> So, your article is FUD in it's purest undistilled form. The article is just reiterating an argument that Mozilla and Facebook made. If you’re saying Mozilla

> So, your article is FUD in it's purest undistilled form. The article is just reiterating an argument that Mozilla and Facebook made. If you’re saying Mozilla and Facebook are spreading Fear Uncertainty and Doubt with their proposal for a binary JS AST, then you may do so, but please realize that they probably had good reasons to start such a project. EDIT: Even though I disagree with the parent, it is making some good points (specifically, that WebASM is going to add a GC), so flagging it to death doesn’t seem to be the right thing to do.