5 ms·

The level of mental gymnastics in this thread denying the extent to which companies like Google (and their puppets like Mozilla) control the internet is too dam

by swed420 2mo ago

The level of mental gymnastics in this thread denying the extent to which companies like Google (and their puppets like Mozilla) control the internet is too damn high. Fortunately if projects like Ladybird gain enough momentum, websites might be forced to cater to it. Time will tell.

inigyou 2mo ago
You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare?
- swed420 2mo ago
  > You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core If you want to inherit all of Firefox's flaws, I suppose. > and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare? Considering Cloudflare is a sponsor of Ladybird, something tells me they're going to grant an exception for it.
  - Larrikin 2mo ago
    What flaws exactly? People on here love to moan about Firefox because Mozilla did one thing at some point in the existence of the company they didn't like. But then just cede the Internet to Google and chromium clones because at some point when they were a crappy junior JS dev, Chrome had some better tooling over Firebug so they just got used to testing in one browser. Maybe they also like to remember how Firefox, a decade ago, couldn't handle 1000 tab sessions. I hope Firefox keeps up the fight but HN loves to crap all over them for not being perfect.
    - tombert 2mo ago
      Can’t speak for all users, but at least as of about six months ago, there appears to be a bug in Firefox in NixOS where the shader cache doesn’t appear to be able to write properly, and as such video acceleration doesn’t work. It became most evident when I was trying to watch 360-degree videos in Immich. Entirely possible that this is an issue specific to NixOS or my machine, but because of that issue I switched over to Brave. I would like to go back to Firefox at some point. Maybe I’ll see if I can make a patch to fix video acceleration on NixOS.
      - fouc 2mo ago
        the obvious thing to do is keep using firefox as your daily driver, and load up the other browser as needed for the video etc. I'm being tongue-in-cheek here because it seems most people just give up on safari/firefox if one thing doesn't work and go to some chromium-based browser as their default driver. That's sad.
        picofarad 2mo ago
        What you say is what I do, Firefox is open all the time, I switch to brave or edge if ff won't load something. I use adnauseam as adblocker. I have never had chrome on windows 10 or 11; nor chromium. For a year chase.com wouldn't allow me to login from Firefox. Dumb.
        inigyou 2mo ago
        Did you go to your local Chase branch with Firefox on your phone and pretend you have no idea why it doesn't work?
        duskdozer 2mo ago
        I don't understand it. I do keep an ungoogled chromium install around for the few times when I suspect a site is intentionally breaking itself for firefox, and it's not a big deal to open on occasion. Otherwise, if you value customization at all, you have to use firefox.
        kakacik 2mo ago
        Thats what I do - that 1 page in 100, if at all, goes to chrome. But basically 100% of pages I ever use work fine. They will have to pry with significant force firefox with ublock origin from my old dusty finger bones... fuck the rest for selling us all out. Even if it won't move the needle a bit, I can look at myself in the mirror in this specific regard and be content that I didnt bow my head like bland masses did and didnt work towards massive enshittification of our global society from now on. Because thats what its all about, nothing less. With our choices, we shape future for our kids and grandkids. Shame on you, all you rich faangs who are directly helping this. Godwin's law is never too far in such cases and history wont be kind to you, no reason to be
    - GoblinSlayer 2mo ago
      People complain about Chrome as often as about psychopaths, because it can't be fixed.
    - swed420 2mo ago
      > What flaws exactly? For starters, they notoriously make configuration a difficult and shifting game of whac-o-mole to do simple things such as disabling the AI that nobody asked for: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45926779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45926779 It's also become more unstable in recent years, and I'm not even talking about 1000 tab sessions. It will crash with only a handful of tabs fairly regularly on linux. For more flaws, look at everything LibreWolf, Waterfox, etc do to make up for them.
      - inigyou 2mo ago
        I don't think the AI is part of the core. You know you get to change all that stuff when you make a fork, right?
        swed420 2mo ago
        But you would still be left with all of the other issues pointed out by me and others. Plus, the parent seemed to be referring to FF, not just its core, so I replied accordingly.
    - shevy-java 2mo ago
      > What flaws exactly? Look how few people use it. Do you still want to claim that firefox is perfect? Because if not I suggest to read up on the last 15 years why people stopped using Firefox. Not all of which has to do with Google. > I hope Firefox keeps up the fight but HN loves to crap all over them for not being perfect. This shows a total lack of understanding. You assume that Firefox is perfect. It is not. It is a pretty bad browser. There is a reason why adChromium won. I wish it would be different but it is not.
    - thisislife2 2mo ago
      > What flaws exactly? It's not modular, for example. You can't just use the Gecko engine in your project. To do so, you have to deal and hack through the whole codebase of the Firefox browser.
      - dralley 2mo ago
        Well for years HN was complaining that Mozilla was trying to fix that, because it broke XUL extensions.
        thisislife2 2mo ago
        It's been many years since Firefox dropped support for XUL extensions and XUL itself. It even lead to Firefox being forked, and Palemoon browser (amongst other forks of it) now carry the legacy of XUL ( https://udn.realityripple.com/ https://udn.realityripple.com/ ). Also, that hasn't stopped Firefox from offering stand alone Gecko on Android ( https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ ) now, has it? If they can do it for Android, why not all the other desktop platforms? Start redirecting the 300+ million dollars they have earned from Firefox to the developers instead of the CEO et al and maybe we will see some good innovation happening in Firefox ...
    - deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]
  - chironjit 2mo ago
    Sadly Cloudflare's browser detector is the main barrier to using Servo for most websites, so they're not the angel they seem
- bossyTeacher 2mo ago
  > You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare? Under some definitions, the browser IS the core. You are bound at a fundamental level to your parent if you build on someone else's foundations. Firefox is probably a great one to do it but worth knowing that someone else owns the land upon which you stand.
Plont 2mo ago
They literally didn't deny that. They made a separate point you appear not to have actually read. Regardless, I don't want baked-in Firefox adblocking in part because I don't trust Mozilla with that task either. They'd absolutely end up allowing their own "acceptable" telemetry and ads. Even if they didn't, it would be unlikely to ever be as effective as Ublock Origin. Much like how Chromium browsers' built-in adblocking is barely anything in comparison, even on Manifest V2. And yet, for now, Firefox and Mozilla is by far the lesser evil. I like a few of the Chromium browsers well enough, but they are ultimately at the mercy of Google. I hope Ladybird does well, too.
- swed420 2mo ago
  Their separate point was ignored because it was an irrelevant tangent. > Regardless, I don't want baked-in Firefox adblocking in part because I don't trust Mozilla with that task either. This is in a thread about how we should be happy that FF is vetting code for us. Do we trust them or don't we? > And yet, for now, Firefox and Mozilla is by far the lesser evil. I'm instinctively tempted to agree, but the difference is so negligible at this point that the only sign I would is the fact I'm still using FF due to momentum (as well as Ladybird not being ready from prime time yet). FF/Mozilla has proven itself to be controlled opposition, so I'm not very interested in games of "lesser-of-two-evils" abuser logic that has infected politics and many other spheres in a race to the bottom.
  - aaplok 2mo ago
    > Do we trust them or don't we? GP trusts them for reviewing external extension code, and ensure that it does not contain malware, but not for not inserting exception to their own telemetry if they wrote the code themselves. Or, more likely, they feel that having two independent actors collaborating on the extension (one by writing and the other by reviewing) yields a more trustworthy outcome than either actor on their own.
    - swed420 2mo ago
      That was a rhetorical question. Mozilla have given us plenty of reasons to not trust them, which makes it hilarious that anybody would think it's noteworthy they're reviewing the code of Raymond Hill of all people.
bossyTeacher 2mo ago
> Fortunately if projects like Ladybird gain enough momentum, websites might be forced to cater to it. Time will tell. Ladybird has corporate sponsors too. Sponsorship is influence. Obviously, the more sponsorships you have the less influence an individual one have but it is worth knowing.
- swed420 2mo ago
  True, but it ultimately depends on the terms of the sponsorship. One would hope that a project like Ladybird (which is motivated to compete with a product which was ruined by Google's sponsorship) would choose those terms carefully.

by swed420 2mo ago

inigyou 2mo ago

You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare?

swed420 2mo ago
> You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core If you want to inherit all of Firefox's flaws, I suppose. > and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare? Considering Cloudflare is a sponsor of Ladybird, something tells me they're going to grant an exception for it.
- Larrikin 2mo ago
  What flaws exactly? People on here love to moan about Firefox because Mozilla did one thing at some point in the existence of the company they didn't like. But then just cede the Internet to Google and chromium clones because at some point when they were a crappy junior JS dev, Chrome had some better tooling over Firebug so they just got used to testing in one browser. Maybe they also like to remember how Firefox, a decade ago, couldn't handle 1000 tab sessions. I hope Firefox keeps up the fight but HN loves to crap all over them for not being perfect.
  - tombert 2mo ago
    Can’t speak for all users, but at least as of about six months ago, there appears to be a bug in Firefox in NixOS where the shader cache doesn’t appear to be able to write properly, and as such video acceleration doesn’t work. It became most evident when I was trying to watch 360-degree videos in Immich. Entirely possible that this is an issue specific to NixOS or my machine, but because of that issue I switched over to Brave. I would like to go back to Firefox at some point. Maybe I’ll see if I can make a patch to fix video acceleration on NixOS.
    - fouc 2mo ago
      the obvious thing to do is keep using firefox as your daily driver, and load up the other browser as needed for the video etc. I'm being tongue-in-cheek here because it seems most people just give up on safari/firefox if one thing doesn't work and go to some chromium-based browser as their default driver. That's sad.
      - picofarad 2mo ago
        What you say is what I do, Firefox is open all the time, I switch to brave or edge if ff won't load something. I use adnauseam as adblocker. I have never had chrome on windows 10 or 11; nor chromium. For a year chase.com wouldn't allow me to login from Firefox. Dumb.
        inigyou 2mo ago
        Did you go to your local Chase branch with Firefox on your phone and pretend you have no idea why it doesn't work?
      - duskdozer 2mo ago
        I don't understand it. I do keep an ungoogled chromium install around for the few times when I suspect a site is intentionally breaking itself for firefox, and it's not a big deal to open on occasion. Otherwise, if you value customization at all, you have to use firefox.
      - kakacik 2mo ago
        Thats what I do - that 1 page in 100, if at all, goes to chrome. But basically 100% of pages I ever use work fine. They will have to pry with significant force firefox with ublock origin from my old dusty finger bones... fuck the rest for selling us all out. Even if it won't move the needle a bit, I can look at myself in the mirror in this specific regard and be content that I didnt bow my head like bland masses did and didnt work towards massive enshittification of our global society from now on. Because thats what its all about, nothing less. With our choices, we shape future for our kids and grandkids. Shame on you, all you rich faangs who are directly helping this. Godwin's law is never too far in such cases and history wont be kind to you, no reason to be
  - GoblinSlayer 2mo ago
    People complain about Chrome as often as about psychopaths, because it can't be fixed.
  - swed420 2mo ago
    > What flaws exactly? For starters, they notoriously make configuration a difficult and shifting game of whac-o-mole to do simple things such as disabling the AI that nobody asked for: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45926779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45926779 It's also become more unstable in recent years, and I'm not even talking about 1000 tab sessions. It will crash with only a handful of tabs fairly regularly on linux. For more flaws, look at everything LibreWolf, Waterfox, etc do to make up for them.
    - inigyou 2mo ago
      I don't think the AI is part of the core. You know you get to change all that stuff when you make a fork, right?
      - swed420 2mo ago
        But you would still be left with all of the other issues pointed out by me and others. Plus, the parent seemed to be referring to FF, not just its core, so I replied accordingly.
  - shevy-java 2mo ago
    > What flaws exactly? Look how few people use it. Do you still want to claim that firefox is perfect? Because if not I suggest to read up on the last 15 years why people stopped using Firefox. Not all of which has to do with Google. > I hope Firefox keeps up the fight but HN loves to crap all over them for not being perfect. This shows a total lack of understanding. You assume that Firefox is perfect. It is not. It is a pretty bad browser. There is a reason why adChromium won. I wish it would be different but it is not.
  - thisislife2 2mo ago
    > What flaws exactly? It's not modular, for example. You can't just use the Gecko engine in your project. To do so, you have to deal and hack through the whole codebase of the Firefox browser.
    - dralley 2mo ago
      Well for years HN was complaining that Mozilla was trying to fix that, because it broke XUL extensions.
      - thisislife2 2mo ago
        It's been many years since Firefox dropped support for XUL extensions and XUL itself. It even lead to Firefox being forked, and Palemoon browser (amongst other forks of it) now carry the legacy of XUL ( https://udn.realityripple.com/ https://udn.realityripple.com/ ). Also, that hasn't stopped Firefox from offering stand alone Gecko on Android ( https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ ) now, has it? If they can do it for Android, why not all the other desktop platforms? Start redirecting the 300+ million dollars they have earned from Firefox to the developers instead of the CEO et al and maybe we will see some good innovation happening in Firefox ...
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
- chironjit 2mo ago
  Sadly Cloudflare's browser detector is the main barrier to using Servo for most websites, so they're not the angel they seem
bossyTeacher 2mo ago
> You know you can make a browser based on Firefox's core and don't need to make a new one from scratch that'll never get past Cloudflare? Under some definitions, the browser IS the core. You are bound at a fundamental level to your parent if you build on someone else's foundations. Firefox is probably a great one to do it but worth knowing that someone else owns the land upon which you stand.

Plont 2mo ago

They literally didn't deny that. They made a separate point you appear not to have actually read. Regardless, I don't want baked-in Firefox adblocking in part because I don't trust Mozilla with that task either. They'd absolutely end up allowing their own "acceptable" telemetry and ads. Even if they didn't, it would be unlikely to ever be as effective as Ublock Origin. Much like how Chromium browsers' built-in adblocking is barely anything in comparison, even on Manifest V2. And yet, for now, Firefox and Mozilla is by far the lesser evil. I like a few of the Chromium browsers well enough, but they are ultimately at the mercy of Google. I hope Ladybird does well, too.

swed420 2mo ago
Their separate point was ignored because it was an irrelevant tangent. > Regardless, I don't want baked-in Firefox adblocking in part because I don't trust Mozilla with that task either. This is in a thread about how we should be happy that FF is vetting code for us. Do we trust them or don't we? > And yet, for now, Firefox and Mozilla is by far the lesser evil. I'm instinctively tempted to agree, but the difference is so negligible at this point that the only sign I would is the fact I'm still using FF due to momentum (as well as Ladybird not being ready from prime time yet). FF/Mozilla has proven itself to be controlled opposition, so I'm not very interested in games of "lesser-of-two-evils" abuser logic that has infected politics and many other spheres in a race to the bottom.
- aaplok 2mo ago
  > Do we trust them or don't we? GP trusts them for reviewing external extension code, and ensure that it does not contain malware, but not for not inserting exception to their own telemetry if they wrote the code themselves. Or, more likely, they feel that having two independent actors collaborating on the extension (one by writing and the other by reviewing) yields a more trustworthy outcome than either actor on their own.
  - swed420 2mo ago
    That was a rhetorical question. Mozilla have given us plenty of reasons to not trust them, which makes it hilarious that anybody would think it's noteworthy they're reviewing the code of Raymond Hill of all people.

bossyTeacher 2mo ago

> Fortunately if projects like Ladybird gain enough momentum, websites might be forced to cater to it. Time will tell. Ladybird has corporate sponsors too. Sponsorship is influence. Obviously, the more sponsorships you have the less influence an individual one have but it is worth knowing.

swed420 2mo ago
True, but it ultimately depends on the terms of the sponsorship. One would hope that a project like Ladybird (which is motivated to compete with a product which was ruined by Google's sponsorship) would choose those terms carefully.