It's a great question, and I don't know the answer. A browser is a very complex application which requires many FTEs and millions of dollars to develop and maintain. Donation models don't work well for open source, there's no way individual users will be contributing (in aggregate) millions of USD for a browser. There are various forks of Firefox and Chrome but I am reluctant to use those because they may be out of date or its developers might have financial or other incentives to install telemetry or backdoors. Previously, an ideological, established and proud institution like Mozilla could be trusted to an extent to refrain from such things. A subscription based model might work but it's hard to say if there's a market fit, as the qualms that HN users have over Google's monopoly are not shared by the population at large, who just don't care or even know about these things. A strategy I have been pondering is to take a browser and drastically simplify it (just the rendering and networking, no JavaScript/WASM, audio/video and APIs) and iterate until it's finished and secure; this ought to be manageable by a modestly funded small team of developers. Then use that to browse the web where I can, and use Chrome for websites that require the full browser stack like Youtube. It's a step backwards but this is where we are.