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

15 Years of Forking

waterfox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#31

Post by MrAlex94 »

kajika91 wrote: post #23

I am surprise there is no mention of Librewolf here. The differences of Librewolf and Waterfox is pretty hard to grasp, I am digging a little bit but so far I guess I would say using any of them is still way better than the main alternatives. Librewolf is, to me, the way better alternative as this is really in the FOSS mindset : a tool for everyone to use and by anyone to contribute. Seeing their plateform alone (Lem…

Librewolf and Waterfox have always had different goals. Waterfox has always had a more opinionated take on defaults and privacy. Essentially the goal has been keep the web as private as possible without breaking it (I know Librewolf is more aggressive there and that sometimes leads to website breakages) and I think I've managed that well, especially with the implementation of Oblivious DNS by default.

The upside of Librewolf being a community project is also IMO its downside - there isn't any accountability and with the current climate around the world becoming more hostile to online services, I think governance is hugely important, which is why I've tried to collate everything as much as I can: https://www.waterfox.com/docs/policies/company-information/

At the end of the day, if something goes wrong, at least with Waterfox I can be held accountable.

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#32

Post by red_admiral »

> Mozilla: Break free from big tech - our products put you in control of a safer, more private internet experience.

(Adds AI that needs 7 about:config entries to disable, until users roast it enough that they add an off switch.)

> Waterfox: And we still don’t have AI in the browser. That hasn’t changed. The browser’s job is to load web pages, keep your data private, and get out of the way. It seems other browsers have forgotten that.

At some point I think we should just redirect the Firefox funding to Waterfox.

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#33

Post by adrianwaj »

MrAlex94 wrote: post #31
kajika91 wrote: post #23

I am surprise there is no mention of Librewolf here. The differences of Librewolf and Waterfox is pretty hard to grasp, I am digging a little bit but so far I guess I would say using any of them is still way better than the main alternatives. Librewolf is, to me, the way better alternative as this is really in the FOSS mindset : a tool for everyone to use and by anyone to contribute. Seeing their plateform alone (Lem…

Librewolf and Waterfox have always had different goals. Waterfox has always had a more opinionated take on defaults and privacy. Essentially the goal has been keep the web as private as possible without breaking it (I know Librewolf is more aggressive there and that sometimes leads to website breakages) and I think I've managed that well, especially with the implementation of Oblivious DNS by default. The upside of L…

There was a recent comment: "if you don't know: any browser extension can read input/password fields across all site(s) you gave it access to (yeah, it's crazy but unfortunately true)."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47553048

Would either WF or LW fix that? Is it true?

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#34

Post by xacky »

There is no pure browser anymore. The little red hen of Google funds everything, and forks like Waterfox just change a few parts of the UI but still rely on the upstream for all actual browser code. Even Mozilla was bootstrapped by AOL-Time Warner Back in the day. If you look at Ladybird they already have lots of ad companies funding it as well and will demand its enshittification if it gets popular.

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#35

Post by darkwater »

red_admiral wrote: post #32

> Mozilla : Break free from big tech - our products put you in control of a safer, more private internet experience. (Adds AI that needs 7 about:config entries to disable, until users roast it enough that they add an off switch.) > Waterfox : And we still don’t have AI in the browser. That hasn’t changed. The browser’s job is to load web pages, keep your data private, and get out of the way. It seems other browsers h…

From TFA:

> The original text implied Brave special cases ads on their search partner’s page - they don’t. Brave blocks third party ads on all websites by default, regardless of any partnership, and offers an additional aggressive mode that blocks first party ads as well. Waterfox’s approach of allowing text ads on the default search partner page is our own decision for sustainability,

I would like to stress on the last sentence:

  Waterfox’s approach of allowing text ads on the default search partner page is our own decision for sustainability
So basically they are permitting ads from their paying partners.

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#36

Post by MrAlex94 »

kevinbaiv wrote: post #19

[flagged]

I've tried a few ways - people are generous with donations, but you can't really live off of it and I have a subscription based search service, but people just aren't willing to pay.

This is basically the only potential way I can keep this going, even then there may not be much uptake, but it's a hail Mary.

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#37

Post by MrAlex94 »

darkwater wrote: post #35
red_admiral wrote: post #32

> Mozilla : Break free from big tech - our products put you in control of a safer, more private internet experience. (Adds AI that needs 7 about:config entries to disable, until users roast it enough that they add an off switch.) > Waterfox : And we still don’t have AI in the browser. That hasn’t changed. The browser’s job is to load web pages, keep your data private, and get out of the way. It seems other browsers h…

From TFA: > The original text implied Brave special cases ads on their search partner’s page - they don’t. Brave blocks third party ads on all websites by default, regardless of any partnership, and offers an additional aggressive mode that blocks first party ads as well. Waterfox’s approach of allowing text ads on the default search partner page is our own decision for sustainability, I would like to stress on the l…

I think that's an unfair framing. No one is paying Waterfox to allow ads - it's a revenue share from the default search engine (which I've always been transparent about)[1], same as every other independent browser that has a search partner. It's not an "acceptable ads" programme where advertisers pay to be whitelisted.

[1] https://www.waterfox.com/docs/policies/revenue-model/

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#38

Post by MrAlex94 »

adrianwaj wrote: post #33
MrAlex94 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Librewolf and Waterfox have always had different goals. Waterfox has always had a more opinionated take on defaults and privacy. Essentially the goal has been keep the web as private as possible without breaking it (I know Librewolf is more aggressive there and that sometimes leads to website breakages) and I think I've managed that well, especially with the implementation of Oblivious DNS by default. The upside of L…

There was a recent comment: "if you don't know: any browser extension can read input/password fields across all site(s) you gave it access to (yeah, it's crazy but unfortunately true)." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47553048 Would either WF or LW fix that? Is it true?

Nothing to "fix" per se - webextensions need to interact with website data, otherwise they wouldn't be much use. Any extension with content script access can read page content including form fields.

The only real mitigation is being selective about which extensions you install and what permissions you grant them (even then, ownership of extensions change hands, updates can change what they do... it's a never ending battle really).

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#39

Post by JoaoCostaIFG »

pedrogpimenta wrote: post #26
renewiltord wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like I judged them well in not doing so. I would have been such a sucker. After all, donating to corporations is for bootlickers. https://www.waterfox.com/blog/waterfox-has-joined-system1/ So they’re just shilling their own search product on their own browser. No different from Google and Chrome. Except with some corporate bootlicking from running dog lackeys. He literally sold it to an online advertising compa…

Right. So you don't ever donate to anything, right? Just in case. The future. You know?

It's somewhat funny that this guy asks for 850$/hour for consulting (in his hn profile description), never donates to anything, and writes multiple comments complaining like this.

Re: 15 Years of Forking

#40

Post by lowdude »

MrAlex94 wrote: post #36
kevinbaiv wrote: post #19

[flagged]

I've tried a few ways - people are generous with donations, but you can't really live off of it and I have a subscription based search service, but people just aren't willing to pay. This is basically the only potential way I can keep this going, even then there may not be much uptake, but it's a hail Mary.

I came across Waterfox a number of times over the years, but I think it will be difficult to get a similar amount of reach for your search engine. In particular, on the home page of Waterfox, there is nothing even hinting at the existence of the search service. Maybe this is intentional, as it is in public beta for now, but I think it would help to at least note its existence there, or near the `donate` section (as a means of support, rather than direct donation). Also make sure that this directly exists as one of the search engine options for Waterfox, if it isn't already, every click involved in the setup will make it easier for people to try out.

But charging $5 / $10 for basically what StartPage does (to the best of my understanding) is going to be a tough pitch either way. Out of interest, what would the pricing for the Google API look like, if you had no other costs involved?

Post reply on HN