Cloudflare and “challenging the status quo” in the same phrase ?
Well, the browser status quo. I guess they want their own Chrome.
Its sponsorship only of an open source browser, with no telemetry, advertising, crypto, etc, etc built in.
Sponsors get listed as sponsors, thats it.
For now
So when they do just fork it?
I likely won’t touch it anyway, but it is fully open source, so it can be forked easily. With the transition to Swift I suspect there would be plenty of devs who could take things forward if they wanted to.
If you look at history, Google did the opposite with Chrome, they forked an open source browser and turned it into the world’s most used.
I guess we’ll see.Thats google though, with the added ability to put it direct into an extremely common OS (Android). With ladybird, you’ve got an apparent neocon and 3 years currently planned for a GA release (2028). Its future is already pretty uncertain regardless of sponsorship.
So when they do just fork it?
say the same for chrome, and think again if you mean it seriously.
Iridium, cromite, edge, brave, thorium, vivaldi, pale moon…
And this is a drastically simpler browser that would be in swift 6.
and what can they do against the manifest v3 migration? they cannot afford to keep maintaining the code for mv2 addons. it is an important topic for efficient content blocking.
its funny you bring up edge as an alternative. brave too has opt-out telemetry and other shenanigans.
Cloudflare has announced its sponsorship of the Ladybird browser, an independent (still-in-development) open-source initiative
Is it still independent?
Yes, and their donations are limited to 100k a year per corporation/organization, so there cant be a company who comes, donates 20million and then tries to gain control of them through money
Yes, and their donations are limited to 100k a year per corporation/organization
Interesting that they did that.
Frankly, that’s really cool and I think all NPOs capable of doing that should follow suit… though I suppose that paves the way towards ghost or shell companies sneaking in that way… Hmm…
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!
I think It’s on their charter that no matter how much corporate money they’ll get they’ll never accept any outside influence just the same. The donators are amply warned to not expect anything other than development as usual or faster.
People always imagine this as “I will pay you $100 to kick the puppy” and of course they would never.
But what actually happens is that you have a long-term donor. You rely on their help (they’re paying for you to be able to hire a nice college intern who’s really smart and has been fun to have on the project). They never tell you what to do so you see them as more of a friend than anything else. It’s perfectly normal to get some lunch with friends and talk. You’re stuck on some problems and they have some good connections that help you out. That might even be worth more than $100k, but it’s not money at all so it’s OK that they’re helping you like this. They also talk you up, which is like free advertising except you didn’t ask for it so that also doesn’t count. Anyway, at some of the lunches they’re telling you about what’s going on with them and there’s some problems they’re dealing with that you could help with. They don’t ask for help, of course, because they know you’re independent. But being independent means it’s OK for you to do what you want. Even help a friend out who didn’t ask for help so they’re not influencing you…
This guy politiks
they stated on their website this project will remain independet and that donators don´t have a say in how this is being developed
No browser with third party investors can be really independent, they always will obey more the interests of the investors as on those from the users. Anyway the guys from Ladybird have balls of steel to develope an browser engine from scratch in an market saturated of browsers of any kind and a brutal competition, this would had more sense 15 years ago, but not now. Good luck, maybe in 2029-2030 there is an good browser multi-platform with all the needed infrastructure, servers and extensions, but I’ll see to believe.
How can you say it’s saturated when chrome has an effective monopoly. If you look at browser engines, there’s basically only 3 for desktop, with one of them targeting only Macs.
As said, there are currently three engines + two forks of these (Gonanna and Qt), except some basic render engines from text only browsers (Links, Lynx and some others), but over hundred different browsers which use these engines, + almost 70 abandoned ones, because outdated engines and others which also tried to develope an own engine. This is what I mean with saturated. It’s nice to try to release a browser with a new independent engine, but if there are not enough users which also use it, it’s a death born child. For some products the market is limited. Make it eg. sense to release a new OS? There also existing only 4, Unix, Unixbased like Windows or Mac and Linux with tons of distros. It’s not only the browser engine, in over 20 years there are also growed complete infrastructure arround these engines, dedicated plug ins, extensions, etc, which don’t exist for a new indie engine, precisely because other browsers, which also tried to release a new engine, before Ladybird, are currently all death. Sad, but you need also a minimum of infrastructure for an browser and which offer also somewhat more as only a new engine. It need security and privacy measures, inbuild or with extensions/plug-ins which need an extra developement and other things more.
No browser with third party investors can be really independent, they always will obey more the interests of the investors as on those from the users.
That’s why they limited donations to $100k per organization. No one is allowed to make themselves indispensable to the project.
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.
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?
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.
“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”?
Which is still partly, because it’s not solely. But yes, that is a rather large part of the total sum.
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.
Personally, I think if the engine was closed source, then we didn’t in fact “had that”. Maybe Microsoft had it, not us.
What makes things like chromium, firefox and webkit actual ecosystems is that they at least have an open source basis. Edge isn’t an ecosystem, it’s a black box. We don’t even know whether it’s true or not that it was its own thing or just they sneakily used bits and pieces of chromium from the start anyway.
User Agent checks is the easiest thing to overcome. Had edge’s engine been open source we would have had spins of it resolving the issue within hours. There are many examples of “random developers” succeeding where big companies tied by business strategies (I bet they had business reasons to keep a distinctive user agent) didn’t, to the point that the web runs on servers using FOSS software.
Personally, I think if the engine was closed source, then we didn’t in fact “had that”. Maybe Microsoft had it, not us.
Well, yeah, in that aspect, you’re correct. I meant that as a “we had a non Google-reliant engine”.
Yes, I understand that. But in my view, Microsoft is the one that might have had “a non Google-reliant engine” (if it’s true that they didn’t rely on Google code).
They just let us use it under their conditions, for the limited time they decided to make it available to us… but it was never “ours”. We were just contractually allowed to use it, but we didn’t really “have” it.
Semantics. I agree with you in principle, but the matter of fact is that we ended up with effectively zero choice over the browser engine.
Yes, the matter of fact is that the reason why that choice was taken away is because everyone except MS was forbidden from “having” that engine. It might have still been alive today in some form had it not been an exclusive MS-owned thing.
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.
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.
I think not being a default browser means that, for now, it’s not for ordinary users anyway.
But we’re discussing the potential future of the browser, not its current state. Right now it can barely render a modern page without crashing (but not always).
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.
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.
That speaks a valume about how much control google has on Mozilla decision making process.
It doesn’t say anything about that at all. Just because you’re paying for something doesn’t mean they have to do it your way. It is at most something to keep an eye on.
Google pays them for two reasons. To be the default search engine giving them substantial marketing and ad space, and to keep them floating and independent to lessen their probable status as a monopoly.
In fact, in the recent antitrust ruling, Google is precluded from even making exclusive deals with them.
You are agreeing with the person you replied to lol
Mozilla, though getting funding from Google to make google its default search engine, officially decided to keep supporting Manifest v2.
For now. Google probably isn’t too concerned since they have a more than 70% market share, and nearly 90% if you count all Chromium-based browsers. Firefox has managed to do what Google wants, which is “exist” and “not meaningfully compete with Chrome”. If that changes, Google might lean on them harder.
If that changes, Google might lean on them harder.
If you remember, at one time Firefox used to hold 30% of total browser market share, and it was pro-privacy organization back then as it is now.
Even at that time Google was not managed to influence their decision making process.
What makes you think Google didn’t influence their decision making process? (Assuming that’s what you’re saying)
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
I love WebKit exploits because they suddenly open up several gaming consoles to homebrew, almost all of them have browsers based on WebKit too.
Servo and Ladybird are awesome to follow along. Hope they both succeed
challenge the status quo by partnering with the status quo…
Challenge the status quo in a Snowpiercer fashion.
I’ve got a roach farm, so I’m already on board.
Was this too obscure for Lemmy?
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.
It is naive to trust any US-based service. The devil’s advocate in me just wanted to hear why you believe what you do, so thanks for that.
My angle was mostly to point out that Ladybird hasn’t done anything obviously morally bankrupt like the politicians you pointed out - the only detracting factors to me about the project are 1) that the nonprofit is based in the US 2) that it’s not written in Rust.
Of course, it’s worth being suspicious of a web browser of all things. I just see Cloudflare’s contribution in a neutral light given Cloudflare’s general strategy towards PR and the fact that the Ladybird browser is likely going to be a very niche product - and they aren’t even focusing on Windows support for the foreseeable future.
Do I trust Ladybird more than Mozilla? Only very slightly, but the bar is pretty low - and it’s not blind trust.
Still, it’s hard to understand why Cloudflare chose to back exactly Omarchy.
Maybe the developers in Cloudflare use it? Also weird because Omarchy’s default browser is Chromium I think. The webpage didn’t list the default browser, so not sure about that.
Here’s one theory: https://drewdevault.com/2025/09/24/2025-09-24-Cloudflare-and-fascists.html
Anyway, Omarchy and Ladybird are both run by fascists. Omarchy makes this pretty obvious from the outset – on the home page the big YouTube poster image prominently features SuperGrok, which is a pathetically transparent dog-whistle to signal alliance with Elon Musk’s fascist politics. Omarchy is the pet project of David Heinemeier Hansson, aka DHH, who is well known as a rich fascist weirdo.2 One need only consult his blog to browse his weird, racist views on immigration, fat-shaming objections to diverse representation, vaguely anti-feminist/homophobic/rapey rants on consent, and, recently, tone-policing antifascists who celebrate the death of notable fascist Charlie Kirk.
Speaking of tributes to Charlie Kirk, that brings us to Andreas Kling, the project lead for Ladybird, who tweeted on the occasion of his assassination:
RIP Charlie Kirk
I hope many more debate nerds carry on his quest to engage young people with words, not fists.
– @awesomekling
I was not prepared to learn these things today.
most people outside the us have never heard any of kirk’s talking points. if you only know that he is a conservative debater and use your normal (non-us) definition of “conservative”, then “people should not die for their opinions” is not a controversial take. i’m not saying that’s what’s happened here but it’s the most likely situation considering klings history.
I definitely wouldn’t expect people to have heard of Kirk at all. Even within the US he was a bit of a niche asshole. But I would expect that before posting “RIP <somedude> he was a good guy” they would do some quick web searches and get an idea of what somedude was about and then only post if they agreed that that’s their notion of a good guy.
i agree, but my assessment of most people is that they just say shit
shit
yeah
Grrrreat. So one can already tick off that browser before it is even ready to test.
Honestly, Firefox has been stable AF and forks are doing awesome work. Maybe those forks might even continue doing their own thing by the time this project will be ready for beta testing.
Competition is great but this one’s on already on shaky ground.
I’m rooting for Servo more than these fascist wannabes.
The argument on Kling seems pretty weak to me… is he Fascist because… he doesn’t support violence and an assassination? 🙄
By this logic for being not fascist one must support the death penalty?
I am pretty sure fascists are in favour of violence and murder (in fact the person cited was killed by a fascist)
RIP Charlie Kirk
I hope many more debate nerds carry on his quest to engage young people with words, not fists.
“carry on his quest”. What was Charlie Kirks quest again? Where does he say he doesn’t support violence and assassination? Are you Klings PR?
I am pretty sure fascists are in favour of violence and murder (in fact the person cited was killed by a fascist)
Just because fascists kill fascists doesn’t make spreding hate less fascist. Does your definition of fascists only start when they start shooting people on sight?
People like kirk were revelling in current administration. But since they didn’t “use violence”, they must’ve been innocent in all this trend, huh?
Honestly there’s a reason fascists are on the rise. People like you seem too oblivious to see the subtle narrative of spreading hate by casual undertones.
But hey, you do you. I hope you take up his quest as well.
No, Kling is not at his first “offence” - he doesn’t support LGBT, so that surely makes him a fucking fascist.
Can you cite something for that? I’m not disagreeing, I’m just disappointed by the revelation and would like to get my facts straight.
Jesus, what a reach for two projects run by normal dudes.
The open source community is filled with people on the left side trying to bring down people they disagree with. You can tolerate them, or fork away and leave their “shitty project run by fascists” instead of witch hunting and name calling anyone you dissagree with
fascists guy: has an opinion
leftist guy: wants to witch hunt a guy for his opinion amd get him kicked out of his own project
like it or not, who’s being fascist? you know it well.
Hey, hi, trans person here. Calling my mere existence “political” is not “just an opinion”. Rejecting a PR to change “he” to “they” in some code comments is also just a stupid hill to die on. No singular they is basically baby’s first edgy opinion.
Sorry which are we talking about the rejected the PR, DHH or kling?
I suspect its DHH just making sure
Edit: Found it
Kling rejected with: “This project is not an appropriate arena to advertise your personal politics.”
For SerenityOS documentation to use a singular they to not assume gender.
Edit 2: For the record, this is even more stupid than you think. The documentation was written with gendered language for a male reader only in mind.
“Hey, I fixed your bad writing”
“POLITICS?!1?!%?!”
The tweet about Kirk has some firm context with this. I’d call it pretty dang likely that kling is a fan…
deleted by creator
Let’s not forget that Drew is the one that wants to burn Stallman at the stake.
You yourself are tagging the fascist guy as a fascist. Not all opinions are just opinions.
Who’s the real fascist?
The one you tagged as such.I’m labeling him that to make clear the irony of the situation
the supposedly “fascist” guy: has an opinion
the totaly “moderate” leftist guy: wants him gone even from his own project from it
hope I made myself clear now 👍
No, you did, but my point still stands. Not all opinions are just an opinion.
Person A: yeh we need to accept shootings. Empathy is damaging. So much more damaging crap.
Person B: they debated, such good people, we need more like them.
Yeah. No? My point is that there’s a reason they get tagged as fascists or fascists apologists, they have fascist opinions or condone/glorify people saying them.
“Has an opinion” is an unacceptable generalisation in this case.
the “supposedly” fascist guy:
has an opinionwants to get rid of people not like him and who did not do any wrong
Yeah, they could have just backed arch
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
Like, definitely not a full screen window. Have they changed that yet?
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?
Well, not a straight answer but, there you go.
(yes, late, also my first post so hi)
I think that’s the first time I’ve seen a url in hiragana. And welcome to lemmy. I hope you enjoy it here, it’s normally very chill.
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% 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.
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.”
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
Interesting! I used Firefox for ages and never encountered that issue.
The VPN “click to confirm you’re human” is annoying but at the same time understandable - 60% of all Internet traffic is bots.
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.
Super weird. I’m using Mullvad Browser half the time, never had any such issues. It automatically kills all cookies, has uBlock and NoScript installed, etc. EDIT: oh, yeah, it’s also Firefox-based.
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
What…? I do that literally every day - I handle the service catalogue at work so I need a lot of icons for the hardware and software we provide to users. Just yesterday I downloaded the images for a bunch of Apple hardware, straight from the search results.
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?
Other than the fact that I fail to see that “impossible to save stuff” bit - yeah, you should, somewhat. Again: over 60% of traffic is bots, that generates A LOT of traffic. These days a lot of people wouldn’t be able to afford hosting a website if they didn’t have services that Cloudflare and similar companies offer.
Also, they’re literally a man in the middle as a service (…)
I don’t know enough about networking to have an opinion on that. I only know that the two network security companies that I follow on socials recommend them. And it’s not “shills shilling”, these are two companies that will take governments and companies to court for threatening user rights.
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
Sure, I get that. But I’m a fan of Occam’s Razor. Can they exfiltrate data from their DNS? Of course. Everybody can. But why would they? If anyone finds out, it effectively kills the entire company, and they don’t do business with personal data - that’s Google’s market. It’s a lot of risk for zero reward, the way I see it.
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”.
Yes, but someone said they didn’t and since no one ever fact checks, the consensus is that they didn’t, even though they factually did.
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
just ignore that cloudflare was founded to collect data for the department of homeland security
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.
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.
It is being rewritten using swift
pack it up folks, we’ve been compromised
Ah yes, of course the status quo challenges the status quo!
I’ve seen a lot of Ladybird news recently. Let me know when I can actually try using it.
You can try using it.
It will crash most of the time, but it’s technically already usable.
Straight outta Onion
I guess I won’t be using it then. 🤷♂️
