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

641–650 of 777 posts

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

#641

Post by greenyies »

fsflover wrote: post #341
greenyies wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not switching my os to some obscure one for security and it doesn't make sense for me to isolate my browser from my system/files. And yes my mail account is more critical than my local files.

Xen is not an obscure system. Hardware isolation was broken last time in 2006 by the Qubes founder ("Blue pill software"). I open my email in a dedicated VM, so only my email provider could attempt to compromise me. Attachments are automatically opened in another, disposable VM.

I talk about the distro qubes os and not about xen.

Also my email account and everything normal I do, is part of my normal life and it's very helpful to be normal.

If I would ever do something out of the ordinary and want to do something which requires physical access, it's much easier to travel the world as someone who has a normal Internet profile.

My personal data is protected enough on Gmail and gdrive.

Everything else just doesn't exist anywhere.

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

#642

Post by donkeybeer »

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #588
donkeybeer wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are very simple game theoretic-esque arguments that many fans of BSD/MIT dogmatically refuse to acknowledge, I've never gotten a straight answer from them, zero actual data when asked for any against my argument and just try to weasel out of the debate somehow.

I don’t maintain any particularly important software, but I would be extremely happy to know that code I wrote is used in major products everyone uses; so, I prefer to use licenses that minimize the burdens on users. Also, I don’t think intellectual property is real and so I don’t think I can make demands on the users of my code: it seems to me that there’s an implicit contradiction in the GPL between the FSF’s anti-…

I believe in the simple golden rule, you give back to society what society has given back to you. Just like all others who gave back their changes, I trust any corporation should have no difficulty, since they are using the product of thousands of man hours for free. Not a single dollar is required, only the source code of any new changes made.

Secondly, my game theoretic argument. Lets say a powerful corpo takes your code and makes something that turns out very useful and popular. If it was BSD, they have no obligation to share anything back and your original project is left to dry and rot. If it was (A)GPL they are obliged to return the changes, and then you can absorb their changes and beat them to the punch. Its more competitive and creates a stronger capitalist environment. BSD's end state is feudalistic, GPL is capitalistic.

Also, I trust you'd be happy to have your code MINIXed, to have your code end up in closed source bootloaders locking down your new ARM laptop, and so on. At least with GPLs you get some code dumps. At least with Androids we end up with a begrudgingly shat out Linux source dump, that helps a little at least. With iPhone you got, absolutely fucking nothing, nil, nada. I am just suggesting please do not complain if BSD works ever end up creating such a world.

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

#643

Post by donkeybeer »

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #588
donkeybeer wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are very simple game theoretic-esque arguments that many fans of BSD/MIT dogmatically refuse to acknowledge, I've never gotten a straight answer from them, zero actual data when asked for any against my argument and just try to weasel out of the debate somehow.

I don’t maintain any particularly important software, but I would be extremely happy to know that code I wrote is used in major products everyone uses; so, I prefer to use licenses that minimize the burdens on users. Also, I don’t think intellectual property is real and so I don’t think I can make demands on the users of my code: it seems to me that there’s an implicit contradiction in the GPL between the FSF’s anti-…

And indeed GPL/AGPL minimizes burdens greatly on me as a user of a product, I can easily download to debug and if wanted modify the source code of the project of the company I want without involving anyone else.

Whereas if the company had forked a BSD project, there is no such legal recourse for me if the company chooses not to share the sources, at best you can hope to talk to them/pressurize them but of course that is most cases futile. As a user its much more inconvenient for me, I need to use advanced debuggers, disassemblers, etc to debug or modify. Sometimes even that does not work.

As a user, GPL/AGPL provides me far more convenience by default than "permissive" licenses do. It gives me an assurance I can just as easily see and modify the sources of any forks of the project, and if in any case such fails, its only because it wasn't strong enough, for example using GPL software in SaaS, due to which stronger licenses like AGPL were invented.

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

#644

Post by lukan »

pferde wrote: post #633
lukan wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you volunteer in setting up a forum for ladybird and host it and can you convince Kling and co. that you will be around to host it for the next years to come? Because that is a project in itself and as much as I despise discord, I understand why they just went with it.

If I had a serious interest in the project (more than, say, maybe sending a patch here and there to fix my pet peeve), I would definitely volunteer for something like that if there was a demand. That's something I quite enjoy, and am reasonably good at, I think. And as for me being there for years to come, who can say that for sure? I would absolutely try to. For that matter, will Discord still be here next year?

"For that matter, will Discord still be here next year?"

Probably way more likely, than a random volunteer. Kling said they used discord because it was easy. No energy spend there. Migrating the communication structure is work and energy. Friction.

But so far I also did not followed developement closely, because I did not set up discord yet and do not really want to. But I realize I am not in the majority here and I do not think I am in a position to demand anything here. Your words sound a bit like demanding something.

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

#645

Post by iforgotpassword »

I really hope this will succeed. It's sad browsers became free and dependent on Google.

I loved opera to death in the early 2000s. I was young and broke and didn't want to pay for it, but even though there were cracked versions around I dealt with the officially free, ad-sponsored version (Google ads, ironically) because I wanted to support it.

Now I've donated to Firefox in the past, but they've disappointed again and again with questionable business decisions. Still, I'm exclusively using Firefox than anything Chromium-based out of principle and I think I will switch to ladybird as soon as feasible. I have no problem paying for a browser that's truly independent.

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

#646

Post by JimDabell »

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 :)

Are you planning on participating in the standards process? Will you have anything like the Mozilla / WebKit / Chrome standards positions?

https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/

https://www.webkit.org/standards-positions/

https://chromestatus.com/newfeatures

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

#647

Post by llama_drama »

ArtixFox wrote: post #599
ozgrakkurt wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can make a handmade car as well but it is difficult

How does that matter??

Check out this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40862781. While it's certainly possible to write the same parallel algorithm in C++, it wasn't done in Firefox before Rust, nor has it been done in Chrome.

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

#648

Post by dm33tri »

jchw wrote: post #516
tracker1 wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Personally, I think life would be better if browsers just didn't play the game at all. If the web was not controlled by corporations, DRM as part of the platform 100% would have simply never happened. From my point of view, putting DRM into web browsers is actively bad for a couple of reasons beyond the usual arguments against DRM. The greatest asset the web platform has is that it's a unified, open platform that any…

I don't even know what DRM brings to the browsers apart from breaking external monitors and blacking out screenshots

All the content behind it is still available day 0 on trackers

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

#649

Post by tkz1312 »

mike_d wrote: post #568
jchw wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, I object to DRM being added to the web platform in the first place. It is antithetical to the platform. This goes above the definition of what a user agent is and goes into what the web even is in the first place. Secondly, users don't really get a choice. Users are fucked because browsers implement features like DRM and websites hard-depend on them. So the user is no longer choosing whether or not to enable…

If Netflix doesn't work in the browser users aren't going to lean back in their chairs and think fondly of the freedom fighter jchw that protected them from working against their own interests, they are going to open Edge and watch Netflix. No matter how much you opine the outcome is not going to change, the end users have spoken in what they want in their user agent.

> If Netflix doesn't work in the browser users aren't going to lean back in their chairs and think fondly of the freedom fighter jchw that protected them from working against their own interests, they are going to open Edge and watch Netflix.

Or maybe (hopefully) they download popcorn time instead

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

#650

Post by cqqxo4zV46cp »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #565
Dalewyn wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Personally, I think life would be better if browsers just didn't play the game at all. A web browser is a user agent. Why is the browser deciding anything one way or another? Let the user decide by providing options one way or another. If the user wants DRM access, let them; why is it the browser's business? Again, the two important words: User agent. The freedom to decide and choose is what helped Firefox take out…

There should be a great diversity in user agents because there is great diversity in personal tastes. One person's user agent might be another person's "software I would never use". As a text-only web user I am continually amazed, thirty years in, that web developers and now their CDN service providers are _still_ making incorrect assumptions about what user agent I am using. They are wrong every single time. There i…

There are easily less than 1,000 people using the internet in the way that you do. The internet is not immune from cost-benefit.
Post reply on HN