Hacker News Reader

That was the goal, not an accident. The length of the standard itself is comparable to medium-sized serious project kloc count.

They driven these numbers up to ensure that no one except them and their leashed pets could repeat it.

And here we are, you can have ten internet-enabled apps with texts, images and videos, basically the same functionality, but you can only copy nine of them.

You can’t even keep up with a simple fork.

Can nothing be done to the web to lower the barrier to entry such that an independent group (a la OpenBSD or similar) can maintain their own?

Sure, we can have the original web with text and the occasional embedded photo. But if you want what amounts to a full blown operating system, with a rock solid sandbox, plus an extremely performant virtual machine, that’s going to be a high bar.

> Can nothing be done to the web to lower the barrier to entry such that an independent group (a la OpenBSD or similar) can maintain their own?

Of course it can and it is done: Linux Foundation Europe runs Servo, GNOME Foundation runs WebKitGTK and Epiphany, Ladybird Browser Initiative runs Ladybird.

Only WebKitGTK is feature complete. Servo and especially Ladybird are still likely to run into missing features while browsing.

But they are in early development, they are making great progress every month.

Despite existing since 2012, and getting funding from several companies, Servo development has been intermittent. It's now pretty usable, but it's not a success story in keeping pace with the tech giants.

No, Servo only recently has gained traction and it's doing really well in 2024: https://blogs.igalia.com/mrego/servo-revival-2023-2024/

These guys think it can be done: https://ladybird.org

> A lot of discussion in this thread is pointing out that chromium is a thing and that it would be hard for a company to properly fund a web browser without the backing of a tech giant whose more direct revenue stream is elsewhere.

This is not an issue though is it?

Like all those magazine subscriptions make their money off ads. The idea that a business can't survive on its own is fine, no?

If it's a singular tech giant then that's a problem but if chrome had contracts with like a dozen+ companies then it sounds really sustainable.

> Like all those magazine subscriptions make their money off ads. The idea that a business can't survive on its own is fine, no?

This is not quite the same, if a single magazine starts to become more ads than decent content it is not insurmountable for another company to start a competitor. It's not ad income itself that is bad, it's that in the case of a web browser it is insurmountable for a company to start up a competitor from scratch. It wasn't always the case, but because google has dumped so much engineering in to chrome they've effectively pulled up the ladder behind them.