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

Nook Browser

browsewithnook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 125 posts

Re: Nook Browser

#71

Post by Zambyte »

dragonwriter wrote: post #36
Zambyte wrote: post #6

The website says: > Open-source forever > Transparent code, permissive license, and a community-driven roadmap. Which I was going to mention is contradictory, because the point of permissive licenses is that it does not have to be Free forever. But the license is actually GPLv3 instead. So still contradictory wording, but the "permissive" is the part that isn't correct :-)

> Which I was going to mention is contradictory, because the point of permissive licenses is that it does not have to be Free forever. No, the point of permissive licenses is that third-party derivatives , which have no impact on the licensing of the original, don't have to be free ever, while the point of copyleft licenses is that they do. Neither has any effect whatsoever on what future first-party licensing can be…

You keep saying "no" and then agreeing with me.

> No, the point of permissive licenses is that third-party derivatives, which have no impact on the licensing of the original, don't have to be free ever, while the point of copyleft licenses is that they do.

This should read "Yes, [...]".

The point of permissive licenses is for people to sublicense it. You can use this to sublicense the software using a license that actually enforces it must remain Free (see Redict for an example) but it is almost always the case that someone uses this headlining feature of permissive licenses to lock the code up and extract rent.

Your next paragraph frames single contributor or CLA as the two primary development patterns, when that those are absolutely the exception, especially if we exclude repos for things like AoC our homework, which are mostly single contributor.

Re: Nook Browser

#72

Post by Zambyte »

prmoustache wrote: post #54
Zambyte wrote: post #6

The website says: > Open-source forever > Transparent code, permissive license, and a community-driven roadmap. Which I was going to mention is contradictory, because the point of permissive licenses is that it does not have to be Free forever. But the license is actually GPLv3 instead. So still contradictory wording, but the "permissive" is the part that isn't correct :-)

The license of the code released under a permissive license is guaranteed to stay the same. Only the code that is yet to be released is not. From an end user perspective BSD/MIT and GPLvX licences offer the same guarantees. It only is different if you are a contributor or if you intend to distribute modified or unmodified code yourself.

> The license of the code released under a permissive license is guaranteed to stay the same.

It's guaranteed to have at least the terms of the permissive license (usually requiring attribution), but no, it does not guarantee code released under a permissive license will remain available under permissive terms. That is literally the point of the permissive terms: so people can apply more terms under a sublicense.

> From an end user perspective BSD/MIT and GPLvX licences offer the same guarantees.

No they don't. I can decide to stop distributing a BSD/MIT licensed application in both source and binary form, in favor of only distributing it in binary form under a sublicense. As a user, this is not "open source forever". This is "open source until we use the distinguishing feature of the license to make it not open source".

GPL, assuming multiple contributors and no CLA (both of which are extremely common) ensures this cannot legally happen (unless they somehow get all contributors to agree against their exercised rights).

Re: Nook Browser

#73

Post by pseudo_meta »

splatter9859 wrote: post #64
KitN wrote: post #60

I was looking for a good browser. I’m finally interning, and Brave has taken over as my official browser(I don’t like the concept of workspaces/profiles). I used Comet for a while but found it extremely annoying. I like Zen, but I’m not a fan of sidebars in browsers. Currently settled on Helium. This would have been good, but I can’t seem to understand the obsession with sidebars.

I need someone to explain to me, at length, at some point in my life the value proposition of Brave and what it brings to the table that other browsers do not. For example, most of the key differentiators of Brave could be accomplished similarly in Firebox with a litany of extensions -- such as UBlock Origin as just one example -- or Privacy Badger if you'd like to be less 'heavy handed'. The only other differentiato…

I use Brave, and for me it's really just the least bad option.

Firefox-based browsers do not support macOS automation (AppleScript/JXA). Safari lacks features/extensions. Orion/Vivaldi had bugs any time I tried them.

From the Chrimium-based browsers I tried, Brave blocks ads, supports PWAs, the crypto stuff can be turned off, and is stable. Brave does not excite me, but it's good enough.

Re: Nook Browser

#74

Post by linkage »

splatter9859 wrote: post #64
KitN wrote: post #60

I was looking for a good browser. I’m finally interning, and Brave has taken over as my official browser(I don’t like the concept of workspaces/profiles). I used Comet for a while but found it extremely annoying. I like Zen, but I’m not a fan of sidebars in browsers. Currently settled on Helium. This would have been good, but I can’t seem to understand the obsession with sidebars.

I need someone to explain to me, at length, at some point in my life the value proposition of Brave and what it brings to the table that other browsers do not. For example, most of the key differentiators of Brave could be accomplished similarly in Firebox with a litany of extensions -- such as UBlock Origin as just one example -- or Privacy Badger if you'd like to be less 'heavy handed'. The only other differentiato…

At least a year ago, Chromium-based browsers were significantly more secure than Firefox, as measured by the rate at which high severity vulnerabilities were discovered every month and the ease with which Firefox would be hacked in competitions.

The trouble with Chrome is that it is deliberately configured to maximize Google's ad revenue. The omnibar does not show you recently visited websites when you start typing something because they want you to do another Google search so they can serve you more ads. The new extension model deliberately neutered the most effective ad blockers available.

Brave is Chrome without the perverse incentives. Their developers take a security-first approach to everything, to the extent of explicitly _not_ having a centralized sync service for bookmarks, passwords, etc. They have an excellent content blocker built in, thereby doing an end-run around Chrome's new extension model. The crypto wallet and Brave ads are optional - you can disable both in the settings very easily. And since it's a Chromium variant, you can use all of the existing Chrome extensions for third party software like 1Password and the like.

Re: Nook Browser

#75

Post by integricho »

frizlab wrote: post #70
sph wrote: post #65

New browser starter pack: * Fancy logo * Blink engine so it's basically Chrome like every other alternative browser * Mention of AI somewhere on the website * Minimal UI clearly inspired by Safari * Heartfelt promises of speed and privacy * macOS only

The engine of this browser is Webkit.

Anyone can slap a fancy UI on an existing engine and claim they made a browser. So many of them exist now, they don't matter anymore at all. This one will die in the crowd like every other wannabe browser. Build your own goddamn engine and then claim you made a browser, at least the Servo and Ladybird devs are doing some concrete work, not just pointless marketing and empty claims.

Re: Nook Browser

#76

Post by [deleted] »

sph wrote: post #65

New browser starter pack: * Fancy logo * Blink engine so it's basically Chrome like every other alternative browser * Mention of AI somewhere on the website * Minimal UI clearly inspired by Safari * Heartfelt promises of speed and privacy * macOS only

[deleted]

Re: Nook Browser

#77

Post by andrewl-hn »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #59
art0rz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opera 9 was peak browser

Opera 10 was getting into some wild stuff. 9 was obviously just winning. But I loved how 10 literally gave you the user your own endpoints on the web. The browser is the server (by way of proxy)! Massively inspirational decentralization. https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/opera-unite.html

Other parts were legendary, too.

* They came with a mail and chat (IRC) clients, a download manager, a set of browser dev tools, and in the age of limited internet traffic all of that was smaller than a single download of Firefox.

* Their dev tools were the first that allowed remote debugging. You could run Opera on your phone (Symbian, Windows Mobile, early Android) and debug your website from a computer.

* They were the first browser to sync your bookmarks, settings, history, extensions across devices.

* They were the first to add process isolation, albeit initially on Linux only. If an extension crashed your page it didn't take the whole browser down with it. This was later added first by Microsoft in IE8 and then by Google in Chrome.

Their browser was a brilliant piece of tech and a brilliant product. Too bad that the product couldn't survive under pressure.

Re: Nook Browser

#78

Post by amitav1 »

gitmagic wrote: post #34

> When enabled, they provide helpful tools such as chat assistance, summaries, up-to-date web insights, and more. I find this sentence to be a little odd. Who are “they”?

The AI.

Re: Nook Browser

#79

Post by robot-wrangler »

monooso wrote: post #9

Both the browser and the website look remarkably similar to https://zen-browser.app/ .

Switched to zen recently, and although I only expected a slightly different experience to firefox, it's hugely better. Profiles/containers/workspaces especially are great.. this level or organization fits my mental model much better and and I never need to manage bookmarks or use multiple windows. (Performance with large numbers of tabs seems much better too, presumably inactive workspaces are reclaiming the memory in smart ways).

Re: Nook Browser

#80

Post by paradox460 »

GaryBluto wrote: post #33

I see we're heading back to the days of MDI web browsers, slowly but surely. It's really strange to me how web browsers used to allow so much configuration (like the option to use MDI tab/window management or just generic tiling) but don't anymore. I've been hoping a browser comes out that is just Opera 8/9 but with the ability to browse the modern web so maybe with the advent of all these new browsers I should start…

Vivaldi has had tiling for a while now. It's not quite free form mdi, but it beats opening two windows next to each other
Post reply on HN