No browser is sustainable without money because
- The infrastructure and labor costs money
- Google charges out the ass for Widevine which is a must for Netflix, Apple TV+, etc
Comment on Why I recommend against Brave.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks agoMy take: No other browser is sustainable without advertising. Orion looks to be that guy, but we will see. We’ve already seen many other browsers stop development, like Mull and LibreWolf, due to lack of resources. Firefox itself is on the chopping block with Google potentially being forced to sell Chrome. We’ll see what Kagi is able to manage with Orion, though releasing it with pretty much all the features one could want for free doesn’t appear promising. I think taking a “private advertising” approach is the best we’re going to get. This makes Brave sustainable.
The CEO is a dick, no doubt, but they pretty much all are, and every browser has it’s drawbacks.
As far as the useragent, I kinda agree with Brave on that one. Sites want to be crawled by Google but they will block anyone else, which obviously creates an anticompetitive environment in an industry that severely needs competition.
As for the fingerprinting, I kinda get it. I’m sure some users were turning on strict protection and then complaining about the browser not working properly and ultimately ditching it while complaining to others. That being said, even with “standard” fingerprint blocking, Brave is the only browser I’ve used on CoverYourTracks and it returned “you have a randomized fingerprint”. I’m not any sort of tech genius but I think the folks at EFF are and I trust them.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
I don’t understand your point.
synapse1278@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
A Web browser is a complex piece of SW that needs to provide many, many, features and work with great performance. Therefore you need a large team of experienced developers (full-time and maybe volunteers) collaborating on the development and testing. This is cost in labor a d infrastructures (servers, storage, Internet connection, hosting of platforms, etc)
One such feature that is a must-have is playing videos, from YouTube, Netflix, Prime, Twitch and what have you. Most widely spread video codecs are proprietary, you need a license to implement the decoder and these licenses are expensive. H.264 is one such codec, very widely spread across many content and platforms. You wouldn’t want a Web browser that lacks the ability to decide H.264 videos. There are many such codecs that are considered essential, and this cost a lot of money in total.
In conclusion, is an argument as why developing a web browser costs money and requires a sustainable financial plan to persist, even though it is open-source and developed mostly by volunteers.
My personal opinion: advertisement sucks. I don’t want it anywhere in my life. I would prefer to pay upfront for my web browser if it come to this.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
Yeah, no, I understood all of that. I think we all do. I’m just not sure why you felt the need to explain it?
cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
Since when did LibreWolf stop development? First I heard of it, and concerning if accurate.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
I was just reading about it in another thread that I don’t remember. Not really “stopped” per se but one of the major devs left and the remaining have admitted they’re not able to keep up. I’ll go and see if I can find it again and I’ll edit this comment if I do.
cyberwolfie@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
I remember they saying the were too swamped to take on an Android version after Mull dev stopped, which is not the same as stopping. Mull actually stopped development, LibreWolf didn’t - they should not be mentioned in the same sentence like that.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
I linked the thread above.
ripcord@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Wait, what?
Two things:
When did Librewolf stop development?
On funding, they say in their FAQ:
Librewolf seems to very consciously not looking for “resources” from advertising or donations, or etc. The only resource they seem to want is motivation.
Which I think is one of the big issues with OSS projects - many are based around a very small number of people being motivated to work on something for free. And it dies if that stops.
I think that having expectations and funding to continue is important, like you say.
But I’m still confused about what you mean by the “resources” comment re: Librewolf.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
Exactly.
“Resources” can refer to many different things, in this case it is motivation/prioritization.
swelter_spark@reddthat.com 5 weeks ago
That thread is several months old, and is specifically about integrating Arkenfox settings changes. I wouldn’t say Librewolf has ceased development based on the fact that their default settings differ from Arkenfox. Their Codeberg site shows ongoing work.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
And? You have new evidence that things have improved?
Why does that matter?
Lumiluz@slrpnk.net 5 weeks ago
It’s still being kept up to date, just not getting new features, and the security issues have been patched up as they come along. It’s not a dead project yet. Maintaining Librewolf isn’t impossible since Firefox is doing the heavy lifting.
The main issue is mostly that it relies on Firefox.
Honestly, I don’t mind the paid browser route. Browsers, and a lot of software, used to be paid, and it feels like things were less shit when some of it was.
I think ideally we’d see 2 versions of software like some used to be in the 90s - a free, stripped down version that only does basic functions (think Microsoft WordPad Vs Microsoft Word) and a pair full version. This model can still allow FOSS to exist as well, like perhaps having LibreOffice as is, and then having an enterprise version that has additional networking features and support that’s paid for businesses, with all money from that going into the maintenance of LibreOffice.
nuko147@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
Oh SHIT. I had a feeling since months, as an end-user, that something wasn’t going well. But damn, i did not know that was that bad.
ripcord@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Thanks.
AbnormalHumanBeing@lemmy.abnormalbeings.space 5 weeks ago
I can somewhat understand the overall criticism, because Librewolf - as far as my understanding goes - would be in trouble without the work being done on the code upstream.
Personally, I know that this does not exist (yet), and to some people that put privacy above everything else with a more libertarian slant, this might sound like the worst option imaginable, but my “dream” way to handle it within the current economic system would be:
Have an open source, FOSS base, web-engine and all, developed with public funds similar to public broadcasting in many countries (Bonus if carried by international organisations instead of just national. Think a UN institution like UNESCO or WHO, but focused on making the internet accessible neutrally and to all). On top of that code, projects that want to put privacy above all else could still feasibly built projects like LibreWolf (an even Brave), relying somewhat comfortably on secure fundamentals.
I know, sounds like a dream, which it is at this point. But every other solution within the current economic status quo I personally thin of, I see no chance of enshittification not always encroaching and creating crises, if not outright taking over.
Ulrich@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
Personally, I’d never touch a browser funded by the gov.
AbnormalHumanBeing@lemmy.abnormalbeings.space 5 weeks ago
I think that is utlimately valid - although I think the other options are all coming with their own problems. You will then have to instead live with the interests of tech corporations (including nonprofits who ultimately need funding) and advertisers collecting your data, whose interests will ultimately not be much less malignant - or small free software projects of a sometimes quite limited scope. The latter, I think, is also a valid niché, but will leave the overall standards of the internet to corporate interests.
Considering how the CEO here acts for Brave, in my opinion, this is not simply about him being an asshole or being politically questionable. To me - everything about him screams “grifter taking advantage of people’s legitimate concerns” - and he has a material interest in your data as well. Brave always felt to me like trying to sell and market privacy instead of proving to me, in their fundamentals, that they actually have my interests in mind.
Which is why I, personally, do not really understand choosing Brave above LibreWolf (or Tor Browse, occasionally), if privacy is your #1 priority.
ripcord@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
But that didn’t answer my questions
AbnormalHumanBeing@lemmy.abnormalbeings.space 5 weeks ago
Oh, yes, it wasn’t a direct answer, also, I’m not the person you answered to. Ultimately, my comment was more meant as an overall addition to the discussion, building on the idea of what a solution to:
might be.
But as answers to your two points. #1 - I have no idea where they got that from, myself #2 - I think you answered that one yourself rather well, and I wanted to build on that one.
Sorry if that was confusing, my brain is also good at confusing myself at times, can’t imagine how that is for others at times.