

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#289

Post by tristan957 »

unclenoriega wrote: post #271
guappa wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Who are the slaves in this analogy?

I would say that the users are the slaves. Without GPL software, we could end up in situations where hardware vendors stop shipping software updates, so we are slaves to capitalism by having to buy things we shouldn't need to buy.

This goes hand in hand with right to repair in my opinion.

Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder

#290

Post by criddell »

Y_Y wrote: post #140
eitland wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reality check: 1. All the BSDs have been out there for decades without anyone running with it. 2. Google and Microsoft - while being a shadow of their former selves technically - are probably still very capable of reimplementing whatever they want. 3. If Ladybird gets so wildly popular, lets celebrate wildly!

You wouldn't count OSX as someone running with BSD?

Don’t forget the PS5! At it’s heart it’s just a computer running FreeBSD.
Post reply on HN