Welcome to Ladybird, a truly independent web browser

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Project background and current state

  • Ladybird began as the SerenityOS browser and is now an independent BSD-licensed project and non-profit.
  • Commenters note rapid progress: sites like GitHub, Gmail, Google Calendar, and Figma now load, though usability and speed aren’t yet on par with major browsers.
  • It’s explicitly pre‑alpha: source-only, no official binaries, minimal UI, and no extension system yet. Some users report it as “fast”, others as notably slow, especially on heavy sites like YouTube.

Independence, standards, and the Chrome monoculture

  • Many see Ladybird as important because almost all “alternative” browsers are Chromium-based and thus tied to Google’s technical and standards decisions.
  • Debate centers on what “independent” means when Google effectively steers W3C:
    • One side: if you must track Google-driven specs, independence is limited.
    • Other side: market share from independent engines can constrain what sites and standards actually adopt, shifting power over time.

Firefox backlash and search for alternatives

  • The thread is heavily colored by anger at recent Firefox changes: new terms of use, softened language around “we don’t sell your data”, and increasing telemetry/ads.
  • People discuss moving to Firefox forks (LibreWolf, Waterfox, Zen, Floorp) and other browsers (Brave, Vivaldi), with long subthreads about Brave’s crypto model, past affiliate-code controversies, and privacy claims.
  • Some still see Firefox as “lesser evil” versus Chromium, but want a fresh, genuinely independent engine—hence enthusiasm for Ladybird.

Licensing, governance, and politics

  • Some criticize the liberal BSD license, fearing “embrace, extend, extinguish” by big tech and arguing for GPLv3 to lock in community benefits.
  • Others stress that open source alone doesn’t prevent “enshittification”; organizations and business models enshittify, not code.
  • There’s broader reflection that FOSS needs political and regulatory wins (around data, tracking) rather than just more code.

Implementation choices and security

  • Ladybird is currently modern C++, inherited from SerenityOS; now that it’s standalone, the team plans gradual migration toward Swift for memory safety.
  • Rust was trialed but reportedly disliked by the team; Swift is seen as a better fit, though commenters worry about Apple/LLVM dependence and cross‑platform tooling.
  • Security tradeoffs: Ladybird lacks the massive security engineering of Chrome/Firefox but also avoids some complexity (e.g., no JS/Wasm JIT, more use of off‑the‑shelf libraries). Its niche status is seen as both a risk and a reduced target.

Browser complexity, scope, and embeddability

  • Several lament how far the web has drifted from “pages of text and images” to full OS-like environments, making browser engines enormous.
  • Some argue a new engine should focus on the 80–90% of the web people actually use, skipping rarely-used but heavy APIs.
  • There’s strong interest in Ladybird as an embeddable engine and a saner Electron alternative; Servo, NetSurf, and Goanna are cited as existing but under-marketed or niche.

Financing and sustainability

  • The project has seed funding (including a large one-time donation) and aims to maintain ~18 months of runway, scaling staffing accordingly.
  • Many commenters say they’d happily pay or donate for a privacy-respecting, non‑enshittified browser, and see user funding as key to long-term independence.