It’s a shame that in my case trying to use Dillo here (HN) keeps returning 429, something that doesn’t happen with "full‑size" browsers (JS?).

There are no special rules against modern browsers. Can you reproduce it systematically?, if so, any chances you can paste the HTTP headers?

In any case, apart from our cgit instance we have mirrors in Codeberg and SourceHut:

- https://git.dillo-browser.org/dillo/

- https://codeberg.org/dillo/dillo

- https://git.sr.ht/~dillo/dillo

I meant browsing HN with Dillo. And it is not Dillo's fault. Other not "mainstream" browsers have the same problem.

Ahh, I see. Yes, I also see it sometimes, for those cases the "Mimic Chrome" workaround usually fixes it.

I assume is a side effect of abusive crawlers compounded with Dillo headers not being very common.

Very possible. I was too lazy to investigate.

BTW Thanks for all fixes, especially this one https://bug.dillo-browser.org/511/. Dillo (3.2.0) crashed quite often on my system because of this bug. I hope I will compile and test the new release soon.

I can browse HN fine with both Servo [0] and Blitz [1] (the latter of which is no-JS like Dillo). So I think there might be something Dillo-specific going on here.

[0]: https://github.com/servo/servo/

[1]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz/

I use dillo a lot, congratulations!

With these age verification laws and depending upon what Firefox does, dillo could very well be the go-to browser on Linux and BSD. If these laws hit us and Firefox adds logic to verify one's age, I will be 100% dillo.

Understandable but I think the age sniffing laws are much more profound. It's fascinating to see how quickly all countries succumb to them right now.

People may not believe it right now, but I think anonymously browsing the www will be a thing of the past in some years. People should see the concomitant attacks on VPNs - this is all concerted, not "isolated accidents". We need to make the flow of money obvious - I am fed up of being controlled by lobbyists.

Unfortunately even Google started requiring JS, which was a huge attack against small browsers and the open web.

Google at this point kind of controls the www. Now, strictly speaking that statement is not true, but it now feels as if Google sits in so many areas that are important for the www; chrome is just the most obvious one.

Yep, https://html.duckduckgo.com works well in such browser though :)

Also check out http://frogfind.com/, it automatically converts results into basic HTML.

The Google index is still accessible from many other "proxy search engines" that still work without JS, one example is Startpage.

See the nice list from Seirdy for more details on search engines: https://seirdy.one/posts/2021/03/10/search-engines-with-own-...

First thing I see when I try to visit Startpage, for probably the first time ever, is "Our system has detected the type of high-volume traffic coming from your internet connection that is normally associated with bots and scrapers." WTF. Total BULLSHIT. I have accessed that site precisely ZERO times from this IP. Now it will be one, and the last time I ever try.

But does it require ES6? Javascript was quite minimal in the early days. It doesn't need a JIT, in fact I'd prefer it not to be.

The difficult bit isn't the core JavaScript support. There are a dozen engines packaged as libraries that can use for that. The difficult bit is supporting all of the hundreds of DOM APIs.

Also the "undefined behaviours" used for fingerprinting and denying access to non-mainstream UAs even if they have JS support. If I remember correctly, YouTube was doing something like that.

It is a feature. If website does not work in basic HTML, it is probably just a waste of time.

Am I the only one who has to giggle when reading that name?

I know people have somewhat related thoughts about the image editor called GIMP.

Yeah, I was going to say the same thing, kind of an unfortunate name. Why? It makes you think of a DILD*. Then you have to remind yourself, they probably mean armadillo.

not to be confused with armadildo, naturally

They missed a great opportunity to name the "Control via UNIX socket" section "Teledillonics".

> Am I the only one who has to giggle when reading that name?

Oh, I know exactly what you’re talking about. I too am reminded of Tom Bombadil’s song from The Fellowship of the Ring every time Dillo is mentioned.

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo!
    Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow!
    Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!

that's cool!

i totally misread the title of this post. What is wrong with me?

Dildo Browser sounds like the name of a website aggregating sex toy store products. Could be interesting to build if it doesn't exist yet. Maybe add features like showing where a given product is available at the lowest price, product comparisons, and user reviews.

dilloc began before the 3.3.0 release, in some previous git commits and it was amazing.

It's pretty easy to write a redirect menu item calling a script similar to a plumber/xdg-open replacing the JS url's with non JS ones, a la Libredirect under Firefox/Chromium.

Is there a current and pre-compiled Windows port for Dillo somewhere?

i already mentioned it in other Dillo-related posts, but i can not repeat enough: Dillo was the browser enabled me to view the web at all on my first old 486 PC, packed in Damn Small Linux.

Sad dillo is c++, I would have compiled it with a small and alternative plain and simple C compiler like cproc/qbe or tinycc.

That said, there is a signal about coding AI able to do a really good job at assisting to port c++ to plain and simple C en masse.

I did attempt this with whatever was state of the art (SOTA) about 6 months ago for my own C++ and was disappointed. It's just not there yet.

:(

So that signal is that good. Back to manual c++ to simple and plain C porting then.

A huge thank-you to the dev(s)! I love retro projects like this. I use Dillo daily, although it is for internal use. One thing I use it for is to view gemini protocol sites. The plug-in architecture means that you can render any protocol; gopher and gemini amongst others.

It's so lightweight!

While Mastodon client ain't working either, at least there is an alternative available: https://codeberg.org/adele/smolfedi