7 ms·

> There are currently no plans to switch to a less permissive license. Hey, just a reality check: in the event that you actually do become wildly successful, t

> There are currently no plans to switch to a less permissive license. Hey, just a reality check: in the event that you actually do become wildly successful, this means that others (Google, Microsoft, etc.) will be able to fork the browser and then develop it faster than you - thus leaving you behind and taking away your users! Would highly recommend leaving yourself some mechanism to prevent that, unless you're really okay with the project defeating itself through its own success.

eitland 2y ago
Reality check: 1. All the BSDs have been out there for decades without anyone running with it. 2. Google and Microsoft - while being a shadow of their former selves technically - are probably still very capable of reimplementing whatever they want. 3. If Ladybird gets so wildly popular, lets celebrate wildly!
- Y_Y 2y ago
  You wouldn't count OSX as someone running with BSD?
  - eitland 2y ago
    I run Mac OS. I am aware that it builds on BSD. Yet BSD is very alive and nobody who wants BSD is lost to Mac. At least I personally have never heard anyone deliberating over a free BSD vs Mac. Edit: and of course upvote. Apple ran with it. But they didn't run away with it. We still have it. Actually we have some patches thanks to them. As I mentioned in my other reply: Open source is not a zero sum game.
    - talldayo 2y ago
      > Actually we have some patches thanks to them. In a relative sense, I would argue that Apple has pilfered an order of magnitude higher value from the community than they have given back. The only example of Apple's net-positive contributions seem to be CUPS and LLVM, both of which were cross-platform before Apple took control. Compared with how much networking and userland code they've taken it feels like a trillion-dollar pittance. Even Microsoft chips in more.
      - shiroiushi 2y ago
        >Even Microsoft chips in more. They do? With what? (Besides Linux kernel drivers that are only useful for running Linux on their own VM solution.) I guess VScode, for people that use it? CUPS is fantastic, though you're right, it was cross-platform before Apple took control.
      - eitland 2y ago
        > In a relative sense, I would argue that Apple has pilfered an order of magnitude higher value from the community than they have given back. I take objection to the use of "pilfering" to describe usage of software according to the terms specified by its authors. Or would you somehow argue that some features disappeared from BSD thanks to Apple copying their code as they were expressly allowed to in the license? Furthermore, even if it wasn't free software but rather MS Windows or a "pirated" movie many people here would argue it wasn't theft but just unauthorized use.
  - BirAdam 2y ago
    Well, macOS is sort of BSD, but not quite. The kernel isn’t really BSD despite large sections being originally taken from BSD. The XNU kernel isn’t really BSD anymore. Then, the userland (BSD is both kernel and userland developed together) isn’t really BSD anymore, and Apple neglects their UNIX userland anyhow.
  - criddell 2y ago
    Don’t forget the PS5! At it’s heart it’s just a computer running FreeBSD.
    - eitland 2y ago
      Have you ever seen someone choosing Playstation for their server park since Playstation 3? As their primary workstation? (Yes, PS3 ran Linux in the beginning.)
- rsprinkle 2y ago
  Cisco's OS is a fork of BSD.
  - eitland 2y ago
    I don't know. But if so, what? Have you caught anyone deciding to go with Cisco instead of BSDs on their servers or their laptop? I'm serious here: Open source isn't a zero sum game. Partially thanks to the permissive license of BSD we now have both Mac OS and JunOS (edited: it said Cisco first), which is a good thing, not a bad thing. The problem with Chrome isn't that it exist but that it has been forced upon us and the fact that we know they have used questionable methods to establish it as the dominant browser.
  - marcus0x62 2y ago
    Which one? They have dozens of “OSes” across their various products. Cisco IOS is absolutely not based on BSD - it is a proprietary kernel, and such that it even has a “userland”, a proprietary userland. IOS XE is based on Linux. Most of the voice stuff is Linux. Perhaps you are thinking of Juniper’s JunOS, which is based on FreeBSD?
    - yarq 2y ago
      ASyncOS is a fork of FreeBSD. It is used in Cisco's email and web security appliance, which is also their hosted offering. This appliance was previously known as IronPort, before being acquired by Cisco.
      - marcus0x62 2y ago
        I'm sure that's definitely what the parent commenter was thinking of.
ecef9-8c0f-4374 2y ago
KHTML was the basis for Chrome and Safari. A valid concern
- eitland 2y ago
  Chrome in itself is not the problem. Competition is good. Firefox is better now thanks to Chrome. Neither is Safari. Safari is actually part of the solution. Safari has saved Firefox and other browsers by being the only option on iOS for a long time and a better choice for many (because of battery usage) on Mac OS. Without Safari I am afraid we would all be locked into Chrome now. The problem is that Google, like Microsoft before them, 1. used their dominant position in one market to force their way into dominating another market, 2. used various underhanded tactics to make users think Chrome were better while in reality it was just given better treatment by their backend servers and also the Googles frontend devs[1] 3. and that unlike Microsoft they still haven't got a multi billion fine for it and haven't been forced to advertise alternative browsers for months. [1]: see various bugs[2] in everything from the core of the Angular framework to Google Calendar to YouTube [2]: yes, I am generous enough to consider them bugs. I am fairly certain though that bugs that doesn't affect Chrome aren't exactly considered top priority.
  - soundnote 2y ago
    EU law does force them to advertise alternative search engines. I just updated Chrome on my work laptop and they gave me a slate of search engines. My Chrome defaults to Brave Search now.
  - jampekka 2y ago
    > Safari has saved Firefox and other browsers by being the only option on iOS for a long time Amazing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement)
    - eitland 2y ago
      Hehe. But more seriously: it is actually the truth. Kind of in in the same way that people are thankful for Churchill: not because he was a fantastic man in every way (he wasn't) but because he saved us from something even worse.
awesomekling 2y ago
Yes, we are aware of how permissive licenses work. If someone forks our code and does a better job with it than we do, fair game. :)
- dataflow 2y ago
  Note they won't have to do a better job in the long run, just a good enough job in the short run to leave you behind. But yeah, as long as you're keeping this in mind :) best of luck!
  - freehorse 2y ago
    Not even that sometimes, browser popularity can just be a matter of advertising (eg how chrome took off in the internet explorer offboarding era even though there were objectively equal or better alternatives at the time by just using google's internet omnipresence at the time for advertising). Sadly, modern internet is governed more by advertising industry rather than any kind of open-internet principles. But ultimately this is all developers' decisions and I respect that. If anything, if a major company decided to take off and invest, they could do it in any case, publishing their modified source code would not make that much of difference essentially. It is really refreshing to see at last a browser that does not absolutely depend on google's resources in any way.
- guappa 2y ago
  Just so you know, chromium exists now as an open source project because KDE developers used GPL.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - dataflow 2y ago
    Would you mind elaborating? How did KDE's use of GPL prevent Chromium from being closed-source? What about Google Chrome?
teekert 2y ago
"Better" is a subjective term. I would probably stay on OG Ladybird if it meant MS/Google-ified LB starts screenshotting/OCRing/Uploading/LLMing all the data, even if it were to become faster and more slick. Slow computing it's sometimes called [0] I sometimes experience some friction (really acceptable though) on Firefox, it has never lured me to Edge of Chrome. Some people have standards you know ;) [0] https://www.slowcomputingbook.com/ https://www.slowcomputingbook.com/
- tverrbjelke 2y ago
  think I'll get me this book. Thx
hfgjbcgjbvg 2y ago
They’re backed by Shopify. If Google or Microsoft forked it that would probably be the best thing they could hope for.
adwn 2y ago
> Hey, just a reality check: It's rather condescending of you to assume that the developers of Ladybird aren't fully aware of the consequences that their choice of license entails.
- dataflow 2y ago
  That certainly wasn't the intention. Was there really a need to turn this into a personal swipe? This is a common outcome many smart and talented developers have historically come to regret. You can find their stories all over the web, including right here on HN. I didn't want to see the same thing happen here, is all.
  - donkeybeer 2y ago
    Its a religious thing unfortunately for some developers. They don't seem to understand the concept of all entities esp large companies acting in their self interest unless forced to. They are building the noose by which themselves will be hanged, and I think it'd be hilarious to see once we finally see the current crop of MIT/BSD being used to completely lock down hardware and software. And these developers unable to use their own hobby oses anymore. I don't know if they will still see what their error was, they probably won't, as I said its a religious matter. And religious dogmatism is a strong bulwark against logic and sense.
  - donkeybeer 2y ago
    There are very simple game theoretic-esque arguments that many fans of BSD/MIT dogmatically refuse to acknowledge, I've never gotten a straight answer from them, zero actual data when asked for any against my argument and just try to weasel out of the debate somehow.
    - fiddlerwoaroof 2y ago
      I don’t maintain any particularly important software, but I would be extremely happy to know that code I wrote is used in major products everyone uses; so, I prefer to use licenses that minimize the burdens on users. Also, I don’t think intellectual property is real and so I don’t think I can make demands on the users of my code: it seems to me that there’s an implicit contradiction in the GPL between the FSF’s anti-IP stances and their attempt to control how their software is used using IP constructs.
nottorp 2y ago
> will be able to fork the browser and then develop it faster than you - thus leaving you behind and taking away your users So, that fetish for infinite growth... can we get rid of it? Firefox keeps trying to grow in various directions and look where it's taking them.

eitland 2y ago

Reality check: 1. All the BSDs have been out there for decades without anyone running with it. 2. Google and Microsoft - while being a shadow of their former selves technically - are probably still very capable of reimplementing whatever they want. 3. If Ladybird gets so wildly popular, lets celebrate wildly!

Y_Y 2y ago
You wouldn't count OSX as someone running with BSD?
- eitland 2y ago
  I run Mac OS. I am aware that it builds on BSD. Yet BSD is very alive and nobody who wants BSD is lost to Mac. At least I personally have never heard anyone deliberating over a free BSD vs Mac. Edit: and of course upvote. Apple ran with it. But they didn't run away with it. We still have it. Actually we have some patches thanks to them. As I mentioned in my other reply: Open source is not a zero sum game.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    > Actually we have some patches thanks to them. In a relative sense, I would argue that Apple has pilfered an order of magnitude higher value from the community than they have given back. The only example of Apple's net-positive contributions seem to be CUPS and LLVM, both of which were cross-platform before Apple took control. Compared with how much networking and userland code they've taken it feels like a trillion-dollar pittance. Even Microsoft chips in more.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      >Even Microsoft chips in more. They do? With what? (Besides Linux kernel drivers that are only useful for running Linux on their own VM solution.) I guess VScode, for people that use it? CUPS is fantastic, though you're right, it was cross-platform before Apple took control.
    - eitland 2y ago
      > In a relative sense, I would argue that Apple has pilfered an order of magnitude higher value from the community than they have given back. I take objection to the use of "pilfering" to describe usage of software according to the terms specified by its authors. Or would you somehow argue that some features disappeared from BSD thanks to Apple copying their code as they were expressly allowed to in the license? Furthermore, even if it wasn't free software but rather MS Windows or a "pirated" movie many people here would argue it wasn't theft but just unauthorized use.
- BirAdam 2y ago
  Well, macOS is sort of BSD, but not quite. The kernel isn’t really BSD despite large sections being originally taken from BSD. The XNU kernel isn’t really BSD anymore. Then, the userland (BSD is both kernel and userland developed together) isn’t really BSD anymore, and Apple neglects their UNIX userland anyhow.
- criddell 2y ago
  Don’t forget the PS5! At it’s heart it’s just a computer running FreeBSD.
  - eitland 2y ago
    Have you ever seen someone choosing Playstation for their server park since Playstation 3? As their primary workstation? (Yes, PS3 ran Linux in the beginning.)
rsprinkle 2y ago
Cisco's OS is a fork of BSD.
- eitland 2y ago
  I don't know. But if so, what? Have you caught anyone deciding to go with Cisco instead of BSDs on their servers or their laptop? I'm serious here: Open source isn't a zero sum game. Partially thanks to the permissive license of BSD we now have both Mac OS and JunOS (edited: it said Cisco first), which is a good thing, not a bad thing. The problem with Chrome isn't that it exist but that it has been forced upon us and the fact that we know they have used questionable methods to establish it as the dominant browser.
- marcus0x62 2y ago
  Which one? They have dozens of “OSes” across their various products. Cisco IOS is absolutely not based on BSD - it is a proprietary kernel, and such that it even has a “userland”, a proprietary userland. IOS XE is based on Linux. Most of the voice stuff is Linux. Perhaps you are thinking of Juniper’s JunOS, which is based on FreeBSD?
  - yarq 2y ago
    ASyncOS is a fork of FreeBSD. It is used in Cisco's email and web security appliance, which is also their hosted offering. This appliance was previously known as IronPort, before being acquired by Cisco.
    - marcus0x62 2y ago
      I'm sure that's definitely what the parent commenter was thinking of.

ecef9-8c0f-4374 2y ago

KHTML was the basis for Chrome and Safari. A valid concern

eitland 2y ago
Chrome in itself is not the problem. Competition is good. Firefox is better now thanks to Chrome. Neither is Safari. Safari is actually part of the solution. Safari has saved Firefox and other browsers by being the only option on iOS for a long time and a better choice for many (because of battery usage) on Mac OS. Without Safari I am afraid we would all be locked into Chrome now. The problem is that Google, like Microsoft before them, 1. used their dominant position in one market to force their way into dominating another market, 2. used various underhanded tactics to make users think Chrome were better while in reality it was just given better treatment by their backend servers and also the Googles frontend devs[1] 3. and that unlike Microsoft they still haven't got a multi billion fine for it and haven't been forced to advertise alternative browsers for months. [1]: see various bugs[2] in everything from the core of the Angular framework to Google Calendar to YouTube [2]: yes, I am generous enough to consider them bugs. I am fairly certain though that bugs that doesn't affect Chrome aren't exactly considered top priority.
- soundnote 2y ago
  EU law does force them to advertise alternative search engines. I just updated Chrome on my work laptop and they gave me a slate of search engines. My Chrome defaults to Brave Search now.
- jampekka 2y ago
  > Safari has saved Firefox and other browsers by being the only option on iOS for a long time Amazing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement)
  - eitland 2y ago
    Hehe. But more seriously: it is actually the truth. Kind of in in the same way that people are thankful for Churchill: not because he was a fantastic man in every way (he wasn't) but because he saved us from something even worse.

awesomekling 2y ago

Yes, we are aware of how permissive licenses work. If someone forks our code and does a better job with it than we do, fair game. :)

dataflow 2y ago
Note they won't have to do a better job in the long run, just a good enough job in the short run to leave you behind. But yeah, as long as you're keeping this in mind :) best of luck!
- freehorse 2y ago
  Not even that sometimes, browser popularity can just be a matter of advertising (eg how chrome took off in the internet explorer offboarding era even though there were objectively equal or better alternatives at the time by just using google's internet omnipresence at the time for advertising). Sadly, modern internet is governed more by advertising industry rather than any kind of open-internet principles. But ultimately this is all developers' decisions and I respect that. If anything, if a major company decided to take off and invest, they could do it in any case, publishing their modified source code would not make that much of difference essentially. It is really refreshing to see at last a browser that does not absolutely depend on google's resources in any way.
guappa 2y ago
Just so you know, chromium exists now as an open source project because KDE developers used GPL.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- dataflow 2y ago
  Would you mind elaborating? How did KDE's use of GPL prevent Chromium from being closed-source? What about Google Chrome?

teekert 2y ago

"Better" is a subjective term. I would probably stay on OG Ladybird if it meant MS/Google-ified LB starts screenshotting/OCRing/Uploading/LLMing all the data, even if it were to become faster and more slick. Slow computing it's sometimes called [0] I sometimes experience some friction (really acceptable though) on Firefox, it has never lured me to Edge of Chrome. Some people have standards you know ;) [0] https://www.slowcomputingbook.com/ https://www.slowcomputingbook.com/

tverrbjelke 2y ago
think I'll get me this book. Thx

hfgjbcgjbvg 2y ago

They’re backed by Shopify. If Google or Microsoft forked it that would probably be the best thing they could hope for.

adwn 2y ago

> Hey, just a reality check: It's rather condescending of you to assume that the developers of Ladybird aren't fully aware of the consequences that their choice of license entails.

dataflow 2y ago
That certainly wasn't the intention. Was there really a need to turn this into a personal swipe? This is a common outcome many smart and talented developers have historically come to regret. You can find their stories all over the web, including right here on HN. I didn't want to see the same thing happen here, is all.
- donkeybeer 2y ago
  Its a religious thing unfortunately for some developers. They don't seem to understand the concept of all entities esp large companies acting in their self interest unless forced to. They are building the noose by which themselves will be hanged, and I think it'd be hilarious to see once we finally see the current crop of MIT/BSD being used to completely lock down hardware and software. And these developers unable to use their own hobby oses anymore. I don't know if they will still see what their error was, they probably won't, as I said its a religious matter. And religious dogmatism is a strong bulwark against logic and sense.
- donkeybeer 2y ago
  There are very simple game theoretic-esque arguments that many fans of BSD/MIT dogmatically refuse to acknowledge, I've never gotten a straight answer from them, zero actual data when asked for any against my argument and just try to weasel out of the debate somehow.
  - fiddlerwoaroof 2y ago
    I don’t maintain any particularly important software, but I would be extremely happy to know that code I wrote is used in major products everyone uses; so, I prefer to use licenses that minimize the burdens on users. Also, I don’t think intellectual property is real and so I don’t think I can make demands on the users of my code: it seems to me that there’s an implicit contradiction in the GPL between the FSF’s anti-IP stances and their attempt to control how their software is used using IP constructs.

nottorp 2y ago

> will be able to fork the browser and then develop it faster than you - thus leaving you behind and taking away your users So, that fetish for infinite growth... can we get rid of it? Firefox keeps trying to grow in various directions and look where it's taking them.