Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web • Hacker News Board

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#91

Post by k1m » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:11 PM UTC

Krasnol wrote: post #83

k1m wrote: post #49

The Guardian website is horrible when it comes to tracking. They don't tend to mention that in their privacy-focused articles. Here's a tweet that sums it up: 'The irony is real... @Guardian headline, "The Guardian view on privacy online: a human right", while allowing trackers to spy on their readers.' https://twitter.com/Ghostery/status/989543132349034499

- The Guardian website is horrible when it comes to tracking. - Here's a tweet The irony is real indeed.

The irony they were highlighting was the Guardian's stated position on privacy, "The Guardian view on privacy online: a human right", and their own complete disregard for that position.

That's quite different from what you appear to be making the irony about.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#92

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

dessant wrote: post #66

marcthe12 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple uses no Turing complete policy. So you also can't bundle a python or ruby interpreter in iOS. Its still anti-competitive but in a different area which is language and api. They are basically trying to push devs to use their native OS apis. PWA are also screwed up in Safari for a reason.

Kivy bundles Python in iOS apps, and the apps are accepted on the App Store. Do you have a link for this policy?

[deleted]

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#93

Post by oefrha » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

ignoramous wrote: post #88

jillesvangurp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad they built Brave on Chromium instead of Firefox. Which of course given that the company is run by Mozilla co-founder Brendan Eich is a bit of a shame. Firefox is showing that they are more than technically competent to keep up with Chromium and deliver great performance and functionality. With the work they are doing rewriting Firefox component by component in Rust, Google will have their work cut out keeping…

> Too bad they built Brave on Chromium instead of Firefox Weren't the initial versions of Brave based on Firefox? I rem reading it somewhere that they later had to move to Chromium for one reason or the other.

Brendan Eich:

> No real choice on mobile. On desktop we started in 2015 w/ Gecko, did full evaluation against chromium, latter won. No benefit in going back to Gecko (Firefox faces diff tradeoff but on back foot now breaking XUL addons). WebKit lineage + Chrome market power => de facto standard.

https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/950209816902774785

All publicly released versions are Chromium-based.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/brave-new-browser-eich-returns...

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#94

Post by chrisseaton » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

zzzcpan wrote: post #44

sharpneli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One cannot have writeable executable memory on iOS (apple can, we cannot). Thus one cannot make a JIT compiler for js and thus pages are slow. Game engines such as Unity use il2cpp to go from the C# stuff into C++ that can be statically compiled as running the C# as bytecode would be too slow without a jitter.

> One cannot have writeable executable memory on iOS (apple can, we cannot). > Thus one cannot make a JIT compiler for js and thus pages are slow. Lack of JIT doesn't slow down pages much. I believe the difference is so small that it might even be possible to be faster without JIT for most pages, especially on low power devices, it's only computation heavy pages that are going to suffer and even then it's not like yo…

> Lack of JIT doesn't slow down pages much.

So why do you think so many major companies invest such a huge amount of money in JS JITs? Google, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, Mozilla all maintain JS JITs and spend what I guess is hundreds of millions of dollars a year on it.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#95

Post by acd » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

Mozilla is right to fight for a brighter future of the web!

First Internet was started as academic network with little to no advertisements. Then came the adtech model, personal data are sold for profit. News Papers does not fully get funded and totally free when they are founded by ads.

Thus we should fight to keep an open democratic internet where quality journalism gets paid by end users not ads.

I thinks its important with an free open Internet for our democracy to work.

We have to somehow get away from adtech and attentiontech towards a user funded internet. Attentiontech is were personal attention span is what corporations fight to keep. We should have content which is good for end users.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#96

Post by krzyk » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:18 PM UTC

johnsea wrote: post #7

The article once more reiterates the fact that Apple doesn't allow other browser engines. You cannot even fight, there is no future ;-) on iOS.

I wonder why no antimonopolist issue was raised there by e.g. EU. Like they did for NFC in Germany - they forced all phones with NFC to be open to use by different apps, which might finally bring other pay solutions to iOS (or non NFC capable iphones to Germany).

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#97

Post by hellofunk » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:21 PM UTC

It would seem that the Brave browser and Firefox share similar goals on privacy. It’s hard to navigate the differences in their perspectives on this, why would one choose one of these browsers over the other if concerned about online tracking?

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#98

Post by asjw » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:22 PM UTC

just_observing wrote: post #23

rpastuszak wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Bear in mind that Mozilla is experimenting with different monetisation models, be it subs, donations, relying on Google for search as well as partnerships with companies such as Scroll (publisher content monetisation platforms). Also, if you follow the discourse on anything published by Mozilla in the past 2-3 years—there's been a shift when it comes to how they speak about Googe. It's a marketing move, of cour…

The Guardian has gone downhill in the last few years, just like the rest of UK mainstream news reporting. They have rolled over to do whatever the Government wants not reporting - take Assange for example. Their coverage is practically non-existent. I used to buy The Guardian every day, then I subscribed digitally. And then when their reporting slid downhill, I stopped subscribing. I still read it - but block their d…

People realized that assange is a psyco

It's just that

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#99

Post by jimktrains2 » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:25 PM UTC

hellofunk wrote: post #97

It would seem that the Brave browser and Firefox share similar goals on privacy. It’s hard to navigate the differences in their perspectives on this, why would one choose one of these browsers over the other if concerned about online tracking?

Brave still contributes to a chrome monoculture, and it still shows ads, so it has a different vision of privacy.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#100

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 2:27 PM UTC

hellofunk wrote: post #97

It would seem that the Brave browser and Firefox share similar goals on privacy. It’s hard to navigate the differences in their perspectives on this, why would one choose one of these browsers over the other if concerned about online tracking?

[deleted]