Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Why are they working on mostly useless ventures?

How about some really captivating features like:

    Tor integration/awareness
    I2P integration/awareness
    ZeroNet functionality
    IPFS functionality
Start working on hard features that will make the internet better, and also more distributed. It's one thing to have throw-away garbage that nobody will use. It's another thing entirely to support new protocols that make Firefox a go-to tool.



There is one MoCo employee helping with getting changes from the Tor browser upstreamed. It's not happening overnight, but progress is being made.

Things like IPFS, while very promising, are not mature enough to justify the effort of adding them in the core of gecko yet.

Also, I dispute the fact that supporting IPFS would "make Firefox a go-to tool" in the grand scheme of internet users, unfortunately.


I sure hope so, regarding Tor and Mozilla. Aside my scripts that make .onion resolution on a Linux machine work, it would be nicer to have a simple and clean interface here.

I certainly understand the hesitancy with IPFS. It is still too new. And they're still ironing out features and implementations. However, what gets me is that it's live right now, and I'm using it for quite a few things.

Right now, I'm getting some VM stuff up and running. My idea is that jor1k linux in JS can be run on IPFS.. Still playing around with it, but it seems very stable and fast.

Also, regarding your 3rd point: I've attributed many network effects to the 85/15 principle. The 15% is your tech userbase. They're the ones that drag everyone else into a platform or technology. The rest (85%) follow because the early adopters knew that it was where to go. Gmail was like this, as was Facebook, as was Firefox, as was Napster, etc. Adding in something like IPFS as a base support adds in "Cloud Storage" where nothing really existed like this before, well, aside 'cloud' meaning other peoples' servers.

Maybe I'm completely wrong. Time will certainly tell, but one thing I know, is that I am indeed impressed with what I'm seeing already.


Out of curiosity, how would you integrate this in a web browser?

Also, in my experience, Servo is a very good platform for experimental features such as these, so if you feel that they will make the Internet better, you should consider contributing them to Servo.


Some of those are honestly pie in the sky, I'll admit. But still seeing a statement that's where resources would be being spent would be ideal for some of those.

With regards to Tor/I2P, It would go a long way to be able to understand that a .onion or .i2p link was clicked and to use an alternate resolver. That would also call for a mode in the browser that sanitizes all user fields and makes the browsers look all exactly the same (to maintain anonymity).

For IPFS, I'd like to see a client-side javascript that handles the peer processing of a node, as well as being able to understand a /ip[n/f]s/hash is an ipfs link. So far, we have resolution via localhost:8080 or ipfs.io/ipfs/hash resolution depending if you're running the peer program or not.

I know that IPFS is actively working on a websockets/client side js for their system, so that any browser can play along, with no noisome downloads or binaries.

And honestly, I didn't know about Servo. I've already enough on my plate, that I didn't need to know about yet another awesome project :)




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: