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

501–510 of 777 posts

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

#501

Post by snvzz »

thiht wrote: post #309
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? Discord IS the platform of this day and age, what the hell are you talking about? You might not like Discord for whatever reasons, but trying to make it sound outdated or legacy is very weird sounding.

Discord is not E2EE.

It is a non-starter.

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

#503

Post by alberth »

awesomekling wrote: post #5

Hello 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 :)

Q1: given that all browsers support non-standard functionality (e.g., CSS attributes not ratified yet, etc) - how will you decide which non standard specs you’ll implement and which you won’t?

(or will you just use Chrome as a reference spec and implement anything it implements?)

Q2: what is your “guiding principle/mission”? Is it to be the fastest browser? The most privacy centric browser? The only 100% standards compliant browser? etc…

—-

Super excited for you. Wishing you the best in this and hope you change the world for the better.

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

#504

Post by rice7th »

bayindirh wrote: post #175
rice7th wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And so? Yes people (and companies) would fork your code, but the most realistic scenario would be that the original ladybird would still be the most relevant browser of it's family, just like firefox, so the problem kinda resolves by itself

Then why KDE's Konqueror is not the most prominent browser of the KHTML family, but Safari is?

Because apple themselves forked it. Only a handful of companies have the power to basically change the web browser market, and apple sure was one. Nowadays every company copies from chrome, so why would anyone bother forking ladybird?

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

#505

Post by DaoVeles »

awesomekling wrote: post #5

Hello 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 :)

When Ladybird first came a long the highest hope I had for it would be something like Konquer browser or the odd ball ones you see that haven't been maintained for years on various Linux Distros/old Mac Os releases.

But with the updates, it wild to see progress moving steady but impressively. And the last year - wow! With all the donations, there is now a path towards a real viable alternative rather than something that looses interest as contributors lives get in the way.

I love that you are no over promising and have provided a reasonable time line, it is the kind of restraint that typically gets things done rather than promising the world up front. I love it and look forward to where this goes from here and it could end up in some very odd places.

If in 2001 you where to say that KHTML would be the core base of the majority of web browsers in 15 years, you would have been a great joke. And look at what happened. The big thing is to keep a Richard Stallman like resolve to do what is right for the people, even if it means a little less personal success.

Be well.

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

#506

Post by anymouse123456 »

It's wild to see how many people showed up here to tell Andreas what he should do with his passion.

I can't wait to see the absolute mountain of perfect pull requests all these people bring to the project!

Seriously though, congratulations Andreas and please keep the faith. We might not be the loudest voices, but almost all of us are cheering for you.

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

#507

Post by chengiz »

gitaarik wrote: post #415
bradley_taunt wrote: post #230

Love the project, but that website is pretty cold and soulless (as mentioned by others). I quickly put together a "cleaner" design for anyone interested, which also uses the original (and objectively better) logo: https://ladybird-dev.netlify.app/

Maybe it's because they want their website to work in their own browser ;)? I can see that if they start off simple with the browser, they start off simple with the website too, and it progressively grows with the browser.

What? The redesign is way simpler than the original website.

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

#508

Post by rice7th »

efilife wrote: post #205
rice7th wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And so? Yes people (and companies) would fork your code, but the most realistic scenario would be that the original ladybird would still be the most relevant browser of it's family, just like firefox, so the problem kinda resolves by itself

Imagine if ladybird gets used regularly by ~1000 nerds, which is its current audience, then gets forked by microsoft and the current ME gets replaced by ladybird. Even if ladybird got over 9000 users, there's no competing with megacorps. Also, its* not it's

Sorry for my grammatical mistake, English is not my first language.

That said, my point here was that realistically no company is going to fork ladybird since there's already chromium, plus even if ladybird was somehow forked by let's say microsoft and got popular, I don't think it would be detrimental to ladybird itself, if not even beneficial, since it would attract more users and, to a lesser extent, more contributors.

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

#509

Post by __float »

sleepycatgirl wrote: post #436
vaylian wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm too used to my Firefox with tree-style tabs and Vim controls to go back to a regular layout. Tree-style tabs could be a core feature. Maybe this is something you can contribute to the project?

I certainly would consider trying to contribute, but.. After seeing the drama.. Nah. Not here. Not now. Still, happy to see a new browser engine, alongside servo.

What is "the drama"? Are you referring to something besides this announcement?

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

#510

Post by talldayo »

fouc wrote: post #500
talldayo wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fact that appears to be lost on the majority of users that have a say in what browser they use: https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...

The problem is that when Chrome came out it was heavily marketed/targeted towards developers. Developers took it up and then built websites in & for Chrome. The end result is many websites work better in Chrome than Firefox or Safari. It's a vicious cycle of continuing dependency. I'm doing my part to break the cycle by supporting the underdog by using Safari as my daily driver & developing primarily for Safari & Fir…

> It's a vicious cycle of continuing dependency.

Or a viscous cycle of continued development. There are definitely things that Chrome does that nobody else should copy, but there's also a lot of stuff like WebGPU and WebRTC that should be standard. Firefox doesn't drag their feet in the same way Apple does, and they certainly don't resist standardization by trying to limit what a user can do on their device.

I have no real love for Google. ChromeOS sucks, Android is only tolerable when you de-Google it, and YouTube is perpetually regressing to a shittier state. But Chromium the browser is great, and it's the only browser I install on my Mac or Linux box when I get set up at work. I want to love Firefox like I used to, but Mozilla as a business is just about as functionally inept as Google or Apple at this point. I'm done trying to be a browser ideologue, I'm embracing post-browser realism here.

Post reply on HN