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

Brave layoffs

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 160 posts

Re: Brave layoffs

#81

Post by zee2345 »

blinkingled wrote: post #66
zee234 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox browser and engine is technical obsolete joke. Their sand-boxing security model, multi-threading, graphical libraries... Remember cancelled Servo rewrite, or the whole "multi-threaded" saga? Try to actually compile that bloody thing, before you write "software to be fully modifiable by any person using tools that are easily, freely available and accessible" Even Ubuntu team gave up on compiling their software…

As someone who has built and lightly studied Firefox codebase out of pure curiosity this technical joke doesn't really ring remotely true. Sure it's an older codebase and Mozilla doesn't have enough funding manpower to do big rewrites but I don't remember Firefox crashing on me in recent times and I use it exclusively on Mac/Linux and Windows. No site compat issues either. So stop blowing smoke I guess and provide ac…

It is not about crashing, but security. Chromium based browsers have multiple layers of sandboxing and hardening. Webpage rendered basically runs in several virtual machines that are very hard to breach.

Mozilla had process based isolation (mainly due old code base). That is far less effective. Some things like GPU access are not sandboxed at all!

>Google remains the default search engine provider inside the Firefox browser until 2023 for an estimated $400 million to $450 million per year.

Mozilla is a multibilion corporation. They DO have resources for proper rewrite in Rust. How they spend their money is another thing!

Old code base was good excuse in 2016! Brave Software Inc is much smaller company, and they do advanced stuff like their own search engine!

Re: Brave layoffs

#82

Post by alisonatwork »

tomjen3 wrote: post #71
omneity wrote: post #3

This doesn’t bode well for Brave’s self professed mission [0]. Maintaining a Chrome fork is already difficult enough on its own, especially with the number of directions where Brave wants to diverge. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36893654

If it doesn't, whats the best suggestion for another browser that is based on Webkit and which takes privacy seriously?

Cromite: https://github.com/uazo/cromite

Re: Brave layoffs

#83

Post by zee2345 »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #72
zee234 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox browser and engine is technical obsolete joke. Their sand-boxing security model, multi-threading, graphical libraries... Remember cancelled Servo rewrite, or the whole "multi-threaded" saga? Try to actually compile that bloody thing, before you write "software to be fully modifiable by any person using tools that are easily, freely available and accessible" Even Ubuntu team gave up on compiling their software…

Which extension authors are shady? I am mostly sticking to ublock origin, but this is the first time I hear that accusation.

Most extensions are single person projects run on GitHub. Imagine if their Gmail account, or phone SIM gets breached and backdoored version reaches Extension Store.

Plus several extensions were just sold to highest bidder!

Re: Brave layoffs

#84

Post by charcircuit »

flagrant_taco wrote: post #39

We aren't going to see browser competition unless and until we fundamentally rethink what the internet should be. The specifications are simply too complex to foster any meaningful competition. There's too much ground to cover playing catchup and Google has such a large market share that, combined with their data and ad monopoly, allows them to create new specs and features that focus entirely on growing their busine…

Google's browser engine is open source. You can reuse Google's browser engine meaning that you can focus on the features that differentiate your browser instead of implementing the spec like you suggest.

Re: Brave layoffs

#85

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

zee2345 wrote: post #83
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which extension authors are shady? I am mostly sticking to ublock origin, but this is the first time I hear that accusation.

Most extensions are single person projects run on GitHub. Imagine if their Gmail account, or phone SIM gets breached and backdoored version reaches Extension Store. Plus several extensions were just sold to highest bidder!

Sure, but it does not address the question I have placed for you. Can you name the extension you consider shady? A lot of projects on github are one man operations.

Re: Brave layoffs

#86

Post by sirwhinesalot »

hooverd wrote: post #77
satvikpendem wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that because Firefox itself basically makes no money? I know about Google's deal with them but it seems like Mozilla is trying to diversify away from them.

The only thing Firefox users hate more than Mozilla taking money from Google is Mozilla making money from other sources. Why can't the Mozilla team just be ascetic hairshirts who make exactly the browser they want and bring XUL back while they're at it. /s

The Mozilla Foundation is a non-profit that owns the for-profit Mozilla Corporation.

Step 1 is get rid of the for-profit corporation that pays its CEO 2.4 million dollars a year to lose market share. That's 24 well-paid developers, or double that from lower-income countries.

The foundation had a revenue of $441 million in 2020. We know that in 2014 ~90% of their revenue come from its search-engine deal with Google. That means that without Google they'd have ~44 million to work with these days (or more).

That's a lot of devs, before even considering non-search-engine sources of revenue. Personally I don't mind ideas like the VPN. I do mind the stupid grants the foundation does unrelated to a web-browser or acquisitions like pocket.

Re: Brave layoffs

#87

Post by coderedart »

izacus wrote: post #41
cwzwarich wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why aren't we collectively putting our time/effort etc.. into making Firefox the singular and best FOSS browser ever? [disclaimer: former Servo team member] Mozilla had a chance to advance browser tech with Servo and fumbled it.

Not to be negative, but what value would Servo exactly bring to users and the web after all the engineering effort? I'm sure it was technically impressive. Chrome, when it came, was stupidly faster than any other competitor, including Mozilla Firefox. What would Servo bring to make web a big jump forward for us users, beyond ideology and fun work for its developers? (Ideology doesn't sell software, as opensource effo…

> but what value would Servo exactly bring to users and the web after all the engineering effort?

Servo was a much more modular effort.

1. we would get a lightweight (modular) electron alternative. This would have helped rust gui ecosystem a lot, just like wgpu helps rust gamedev scene.

2. Probably have more variety in browsers as everyone can now reuse servo components to make their custom version of firefox. Imagine all the linux distros which reuse gnu/linux, but have their own philosophy of package management, updates, mutability etc.. We could have had the same sort of varieties in browsers for different usecases.

Re: Brave layoffs

#88

Post by zee2345 »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #85
zee2345 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most extensions are single person projects run on GitHub. Imagine if their Gmail account, or phone SIM gets breached and backdoored version reaches Extension Store. Plus several extensions were just sold to highest bidder!

Sure, but it does not address the question I have placed for you. Can you name the extension you consider shady? A lot of projects on github are one man operations.

Sure!

Ublock Origin installed from Firefox Extension Web Store. I have no idea how this was verified and distributed. I do not trust webstore as a channel. Also user may easily click on "Unblock" or "Unlock" and get something completely different.

If this extension came from my Linux distro package, or bundled into Firefox binary, I would trust it.

With Brave I have no need to use extensions. Everything is bundled and can be enabled via about:flags.

Re: Brave layoffs

#89

Post by bongwater_OS »

I've been using Brave (quite happily) for years, I was inspired by their initial mission. Reading this article, hearing that they're implementing "price-tiered AI" (~original~), is so antithetical to what I once thought they stood for that I'm ready to ditch.

This might sound crazy, but the primary purpose of a browser isn't to improve search results with a custom API (almost none of which compare to vanilla Google), but to actually improve the browsing experience. Haven't tried Arc, but from what I've seen it seems like they're actually focusing on UX, which is the kind of thing I'm looking for in a browser.

Re: Brave layoffs

#90

Post by ipaddr »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #74
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

As much as dislike the major idea behind it that push ( build a system to get Trump out -- mildly ridiculous to focus entire company around that ), there was one idea in there that did make sense: - Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted. I think that would change internet landscape a fair bit.

How? The big players will create a layer inbetween to handle ad payment. Might create additional businesses.
Post reply on HN