You compared the Cloudflare situation to “taking money from Google” and added that due to Ladybird taking money from Cloudflare, they’re “not challenging the status quo”.
Ladybird being a browser has absolutely no bearing on webhosting and the only status quo it can challenge is in the browser market. Which implies that you think Cloudflare has something to do with the browser market.
This is like saying “the duopoly that reigns the water is Maersk and Smartwater”, two companies that do completely different things that just happen to be related to water…
You compared the Cloudflare situation to “taking money from Google” and added that due to Ladybird taking money from Cloudflare, they’re “not challenging the status quo”.
Ladybird being a browser has absolutely no bearing on webhosting and the only status quo it can challenge is in the browser market. Which implies that you think Cloudflare has something to do with the browser market.
i compared it to firefox, saying sucking up to oligarchies for money gets you tied up with them and prevents you from challenging them.
no use in challenging “the browser market” when you are getting funded by the very same actors keeping it the way it is.
Again: what does Cloudflare have to do with the browser market…?
they monopolize the internet infratructure. they can very well be the ones enforcing mainstream browsers.
and they do. they challenge firefox users much more when they have adblockers on and such. they have the capability to do more.
And you don’t think that financing a third party browser to break the duopoly is “doing more”?
the duopoly that reigns the internet is google and cloudflare. this changes nothing.
This is like saying “the duopoly that reigns the water is Maersk and Smartwater”, two companies that do completely different things that just happen to be related to water…