• Damage@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      Well, the browser status quo. I guess they want their own Chrome.

  • merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    This is very encouraging:

    Ladybird uses a new browser engine called LibWeb that is being created from scratch by the development team.

    Browsers that rely on Chromium / Blink rely on Google. Firefox relies on Google for its funding, so any browser based on Gecko relies on Google. If they can make a browser engine that has rough feature parity with Chromium but doesn’'t rely on Google that’s very healthy for the web.

    • Ardens@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 days ago

      You do know the difference of “built by” and “partly funded by”, right?

      What exactly is your problem by Mozilla/Firefox being partly funded by Google?

    • Ferk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      I just wanna say that we have Webkit. After Google moved over to Blink Webkit has not stopped development… and it even has multiple big names behind it (like Apple, but also Valve partnered with WebkitGtk maintainers, and many devices like Amazon’s Kindle are heavily invested on it) so it’s not gonna go away anytime soon. Specially with Safari being the second most used browser on the web, right after chrome and several times more users than Firefox.

      On Linux we have some browsers making use of Webkit (like Epiphany, Gnome’s default browser) that are thus independent from Google or even Mozilla. I’m not sure if there’s any browser like that for Windows though.

      There’s also Netsurf, they also have their own rendering libraries, but development for it is super slow, I’ve been following them for a couple decades and they still haven’t got a stable javascript engine, so it only works for the most basic of websites. The plus side is that it’s very light on resources, though.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 days ago

      Ironically, we already had that - Microsoft’s first version of Edge was using their own engine. On release, it had the highest W3C compatibility score.

      Google started shitting on it (including things like serving clear HTML version of Gmail because “the browser is outdated” if it detected the Edge user agent) and massive self-delusion campaigns of “Edge is just Internet Explorer” eventually killed the thing and forced MS to switch to Chromium.

      I have Ladybird installed and I check it out every now and then, but I honestly doubt that a bunch of random developers will succeed where Microsoft failed. Unless Cloudflare somehow chips in and forces Google’s hand into compatibility, but I don’t know if even they are big enough to do that.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 days ago

        I imagine the reason that Cloudflare is doing this now is that Google just got off with no punishment from their antitrust loss.

        Anybody who competes with Google now has to worry that they’ll do to them what they did to Microsoft. And, with Trump’s DOJ, the government will probably just ignore it if Sundar Pichai shows up with a shiny bauble for Trump. So, I’d imagine that Microsoft, Cloudflare, Amazon (AWS, Twitch), and Meta, among others, might all decide to fund an alternative browser.

      • Ferk@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Personally, I think if the engine was closed source, then we didn’t in fact “had that”. Maybe Microsoft had it, not us.

        What makes things like chromium, firefox and webkit actual ecosystems is that they at least have an open source basis. Edge isn’t an ecosystem, it’s a black box. We don’t even know whether it’s true or not that it was its own thing or just they sneakily used bits and pieces of chromium from the start anyway.

        User Agent checks is the easiest thing to overcome. Had edge’s engine been open source we would have had spins of it resolving the issue within hours. There are many examples of “random developers” succeeding where big companies tied by business strategies (I bet they had business reasons to keep a distinctive user agent) didn’t, to the point that the web runs on servers using FOSS software.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          Personally, I think if the engine was closed source, then we didn’t in fact “had that”. Maybe Microsoft had it, not us.

          Well, yeah, in that aspect, you’re correct. I meant that as a “we had a non Google-reliant engine”.

          • Ferk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 days ago

            Yes, I understand that. But in my view, Microsoft is the one that might have had “a non Google-reliant engine” (if it’s true that they didn’t rely on Google code).

            They just let us use it under their conditions, for the limited time they decided to make it available to us… but it was never “ours”. We were just contractually allowed to use it, but we didn’t really “have” it.

            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              Semantics. I agree with you in principle, but the matter of fact is that we ended up with effectively zero choice over the browser engine.

              • Ferk@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 days ago

                Yes, the matter of fact is that the reason why that choice was taken away is because everyone except MS was forbidden from “having” that engine. It might have still been alive today in some form had it not been an exclusive MS-owned thing.

    • Karna@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 days ago

      Firefox relies on Google for its funding, so any browser based on Gecko relies on Google

      Google introduced Extension manifest v3 to effectively to kill/handicap AdBlock extensions.

      Mozilla, though getting funding from Google to make google its default search engine, officially decided to keep supporting Manifest v2.

      Adblockers are direct challenge to Alphabet’s ad revenue which is still their biggest cash cow.

      That speaks a valume about how much control google has on Mozilla decision making process.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Mozilla, though getting funding from Google to make google its default search engine, officially decided to keep supporting Manifest v2.

        For now. Google probably isn’t too concerned since they have a more than 70% market share, and nearly 90% if you count all Chromium-based browsers. Firefox has managed to do what Google wants, which is “exist” and “not meaningfully compete with Chrome”. If that changes, Google might lean on them harder.

        • Karna@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          If that changes, Google might lean on them harder.

          If you remember, at one time Firefox used to hold 30% of total browser market share, and it was pro-privacy organization back then as it is now.

          Even at that time Google was not managed to influence their decision making process.

          • merc@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            What makes you think Google didn’t influence their decision making process? (Assuming that’s what you’re saying)

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    Cloudflare has announced its sponsorship of the Ladybird browser, an independent (still-in-development) open-source initiative

    Is it still independent?

    • shaytan@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      10 days ago

      Yes, and their donations are limited to 100k a year per corporation/organization, so there cant be a company who comes, donates 20million and then tries to gain control of them through money

      • Matriks404@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 days ago

        Yes, and their donations are limited to 100k a year per corporation/organization

        Interesting that they did that.

        • joshchandra@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          Frankly, that’s really cool and I think all NPOs capable of doing that should follow suit… though I suppose that paves the way towards ghost or shell companies sneaking in that way… Hmm…

    • nutbutter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      10 days ago

      Yes, it is still independent. Cloudflare is just one of the three Platinum sponsors. Other two are Shopify and FUTO. Proton is also a sponsor, but in Gold tier, iirc.

    • Sina@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      I think It’s on their charter that no matter how much corporate money they’ll get they’ll never accept any outside influence just the same. The donators are amply warned to not expect anything other than development as usual or faster.

    • SunSunFuego@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 days ago

      they stated on their website this project will remain independet and that donators don´t have a say in how this is being developed

    • Zerush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      No browser with third party investors can be really independent, they always will obey more the interests of the investors as on those from the users. Anyway the guys from Ladybird have balls of steel to develope an browser engine from scratch in an market saturated of browsers of any kind and a brutal competition, this would had more sense 15 years ago, but not now. Good luck, maybe in 2029-2030 there is an good browser multi-platform with all the needed infrastructure, servers and extensions, but I’ll see to believe.

      • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 days ago

        How can you say it’s saturated when chrome has an effective monopoly. If you look at browser engines, there’s basically only 3 for desktop, with one of them targeting only Macs.

        • Zerush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 days ago

          As said, there are currently three engines + two forks of these (Gonanna and Qt), except some basic render engines from text only browsers (Links, Lynx and some others), but over hundred different browsers which use these engines, + almost 70 abandoned ones, because outdated engines and others which also tried to develope an own engine. This is what I mean with saturated. It’s nice to try to release a browser with a new independent engine, but if there are not enough users which also use it, it’s a death born child. For some products the market is limited. Make it eg. sense to release a new OS? There also existing only 4, Unix, Unixbased like Windows or Mac and Linux with tons of distros. It’s not only the browser engine, in over 20 years there are also growed complete infrastructure arround these engines, dedicated plug ins, extensions, etc, which don’t exist for a new indie engine, precisely because other browsers, which also tried to release a new engine, before Ladybird, are currently all death. Sad, but you need also a minimum of infrastructure for an browser and which offer also somewhat more as only a new engine. It need security and privacy measures, inbuild or with extensions/plug-ins which need an extra developement and other things more.

    • SunSunFuego@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 days ago

      i give them the benefit of the doubt, as stated on their website:

      All sponsorships are in the form of unrestricted donations. Board seats and other forms of influence are not for sale.

        • Michael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          Is there evidence or something to support your assertion that Cloudflare = NSA?

          Even if Cloudflare = NSA, there no evidence to support your parallel. If the Ladybird team does something suspicious or hostile to the interests of its users - please let us know.

          • thelittleerik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            Edward fucking Snowden and the Patriot Act.

            Cloudflare is not authorized to disclose that they are.

            They decrypt all traffic going through them for deep packet analysis. It would be dumb of the US not to make use of that. Look at Palantir. Or the recent Azure fiasco with the Unit 8200.

            • Michael@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              It is naive to trust any US-based service. The devil’s advocate in me just wanted to hear why you believe what you do, so thanks for that.

              My angle was mostly to point out that Ladybird hasn’t done anything obviously morally bankrupt like the politicians you pointed out - the only detracting factors to me about the project are 1) that the nonprofit is based in the US 2) that it’s not written in Rust.

              Of course, it’s worth being suspicious of a web browser of all things. I just see Cloudflare’s contribution in a neutral light given Cloudflare’s general strategy towards PR and the fact that the Ladybird browser is likely going to be a very niche product - and they aren’t even focusing on Windows support for the foreseeable future.

              Do I trust Ladybird more than Mozilla? Only very slightly, but the bar is pretty low - and it’s not blind trust.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      There’s nothing about integrating anything (I assume you mean Cloudflare turnstile?). It’s Cloudflare giving money to projects they like. Apparently Ladybird also has a 100k per donor limit, so that’s the max Cloudflare can give (annually?)

            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              You compared the Cloudflare situation to “taking money from Google” and added that due to Ladybird taking money from Cloudflare, they’re “not challenging the status quo”.

              Ladybird being a browser has absolutely no bearing on webhosting and the only status quo it can challenge is in the browser market. Which implies that you think Cloudflare has something to do with the browser market.

  • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    How much you want to bet Cloudflare went to them and was like ‘hey either work for (sorry, “with”) us or we declare you a “suspicious” traffic source and block you.’

          • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            By the fiftieth “your browser is outdated, please upgrade to an up to date browser” on an up to date version of Firefox, but with privacy extensions and on a VPN, yeah forgive me if I harbour some resentment. Not even a captcha challenge half the time, just “you’re not worthy of seeing this website, peasant.” And don’t even think about disabling JS, that gets you blacklisted all the same. And if you’re using Tor, forget about it.

            They also block you from loading standalone images, so you can’t download images from search results or even open an image from an article in a new tab. Should I be grateful that they’re saving the website megabytes of server traffic while making it impossible to save stuff offline or use the browser’s zoom tools to get information out of a high resolution image? Also, you’re literally the world’s largest CDN. You’re saying you can’t spare enough of your basically unlimited computational power to let me download a static image you’re probably already cached in every data centre?

            Also, they’re literally a man in the middle as a service. And not just in the ISP sense, they control the TLS certificates and can see literally everything you’re sending to or receiving from the website. Including passwords. Including credit cards. Literally defeats the purpose of TLS. And even if the website itself doesn’t use their traffic passthrough service, they infect even more websites with their CDN service, AKA basically one of those old school tracking pixels but holding libraries needed by the site hostage so you can’t block them without breaking the site.

            Also also, just because they say their DNS service is “private” doesn’t make it private. Companies have been lying about their privacy policy since privacy policies started being mandated with zero consequences. As Amy from Futurama said, “Fool me seven times, shame on you. Fool me eight or more times, shame on me.”

            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              By the fiftieth “your browser is outdated, please upgrade to an up to date browser” on an up to date version of Firefox, but with privacy extensions and on a VPN, yeah forgive me if I harbour some resentment

              Interesting! I used Firefox for ages and never encountered that issue.

              The VPN “click to confirm you’re human” is annoying but at the same time understandable - 60% of all Internet traffic is bots.

              Not even a captcha challenge half the time, just “you’re not worthy of seeing this website, peasant.” And don’t even think about disabling JS, that gets you blacklisted all the same.

              Super weird. I’m using Mullvad Browser half the time, never had any such issues. It automatically kills all cookies, has uBlock and NoScript installed, etc. EDIT: oh, yeah, it’s also Firefox-based.

              They also block you from loading standalone images, so you can’t download images from search results or even open an image from an article in a new tab

              What…? I do that literally every day - I handle the service catalogue at work so I need a lot of icons for the hardware and software we provide to users. Just yesterday I downloaded the images for a bunch of Apple hardware, straight from the search results.

              Should I be grateful that they’re saving the website megabytes of server traffic while making it impossible to save stuff offline or use the browser’s zoom tools to get information out of a high resolution image?

              Other than the fact that I fail to see that “impossible to save stuff” bit - yeah, you should, somewhat. Again: over 60% of traffic is bots, that generates A LOT of traffic. These days a lot of people wouldn’t be able to afford hosting a website if they didn’t have services that Cloudflare and similar companies offer.

              Also, they’re literally a man in the middle as a service (…)

              I don’t know enough about networking to have an opinion on that. I only know that the two network security companies that I follow on socials recommend them. And it’s not “shills shilling”, these are two companies that will take governments and companies to court for threatening user rights.

              Also also, just because they say their DNS service is “private” doesn’t make it private. Companies have been lying about their privacy policy since privacy policies started being mandated with zero consequences

              Sure, I get that. But I’m a fan of Occam’s Razor. Can they exfiltrate data from their DNS? Of course. Everybody can. But why would they? If anyone finds out, it effectively kills the entire company, and they don’t do business with personal data - that’s Google’s market. It’s a lot of risk for zero reward, the way I see it.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 days ago

          How did the literal best DDOS protection on the planet and the provider of a very safe and secure DNS suck?

          • Nalivai@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 days ago

            By being a monopoly and having a unique chokehold on the internet. Even if we don’t get into their ties with various governments that they inevitably have to have, the fact that they alone can cripple the internet is concerning

            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              By being a monopoly

              How so? There are dozens of website hosts and DDOS protection services around.

              having a unique chokehold on the internet

              Have they ever utilised it in any extent?

              Even if we don’t get into their ties with various governments that they inevitably have to have

              That sounds suspiciously close to “I have zero proof but I think they’re doing X”. Can you elaborate on those government ties?

              the fact that they alone can cripple the internet is concerning

              Imagine a hosting company that’s 100% open-source, 100% vegan, 100% green, 100% pro-consumer. Their service is so good that the vast majority of the Internet starts using them.

              Do you start hating them at the point where they reach, lets say, 50% market share, just because they managed to grow that large?

              I guess what I’m asking is: do you have any concrete cause for the Cloudflare hate, or is it just a “they’re big therefore they must be bad, because big == bad”?

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 days ago

        Just big company = bad

        Nothing new on lemmy

        Just ignore that they heavily contribute to opensource, have extremely generous free tiers, open incident reports and regularly share deep dives into their architecture and problems

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          It’s such a weird mix of people with very strong opinions on topics they’re extremely ignorant about here, on Lemmy. I was first shocked to see it on the Technology community.

          I thought that, since Lemmy (and fediverse in general) is relatively difficult to get into, it’d attract more tech-savvy people, but now. Here, in this thread, we have a dude saying that “Cloudflare always sucked”. Any Windows-related discussion always devolves into crying about data being siphoned (and nobody has bothered to read the telemetry documentation, of course)…

          Just getting a weird cognitive dissonance whenever I’m browsing here.

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    Still, it’s hard to understand why Cloudflare chose to back exactly Omarchy.

    Maybe the developers in Cloudflare use it? Also weird because Omarchy’s default browser is Chromium I think. The webpage didn’t list the default browser, so not sure about that.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    Giving how apple adjacent the project is I have never had much faith in it being able to truly become an alternative to firefox.

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        You go to the website and the images promoting the browser are using apple. The project is being developed only for macOS and linux. They decided to change the programming language to swift.

        To many signs that the devs are appleheads and I get the feeling that the main target is apple, linux second and windows completely out of the box (states by devs themselves). Myself personally, not a fan on apple, I don’t have that kind of money to buy hardware and I don’t see any advantages on doing so.

  • ms.lane@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 days ago

    When it incorporates something like TreeStyleTab, I’ll look into it, horizontal tab bars are just silly - most have widescreen displays and content is usually in narrow columns.