6 ms·
We shouldn't. All the nonsense we're trying to cram into the Web is making it harder to justify connecting to it. I long for the days when simple images and t
by Endy 9y ago
We shouldn't. All the nonsense we're trying to cram into the Web is making it harder to justify connecting to it. I long for the days when simple images and text were the norm. Nowadays, I need to have and devote constant system resources to a tracking-blocker, cookie-blocker, an ad-blocker, a script-blocker, a separate javascript-blocker, and a who-knows-what-else-blocker, just to do the things I want to do; let alone the things I need to do.
- skohan 9y ago> I long for the days when simple images and text were the norm. The main issue with the web currently is that tools designed for the purpose of displaying simple images and text, plus a little interactivity, are being stretched to realize complex applications. Powerful on-demand applications on the web are a good thing, and it's a good thing that we're finally getting the tools to build them properly.
- pjmlp 9y agoWe already had them, WebAssembly adds little to Flash, Java applets, Oberon Juice, ActiveX, Silverlight, other than a format that makes all browser vendors happy. I can easily imagine that Adobe R&D already has a working WebAssembly prototype for Flash.
- TomMarius 9y agoNot true. A good security model is added.
- pjmlp 9y agoIt remains to be tested on the wild. Lets see when the first examples pop up on Project Zero or CCC.
- mrec 9y agoIt reuses the existing Javascript security model, which has been tested pretty extensively in the wild.
- pjmlp 9y agoShould I list all of the CVEs related to exploits on JavaScript VMs? Just today there were a few on another HN thread.
- TomMarius 9y agoIt happens, yes. But we're not building WAsm on a greenfield.
- tzahola 9y ago>the javascript security model :Ddd So you’re saying they have mitigated every cross-origin-based exploit? I bet they really mean it this time.
- mrec 9y agoNobody's claiming it's flawless. I'm just objecting to the claim that it's untested.
- CaptSpify 9y agoReally? Yeah, it's been tested extensively, but it's security has also been found to be quite lacking. I'm legitimately surprised someone can say this with a straight face.
- baldfat 9y ago> I can easily imagine that Adobe R&D already has a working WebAssembly prototype for Flash. Actually Haxe and Openfl will probably beat them to the punch since Adobe has pretty much killed flash by 2020.
- tzahola 9y agoAdobe has around 4 guys working on the whole Flash codebase.
- jayd16 9y ago>other than a format that makes all browser vendors happy No small feat!
- Endy 9y agoSure it is. Find a way to lock down all user access and demand that Google and Microsoft get paid or your data gets it. Mozilla will do whatever Google says. Apple doesn't care as much, a new core tech means a new generation of iPhone/iPad/iPod/iHateThisNamingConvention, which means more money for them.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dbbk 9y agoOkay, say every browser had a built-in tracking, cookie, ad, script blocker etc. How would you propose websites then make any money?
- mikestew 9y agoThat’s not my problem to fix, no proposal is required of me.
- dymk 9y agoOkay, then don't expect anybody to build one. Web browsers are incredibly complex, and nobody is going to build one for free nowadays.
- TeMPOraL 9y agoThat's only yet another reason to try and spin off a more user-friendly web, and burn the current thing to the ground.
- mikestew 9y agoWait a minute, did I misunderstand? I thought we were talking about how websites would make money, not build browsers. Are you saying that Apple, who doesn’t depend on web advertising AFAICT, wouldn’t build this hypothetical browser because other companies wouldn’t make money? A more macro economic view, then?
- Sir_Cmpwn 9y ago>Web browsers are incredibly complex This is the problem. A much less complex browser, without wasm, without JavaScript, with a simpler DOM... would not be that incredibly complex and expensive to build. So the point is moot.
- cgh 9y agoBy asking people to buy what they are selling? If they aren’t selling anything, why the expectation of remuneration?
- 9y ago
- jjrh 9y agoIf the revenue generating nonsense (ads, tracking, etc) weren't on the web they would creep in where every they could. At least on the web we can fairly easily block the majority of ads. I liked simple text pages of the past but I also appreciate that lots and lots of applications that would only ever see a windows release (and maybe a buggy mac release) will run on whatever platform I want as long as I have a modern browser. I hear ya though that it's frustrating when you go to a site that is pretty much only text and it just flatout doesn't work without javascript, or they have done something weird with the css and it doesn't reflow properly on a small screen/mobile browser.