We need a multi-national, publicly funded research organization akin to CERN/within CERN, whose whole purpose is to develop a state-of-the-art browser that's not Chromium-based. Make #Google follow our lead, rather than us having to follow Google.
If the Web could be developed using public money, why not a modern browser? Public funding would remove the Mozilla problem of them having to depend on Google.
With the amount of money governments waste annually, we could fund this AND Mozilla.
There could be incentive problems here as well, of course, like governments threatening to withdraw funding in case a certain backdoor isn't included, or if it blocks ads too aggressively and some corporate-funded 'representative' starts receiving pushback from the industry etc, but which is why it would need to:
- Be funded by a wider variety of states than the Five/Nine Eyes members.
- Developed entirely in the open, each important change reviewed by a committee of experts from the public.
@MatejLach But how would you unseat Chrome at this point? Google have the incumbent advantage and the platform advantage. Technical excellence is only part of the story.
@cbowdon That's definitely going to be a challenge, but #Google did some smart marketing by having ads IRL, like in trains and such, even in smaller countries if the % of connected users was high enough.
Since it would be publicly funded, you could also install it on computers in publicly-funded educational institutions. A lot of software spreads by children installing it for their parents. If students are using it at school, they're likely to install it at home.
@MatejLach Ooh that last one is a good one. That’s what MS/Apple/Google are trying after all. You wouldn’t necessarily need CERN-like levels of funding to achieve it.
@cbowdon @MatejLach
but wouldn't you need CERN-like levels of fuding to develop a browser that keeps up with the moving target of shitty WHATWG standards?
@Wolf480pl
That was indeed my thinking as well.
@MatejLach @Wolf480pl @cbowdon
Also why build a state of the art shit whose shape has beed already defined by #Google instead of building something new and better?
Something following a totally different vision?
@Shamar
I think to pull regular users in, we'd have to start with today's web. But once we have sway in the committees, you can begin to redefine what state of the art web should look like.
@MatejLach @Wolf480pl @cbowdon
I think we need a #CERN of #Informatics, but it should start from a simple vision and build what it takes to get there from the ground up.
I have a vision to propose: all people should be able to read, understand and modify each software they use or feed with their data.
Modern Web is not going to survive such vision, so building a browser is wasting money imho.
@Shamar@mastodon social It won't work. Just take some time to, say, explain recursion or graph algorithms, image compression or even cryptography math to a totally untrained user. We will never get to a point of end users to read or understand their software. IMHO, trying to do so is a waste of time that could better be spent on building more ethical solutions that just work for this crowd.
@MatejLach @Wolf480pl @cbowdon
@z428 @MatejLach @Wolf480pl @cbowdon My position is that they should be *able* to (perhaps with a little training), but not obligated to.
you state a key point that repeatedly gets lost in these types of discussions.
and the same people continue to miss it.
The door to programming should always be open to everyone--no artificial barriers in the way for those who have the interest & aptitude to build & exercise their skill. 1/2
@alcinnz 2/2
but not everyone will be able to do that.
software freedom is still *crucial* to them, because it enables a cascade of accountability: The might not be able to code, but they should be able to interrogate the process by which those who code on their behalf work, up to & including choosing who codes for them.
