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

331–340 of 777 posts

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

#331

Post by bigstrat2003 »

hfgjbcgjbvg wrote: post #242
flykespice wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a complete nonsensical claim & willful attempt at spreading misinformation: Permissive licenses doesn't grants you less freedom than GPL, infact it grants you more because the user also has the freedom to modify source code without being enforced to make it public. Companies copying the codebase to their propietary ones won't automatically strip right of users, licenses don't work like that, the original code…

You can copy GPL code, modify it and use it personally and nobody is going to care unless you’re making tons of money. The entities pushing for MIT style licensing are massive and for profit.

> The entities pushing for MIT style licensing are massive and for profit.

I license all my stuff with permissive licenses because (in my opinion) they are more free than the GPL and such licenses. I don't have any massive for-profit company pushing me to do so. Mr. Kling is also not a massive for-profit company, he's just a guy making the software he wants to make. Your argument is in very bad faith.

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

#332

Post by gavinhoward »

awesomekling wrote: post #77
F3nd0 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congratulations on the kick-off! Now that Ladybird is no longer a part of SerenityOS, will you consider a switch to a licence which not only grants, but also protects user freedoms (e.g. the GPL, MPL, EUPL)? Also, any thoughts on having official communication channels on some open, freedom-respecting platforms, rather than Discord only?

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…

Less permissive licenses protect users more.

https://gavinhoward.com/2023/12/is-source-available-really-t...

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

#333

Post by stewx »

spencerchubb wrote: post #329

Can anyone explain like I'm an idiot concrete reasons how Google Chrome's dominance is bad for the web? Preferably things that have actually happened, not what might happen

One answer: Google's interests are at cross-purposes. They are simultaneously making money from showing you advertisements, but also giving you a browser, and sometimes these conflict. For example, they recently rolled out a new on-by-default "feature" to identify yourself to advertisers.

Another answer: concentration of power and market share stifles innovation. Look at what happened to Internet Explorer when Microsoft was the only game in town.

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

#334

Post by Suppafly »

adwn wrote: post #110
imp0cat wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, I am as annoyed as you are with the constant barrage of "rewritten in Rust" projects, but if Mozilla did not try various other projects that are not browser, there would be no Rust.

If I recall correctly, Rust was born with building a browser engine in mind, or at least it was one of its earliest motivations. So Rust would have been a thing even if Mozilla had focused on their core product.

>So Rust would have been a thing even if Mozilla had focused on their core product.

Plus, while Firefox is their main product, it's been decades since Mozilla has been solely a browser company. It's like saying Microsoft should stop making Office because it detracts from their OS business. Companies can make more than one product. Some of those products are going to have shorter lifespans or smaller userbases than others and that's OK.

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

#335

Post by zzo38computer »

paulcole wrote: post #183
pferde wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This is something I could see myself contributing to (or attempting to, anyway), but as soon as I saw Discord+Github, I lost all interest. Github I can understand to some extent, it's a convenient temporary staying place until they can afford, community-wise, to move to something truly open, but Discord? In this day and age?

> but Discord? In this day and age? What’s your recommended alternative?

IRC. And for slow discussions with long messages, you can use NNTP.

(However, GitHub is accessible by git in case you only want to download the repository, regardless of what else they do; however, having multiple mirrors on other services as well can be helpful)

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

#336

Post by bigstrat2003 »

mnmalst wrote: post #269
bayindirh wrote: post #16

I wonder what would happen if Ladybird matures well to compete with Firefox and Chrome (hope so), and it's just forked away by some company and completely closed down in a whim, because BSD-2 allows that.

Personally am asking myself what the benefits of the BSD clause compared to a more restrictive license are. The only reason I personally can see is that they want to have to option to close the browser themself in the future.

Believe it or not, plenty of people prefer permissive licenses because they grant more freedom. Not everyone agrees with the GPL.

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

#337

Post by klohto »

awesomekling wrote: post #325
klohto wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is there still space on your crew? i’d love to join, should i just start committing?

We’re always open to new developers! Find a website that doesn’t work right, then try to figure out why, and see if you can fix it :) The best for a beginner is usually to start with some simple page you made yourself, since you know how it’s supposed to work, and can debug more easily. And come join us on Discord, there are new people getting into the codebase all the time :)

Thanks Andreas! Completely forgot about the current Discord meta.

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

#338

Post by RiverCrochet »

spencerchubb wrote: post #329

Can anyone explain like I'm an idiot concrete reasons how Google Chrome's dominance is bad for the web? Preferably things that have actually happened, not what might happen

Google tried to get this through, and was only prevented because competing browsers didn't play along.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_Learning_of_Cohorts

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

#339

Post by rocketvole »

excuse my ingnorance, but firefox is also an open source browser afaik. The only advantage that ladybird us is that it turns the duopoly of browser engines into a tri-opoly- so what is the point? Why wouldn't this money be better spent enhancing another browser engine like whatever midori runs on? Why does Ladybird need to exist, and why are so many companies becoming sponsors? Not trying to ruffle feathers, genuinely curious

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

#340

Post by bigstrat2003 »

bayindirh wrote: post #71
PedroBatista wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that such a problem other than the human factor of seeing your code being used by some guys you don’t like?

> seeing your code being used by some guys you don’t like? This is not even in the list of my concerns. I just don't like to see efforts of hundreds if not thousands of volunteers are rolled into a closed source application and distributed for the profit of a couple of people who pat themselves on the back because they got their next car/house/whatever for free. This is why I prefer GPL over BSD/MIT.

That sounds no different from "code being used by some guys you don't like" to me, to be honest. If some company took my permissively licensed work and turned it into a commercial product, why would I take issue? I put my work out there for the betterment of all, and it is still bettering the world even in its new form. I have no complaints with that.
Post reply on HN