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.
Servo and Ladybird are awesome to follow along. Hope they both succeed
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.
There’s also Palemoon with its goanna engine, which forked off Firefox when Mozilla retired XUL and has diverged since
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.
doubt that a bunch of random developers will succeed where Microsoft
Ladybird doesn’t have to be profitable and the org cannot be bought.
Not what I meant.
Microsoft - in theory - had the finances to push their browser to peoples homes. Be it by baking it in to Windows, by ad campaigns, etc., etc. And they still lost to Google’s control over the Web.
Ladybird, by comparison, is an obscure no-name product, being made by a controversial figure, with (relatively to MS) zero ability to market itself to the wider audience. All Google has to do is make their products completely inoperable under Ladybird and, other than some extremely committed power-users who want to “de-google” their lives, nobody will use it.
You are right, but as you noticed, we don’t argue the same thing.
eventually killed the thing and forced MS to switch to Chromium.
Ladybird is not threatened to be killed by whatever anybody but the developers do.
Ladybird is not threatened to be killed by whatever anybody but the developers do.
It absolutely is. If Google forces incompatibility on it (like it did with Edge) ordinary users won’t switch. Because the majority of ordinary users are still deep in the ecosystem.
All it takes is for Google to block high quality streaming on YouTube and the browser will never go outside of 2-3% market share.
That’s not bad.
What’s not bad? Ladybird sitting at floor-leves of market share?
If we want to threaten the status quo in any way, it absolutely is. Firefox has 2.26% and - in terms of defining standards or forcing changes upon Chromium - it’s 100% irrelevant.
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.
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.
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?
“Partly funded by”?
Google contributed roughly 83% of Mozilla’s income from 2020-2023, and 89% of overall income since 2005.
That’s what you call “partly”. You know, unlike “solely”…? So what is your question here?
Do you mean “almost completely”?
The standard point is most around how big that ‘partly’ is, and how attached a project can become to that part. If a project has, for easy math, a $10M bankroll and $5M comes from, say, Goog or MS, the project can face a moment where the corporation comes and says, ‘we don’t like that you’ve implemented this feature that interferes with our control of users. We’re pulling our funding unless you remove it.’ (more realistically, ‘we see you have allocated some dev time to this feature request we don’t like. Cancel it before the public can demand it.’) If that happens, you have to have a project lead with some real rectitude to say, ‘okay,’ and just cut their budget in half. The more diversely sourced a FOSS project’s funding is, the harder it is to control, and vice versa.
Wauw, that’s crazy speculations. Google buys a service from Firefox, that doesn’t give them the right to manage Firefox. Give me 1 example where Google did what you say? Otherwise, let’s archive that fantasy rambling as paranoid speculation.
- It’s a standard discussion point, not my argument in particular. It’s the same one as for why it’s a problem to have so much corporate money behind news media, political campaigns, and just about anything else.
But - It’s all speculation, both the idea of priority manipulation happening and your idea it does not. The general population doesn’t know anyone at these projects, so everything has to be discussed in vague generalities. You can say ‘I trust X never to take a bribe, because I know X.’ but you can’t say ‘I trust all members of the profession X is in, because they are in that profession.’
Saying you don’t trust Google is just sensible. Saying you don’t trust management at something like Mozilla because they are faceless management, (not that all the things said about choices made inside Mozilla are likely to encourage trust) though a bit generalizing, is also fairly understandable. As such, it’s not at all unusual that people are going to hold some distrust for the combination of the two, especially when one of the big drivers of Firefox usage is specifically that it’s supposed to be more respecting of privacy than chrome or edge. The user base is already primed to be distrustful of tech companies, and not through paranoia but experience.
I’m not saying manipulation of Mozilla by Google is guaranteed to happen but it’s honestly less speculative to expect creepy activity from google, a company for which the business model is ‘do sneaky shit on the internet,’ than to assume absolutely everything going on is totally trustworthy.
So not a single example, but paranoid speculation, based on your general distrust. That’s fine - you’re allowed to feel that way.
It’s a silly and stupid fallacy, to say that it’s speculation that they are not being manipulated. But no, it’s not speculation, it’s the general principle to say that something needs proof. But I guess you are always in a state of flux. “Be weary of gods, because we can’t prove they are there, but I believe they are - because someone else can’t prove that they are not there…” That’s so incredible silly.
But thanks for the talk. Now, please go find some other paranoid person to share your speculations with.
That’s not how the null hypothesis works. You are presupposing the negative and then ignoring the possible, and even the probable, to maintain it. Treating corporate malfeasance as unlikely as the existence of gods is skepticism ad absurdum. Corporations acting in ways that are harmful to their employees, customers, and neighbors isn’t the nebulous ‘must have been the spirits’ activity of religion. It’s the history of corporations.
Google management is perfectly willing to engage in suspicious practices. It’s basically their business model. Since you need examples because apparently you haven’t been paying attention in your day to day life: Google tracks as much as they can of what their users and adjacent people do. This occurs even after they ‘opt out’ of the tracking. This is well known but here is an AP article talking about it if you’ve somehow made it to 2025 not knowing about it. Google makes deals to obtain data on people from other sources as well, including personal medical data (e.g. Project Nightingale), again without consent. The idea that the people at google, or any large corporation, would ignore the incentives of their business and not apply any pressure to align Mozilla with their interests when they spend millions of dollars per financial quarter on lobbying, and many times that on PR, is absurd. Expecting them not to seek profit is akin to expecting a living organism not to seek food. Trying to hold the null hypothesis of ‘We must first assume nothing wants food’ and then ignoring common experience until a peer reviewed double blind study can show you the patently obvious is just not feasible.
Bla bla bla…
You have no proof of any wrongdoing by Mozilla, you are just paranoid. Feel free to waste your time arguing, just to justify your paranoia. You might find a paranoid audience, but it’s not me.
- It’s a standard discussion point, not my argument in particular. It’s the same one as for why it’s a problem to have so much corporate money behind news media, political campaigns, and just about anything else.
Giving how apple adjacent the project is I have never had much faith in it being able to truly become an alternative to firefox.
Apple adjacent?
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.
Considering that the two projects funded by Cloudflare are headed by known bigots (Andreas Kling and DHH), it makes me distrust Cloudflare even further.
Can you elaborate on why they are bigots? Im interested.
Both developers have been actively hostile to DEI initiatives, and at least on the case of DHH, also coddling with ultranationalism viewpoints.
On Kling: hyperborea.org/reviews/softwar…
On DHH: tekin.co.uk/2025/09/the-ruby-c…
How can there be so many pieces of shit working in tech? It baffles me. The space were everything is in constant motion and “innovation” has this sorts of people being vocal about their fascism.
Easy money, easy power, easy delusions of grandeur I’m guessing. Pick any two of three.
deleted by creator
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?)
deleted by creator
Remind me, which browser is Cloudlfare making?
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
Again: what does Cloudflare have to do with the browser market…?
Apolitical people are really funny.
deleted by creator
You are not much challenging the status quo by partnering up with the NSA.
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.
AIPAC doesnt partner up with politicians. They just give them. “uNrEsTrIcTeD dOnAtIoNs”.
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.
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.
Cloudflare has announced its sponsorship of the Ladybird browser, an independent (still-in-development) open-source initiative
Is it still independent?
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.
Shopify being a sponsor makes it highly suspect instantly.
Andreas (lead engineer) has told the story of how he got that money - they just happen to know each other and $100k is peanuts for the Shopify founders.
But you’re right to suspect anything of the sort!
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.’
Why is Cloudflare suddenly the enemy on Lemmy?
It always was?
Why?
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.”
IIRC a lot of hate comes from their refusal to blacklist kiwifarms after they bullied several people to suicide.
But… they did blacklist Kiwifarms? In 2022.
I seem to remember that they only did after backlash to originally refusing to do so but I wasn’t following it super closely. That’s why I prefaced it with “IIRC”.
Well, not a straight answer but, there you go.
(yes, late, also my first post so hi)
Suddenly? They’ve always sucked
How did the literal best DDOS protection on the planet and the provider of a very safe and secure DNS suck?
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
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”?
Liberalism really does a cook a lot of peoples brains dont it?
This dude has previously defended Microsoft, you can ignore their opinions. They defend companies for free.
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
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.
just ignore that cloudflare was founded to collect data for the department of homeland security
