4 ms·

Maybe stopping to live with the browsers that we have for a while wouldn't be the end of the world? You're right that free software development isn't free, but

by ohazi 6y ago

Maybe stopping to live with the browsers that we have for a while wouldn't be the end of the world? You're right that free software development isn't free, but these browsers already exist, and are already free, and for the most part, they work. CVEs can be found and fixed without corporate backing. Instead, we're rushing to pour more and more stuff into the cesspool. WebUSB and WebBluetooth are not things that I particularly need or want. Part of this is Google's fault. They're currently on top, and if they unilaterally decide to add something, everyone else needs to either implement it or die. I mean, I still think they should fucking stop, but obviously they won't, and I don't have a good answer to this.

rglullis 6y ago
Old man yells at (internet) cloud > for the most part, they work. What is stopping you to just keep using an older version? If you are a developer, what is stopping you to target only the subset of features that you seem necessary? > WebUSB and WebBluetooth are not things that I particularly need or want I assume you are thinking about the browser on your desktop OS. What about platforms like FirefoxOS - KaiOS?
- ohazi 6y ago
  > What is stopping you to just keep using an older version? CVEs, CA issues. Firefox ESR kind of addresses this, but it's a band-aid. The new mis-features eventually show up in ESR as well. I want an actual fork, where dumb features like "ads baked into the browser" are kept out permanently. Look, I said that we should do this because I think it would be good for the community... I am well aware that maintaining a fork like this would be a ton of work. I was never trying to insinuate that it would be easy, just that corporate backing is both not required and an active hindrance.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    > just that corporate backing is both not required Sure, no one needs the backing of the corporation. But whoever gets to be the one doing the "ton of work" that you are asking for needs to be paid, do you agree? Now, the question is: who is going to pay for that? Something more specific than "the community" would help. Are you willing to pay for it? How much? Can you get more people to commit to it? For how long?
    - ohazi 6y ago
      > But whoever gets to be the one doing the "ton of work" that you are asking for needs to be paid, do you agree? I realize that this may be a contrarian position these days, but no, I don't. As an example, the vast majority of Debian maintainers don't get paid, yet as a community project, it has worked exceedingly well for nearly 30 years. Yes, there are certain notable exceptions like Linus Torvalds getting paid by the Linux Foundation, but this is really not the norm. A lot of big community driven open source projects have managed to work well without serious funding for a long time. Would money help? Sure. But no, I don't think a project like this (even a large one) is doomed without it.
      - rglullis 6y ago
        Oh, yes... the decades-old I can benefit for free from that totally unrelated tech project, why can't I get this one as well? fallacy. Yeah, Debian has volunteers and a lot of people working on it for goodwill. But a project the size of Debian is something where you can get many different contributors who do all sorts of different things and become maintainers of these different subsystems. Couple that with a little fundraising and professionals that work on it because it is something that will benefit them economically (e.g, IT companies that provide services where having a free operating system allows them to commoditize their complements[0]) and it's easy to make it a sustainable operation. None of that applies to what you are asking. There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? What you are wishing is just for someone to work for you to free. It reeks of entitlement. [0]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/
        ohazi 6y ago
        You're putting words into my mouth. I stated that I believe the community would be better off if this existed. I have not asked anyone to go and do this. You asked if I thought it was possible to do this without funding. I do. That seems obvious -- it's been done before without funding, it can be done again. The fact that I think it's possible without funding says nothing about whether I think it's the ideal way for something like this to happen. Debian is not unrelated, I specifically used them as my example because Debian maintainers forked and maintained IceWeasel during their dispute with Mozilla. They are the ones who have done this before. --- > There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. You and I seem to have dramatically different takes on what makes software valuable and what motivates people to work on it. I don't care if there's no business use-case for a "crippled-but-leaner" browser. There's a principled case for it -- Many people would prefer to use a web browser that doesn't have ads baked into the shell. That preference gives the leaner browser value. The fact that some people prefer software like this is what makes that software valuable, regardless of whether anybody can make any money from it. This is a statement of inherent value, not a statement about economic viability. And secondly, > And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? I think that others are likely to do this based on observation. There are people who choose to work on projects like these because they personally prefer software that works a certain way, out of principle. Again, the only statement I'm making here is about the likely existence of people who are willing to do this sort of thing for free, out of principle. I am saying nothing about whether or not they deserve to be paid, and I'm not making any moral argument about who is and isn't entitled to use their work or make demands from them.

by ohazi 6y ago

rglullis 6y ago

Old man yells at (internet) cloud > for the most part, they work. What is stopping you to just keep using an older version? If you are a developer, what is stopping you to target only the subset of features that you seem necessary? > WebUSB and WebBluetooth are not things that I particularly need or want I assume you are thinking about the browser on your desktop OS. What about platforms like FirefoxOS - KaiOS?

ohazi 6y ago
> What is stopping you to just keep using an older version? CVEs, CA issues. Firefox ESR kind of addresses this, but it's a band-aid. The new mis-features eventually show up in ESR as well. I want an actual fork, where dumb features like "ads baked into the browser" are kept out permanently. Look, I said that we should do this because I think it would be good for the community... I am well aware that maintaining a fork like this would be a ton of work. I was never trying to insinuate that it would be easy, just that corporate backing is both not required and an active hindrance.
- rglullis 6y ago
  > just that corporate backing is both not required Sure, no one needs the backing of the corporation. But whoever gets to be the one doing the "ton of work" that you are asking for needs to be paid, do you agree? Now, the question is: who is going to pay for that? Something more specific than "the community" would help. Are you willing to pay for it? How much? Can you get more people to commit to it? For how long?
  - ohazi 6y ago
    > But whoever gets to be the one doing the "ton of work" that you are asking for needs to be paid, do you agree? I realize that this may be a contrarian position these days, but no, I don't. As an example, the vast majority of Debian maintainers don't get paid, yet as a community project, it has worked exceedingly well for nearly 30 years. Yes, there are certain notable exceptions like Linus Torvalds getting paid by the Linux Foundation, but this is really not the norm. A lot of big community driven open source projects have managed to work well without serious funding for a long time. Would money help? Sure. But no, I don't think a project like this (even a large one) is doomed without it.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      Oh, yes... the decades-old I can benefit for free from that totally unrelated tech project, why can't I get this one as well? fallacy. Yeah, Debian has volunteers and a lot of people working on it for goodwill. But a project the size of Debian is something where you can get many different contributors who do all sorts of different things and become maintainers of these different subsystems. Couple that with a little fundraising and professionals that work on it because it is something that will benefit them economically (e.g, IT companies that provide services where having a free operating system allows them to commoditize their complements[0]) and it's easy to make it a sustainable operation. None of that applies to what you are asking. There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? What you are wishing is just for someone to work for you to free. It reeks of entitlement. [0]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/
      - ohazi 6y ago
        You're putting words into my mouth. I stated that I believe the community would be better off if this existed. I have not asked anyone to go and do this. You asked if I thought it was possible to do this without funding. I do. That seems obvious -- it's been done before without funding, it can be done again. The fact that I think it's possible without funding says nothing about whether I think it's the ideal way for something like this to happen. Debian is not unrelated, I specifically used them as my example because Debian maintainers forked and maintained IceWeasel during their dispute with Mozilla. They are the ones who have done this before. --- > There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. You and I seem to have dramatically different takes on what makes software valuable and what motivates people to work on it. I don't care if there's no business use-case for a "crippled-but-leaner" browser. There's a principled case for it -- Many people would prefer to use a web browser that doesn't have ads baked into the shell. That preference gives the leaner browser value. The fact that some people prefer software like this is what makes that software valuable, regardless of whether anybody can make any money from it. This is a statement of inherent value, not a statement about economic viability. And secondly, > And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? I think that others are likely to do this based on observation. There are people who choose to work on projects like these because they personally prefer software that works a certain way, out of principle. Again, the only statement I'm making here is about the likely existence of people who are willing to do this sort of thing for free, out of principle. I am saying nothing about whether or not they deserve to be paid, and I'm not making any moral argument about who is and isn't entitled to use their work or make demands from them.