Laughing at the amount of armchair lawyers in the comments.
Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
481–490 of 777 posts
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#482I love the idea of this project! I'm looking forward to giving it a try. I'm not your typical user (I'm more interested in what features a browser lets me disable than what it supports) and while right now Firefox comes out way ahead of everyone else in terms of empowering users to customize things to fit their needs it feels like with every update they introduce more features I need to disable and they're growing mo…
A reminder that the vast majority of Mozilla funding comes from Google who are an advertising company. A reminder that years ago they were paid by an advertising firm to secretly install a plugin for a TV show. When someone raised a bugzilla bug about it, the project manager for the plugin (who herself had come to Mozilla after a career in online advertising tech...) marked it employee-only. Another employee reversed…
C'man, those gaffes are so much less than the telemetry Chrome has, and so much more less than Chrome would have if there was no competition
If your complaint is that Firefox doesn't support enough standards, ladybird is so far behind
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#483No 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.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with have proprietary forks. They exist for good reasons -- either a new browser or get embedded in another product which provides value for their end users. They may (or may not) contribute back to the original projects with bug reports, fixes and features.
Sorry this is not the GPLv3 everywhere world you are dreaming of, and I'm glad it works this way.
Like others said, if you want to have a GPLv3 licensed browser (that will probably be as unusable as GIMP), write one yourself.
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#484I love the idea of this project! I'm looking forward to giving it a try. I'm not your typical user (I'm more interested in what features a browser lets me disable than what it supports) and while right now Firefox comes out way ahead of everyone else in terms of empowering users to customize things to fit their needs it feels like with every update they introduce more features I need to disable and they're growing mo…
[deleted]
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#485[flagged]
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#486Nitpick (or is it?) but the website is soulless and just bad. The website design communicates that this is just another immature project, desperately looking for a VC funding, just following modern design trends where "design == aesthetics". Yuck. I am happy to see the project thrive.
The new website is the first time I've felt excitement for Ladybird and I've been following SerenityOS from the inception.
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#487Hello friends, Ladybird founder here! Here's a short video from Chris Wanstrath announcing our non-profit yesterday, and kicking things off with a $1M donation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9edTqPMX_k Happy to answer questions :)
I don't have much to add here, just wanted to say that I think this is a tremendous gift to the Internet that we loved. It would suffice to say that after many hard reality checks I don't really feel like there are any browser vendors that feel like good stewards of the open web, and it seemed like a new browser that actually managed to break out would be infeasible... until Ladybird showed up. And now, I'm typing th…
I think it should be possible to have some sort of open extension to allow side band canvas rendering to allow for such extensions as optionally provided by the OS. Possibly with an API for custom engines in WASM.
I don't think it should have to be in the browser. I would like the option to watch the content. I know the while process of DRM is stupid and will be side stepped somewhere.
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#488Hello friends, Ladybird founder here! Here's a short video from Chris Wanstrath announcing our non-profit yesterday, and kicking things off with a $1M donation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9edTqPMX_k Happy to answer questions :)
Please forgive me if this was talked about already, but I don't see it. Do you have any thoughts on Web3 support of any kind? Metamask enabled dApp development, but it hasn't evolved particularly well. There have been other attempts to replace Metmask with a better wallet such as Coinbase's wallet or Tally. But I think the whole paradigm needs a rethink. Is any of this even on your radar at all?
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi Andreas, First, thanks for this project and making your self accessible! Will "plug-in" or "add-on" support be a first-party concept in Ladybird? I ask that because in years past a few other browsers (Konqueror, Falkon, Dillo, etc) made it pretty far but lacking add-ons, useful capability such as 'NoScript' or 'uBlock' or even a tab manager made them non-starters.
I would hope that plug-ins and add-ons can be written in C (although any extensions written in C should be only allowed if installed manually by the end user (e.g. by adding it to some configuration file); it should never install them automatically from a "app store" or similar). That is a feature I would use.
I would think that wasm should probably be the "binary" extension target, which could include C source.
Just my opinion.
Re: Ladybird Web Browser becomes a non-profit with $1M from GitHub Founder
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
NoScript for Dillo makes no sense as it doesn't support JS anyway. uBlock... yeah, a little, but most annoyances will be blocked by the lack of JS support anyway. Plus there are plugins for dillo... https://dillo-browser.github.io/#plugins
Exactly. I need 1Password and a vim mode plugin for me to be productive on the web.
Same, bitwarden is essential, as are ublock origin and privacy guard.