6 ms·

Hopefully this will raise awareness on PWAs. Hopefully using PWAs on mobile will be normalized by the 18-24 year olds. TikTok's PWA seems intentionally gimped (

by zelly 6y ago

Hopefully this will raise awareness on PWAs. Hopefully using PWAs on mobile will be normalized by the 18-24 year olds. TikTok's PWA seems intentionally gimped (you can't even search) but I will bet it will suddenly start working once it disappears from the Western app stores. Is there anything TikTok does that the Web Platform + WASM cannot do? (besides spying)

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
irrational 6y ago
Which platform? Apple (probably intentionally) doesn’t support many (any?) of the core features of PWAs on iOS.
astlouis44 6y ago
This times 1000. PWA's + WASM are the only hope of we have of tearing down the walled gardens that are the modern app stores!
quotemstr 6y ago
If the state can order tech companies to blacklist apps, the state can order tech companies to add certain sites to their "malicious browsing" filters or order ISPs to IP-block arbitrary hosts. The state simply has no legal authority under which it may ban apps. If the big tech companies roll over for this and say "yes, sir", they'll do anything. I'm a huge proponent of regulating big tech companies, but all regulation needs to done under the framework of public and universal rules established in advance, not randomly banning individual apps without proof of wrongdoing or a way to mount a defense.
- dependenttypes 6y ago
  The state already blacklists certain programs. Pretty much anything that illegally contains copyrighted content or some other form of illegal numbers.
  - quotemstr 6y ago
    No, the state doesn't blacklist programs. Code is speech. Bernstein v. Department of Justice established that [1] in the 1990s. Sure, if you have an app, and you distribute copyrighted material as part of that app, yes, you can be prosecuted under copyright law and be forced (via injunction) to stop distributing that app. But the word "law" is essential: there is a specific rule, set out in advance, which applies to everyone, and for which there are clear penalties. I have seen nobody explain what law TikTok is supposedly breaking. If TikTok is doing something bad, fine. Make a rule against the bad thing, then ban TikTok on the basis of breaking that rule. You can't just bypass the whole "make a rule" and "show that $X broke the rule" thing and go straight to "punish X". That's called passing a "bill of attainder", and it's such a terrible idea that the practice is specifically banned in the constitution. Now, maybe this situation isn't technically a bill of attainder, but it's the same damned principle at work, and it's still a bad idea. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/remembering-case-established-code-speech https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/remembering-case-estab...
    - xxpor 6y ago
      And SCOTUS has shown no issue with rebuking Trump for shortcutting the APA.
      - dragonwriter 6y ago
        Any action here would almost certainly be under the IEEPA, to which APA rulemaking process does not apply.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > You can't just bypass the whole "make a rule" and "show that $X broke the rule" thing and go straight to "punish X". Yes, as long as the punishment isn't essentially criminal in nature, you can, and it's long been a regularly used tool of foreign policy, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. When sanctions are declared against foreign companies or individuals or trade with them otherwise restricted, it's based on declared threats to the country, not general rules that are announced in advance and then the specific individuals involved found guilty in some judicial process of breaking after the rule was declared. It's all by executive finding.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > If the state can order tech companies to blacklist apps The state absolutely can order parties not to participate in any way with trade prohibited under it's Constitutional power to regulate international trade. Which includes Presidential directives issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
bezmenov 6y ago
What’s to stop the US from blacklisting the PWA too?
- rsa25519 6y ago
  The technical barrier. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I think Chrome & Firefox would put up a much bigger fight than App/Play Store. The latter is already a walled garden.
  - ac29 6y ago
    The US doesnt seem to have a problem taking down websites its found to be illegal, I don't know why a PWA would be much different. They dont need any buy-in from browser developers.
    - phillipwills 6y ago
      Pretty sure they do this by taking over the domain... Not sure if that would work in this case...
busymom0 6y ago
I don’t think this will just be the app itself. It will be network traffic based.
- kortilla 6y ago
  I don’t think there is infrastructure in place in the US to prevent access to an IP space.
  - ptx 6y ago
    Perhaps Huawei might be willing to provide it.
  - busymom0 6y ago
    Shouldn’t this be a very basic thing to do network wise?
    - kortilla 6y ago
      For an individual ISP, yeah. But there are thousands across the US and what I think doesn’t exist is a central list they all look at for IPs to block.
  - oefrha 6y ago
    You just ask ISPs to not resolve the domain names. That would make it inaccessible to the vast majority of people, which is more than enough to kill a social network.
    - xxpor 6y ago
      I would hope ISPs would refuse to cooperate. Ban it at the store level.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  No, it will most likely be restriction on business operations based.
burtonator 6y ago
I'm not even sure POTUS can ban a site just by an executive order... unless I'm REALLY weak on US law... but a PWA wouldn't stop this. Most of the mobile APIs aren't available on PWA and if the site is blocked via route it won't help
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > I'm not even sure POTUS can ban a site just by an executive order... unless I'm REALLY weak on US law... Being ignorant of the special area of law that is “Presidential emergency powers regarding trade with foreign nations” isn't necessarily being really weak on US law generally, though that narrow area of law ends up contravening a lot of what you might correctly understand elsewhere when it is triggered. It's not clear exactly what the content of the order will be, without which we can't really begin to assess whether he has the power to issue it, but there are certainly, at a minimum, things he could due to obstruct their ability to fully interact with US markets under Presidential emergency powers. Given that Trump's I formal descriptions preceding executive actions have not been a particularly good guide to the details of the actions, I don't know that any deeper analysis wouldn't largely wasted.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Hopefully this will raise awareness on PWAs He's not talking about banning the TikTok app narrowly, but banning TikTok from operating in the USA (which, assuming he's acting under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, could also including either preventing or directing and compelling sale, transfer, etc., of any of their property — or any property in which any foreign person holds an interest.)

by zelly 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

irrational 6y ago

Which platform? Apple (probably intentionally) doesn’t support many (any?) of the core features of PWAs on iOS.

astlouis44 6y ago

This times 1000. PWA's + WASM are the only hope of we have of tearing down the walled gardens that are the modern app stores!

quotemstr 6y ago

If the state can order tech companies to blacklist apps, the state can order tech companies to add certain sites to their "malicious browsing" filters or order ISPs to IP-block arbitrary hosts. The state simply has no legal authority under which it may ban apps. If the big tech companies roll over for this and say "yes, sir", they'll do anything. I'm a huge proponent of regulating big tech companies, but all regulation needs to done under the framework of public and universal rules established in advance, not randomly banning individual apps without proof of wrongdoing or a way to mount a defense.

dependenttypes 6y ago
The state already blacklists certain programs. Pretty much anything that illegally contains copyrighted content or some other form of illegal numbers.
- quotemstr 6y ago
  No, the state doesn't blacklist programs. Code is speech. Bernstein v. Department of Justice established that [1] in the 1990s. Sure, if you have an app, and you distribute copyrighted material as part of that app, yes, you can be prosecuted under copyright law and be forced (via injunction) to stop distributing that app. But the word "law" is essential: there is a specific rule, set out in advance, which applies to everyone, and for which there are clear penalties. I have seen nobody explain what law TikTok is supposedly breaking. If TikTok is doing something bad, fine. Make a rule against the bad thing, then ban TikTok on the basis of breaking that rule. You can't just bypass the whole "make a rule" and "show that $X broke the rule" thing and go straight to "punish X". That's called passing a "bill of attainder", and it's such a terrible idea that the practice is specifically banned in the constitution. Now, maybe this situation isn't technically a bill of attainder, but it's the same damned principle at work, and it's still a bad idea. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/remembering-case-established-code-speech https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/remembering-case-estab...
  - xxpor 6y ago
    And SCOTUS has shown no issue with rebuking Trump for shortcutting the APA.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      Any action here would almost certainly be under the IEEPA, to which APA rulemaking process does not apply.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > You can't just bypass the whole "make a rule" and "show that $X broke the rule" thing and go straight to "punish X". Yes, as long as the punishment isn't essentially criminal in nature, you can, and it's long been a regularly used tool of foreign policy, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. When sanctions are declared against foreign companies or individuals or trade with them otherwise restricted, it's based on declared threats to the country, not general rules that are announced in advance and then the specific individuals involved found guilty in some judicial process of breaking after the rule was declared. It's all by executive finding.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> If the state can order tech companies to blacklist apps The state absolutely can order parties not to participate in any way with trade prohibited under it's Constitutional power to regulate international trade. Which includes Presidential directives issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

bezmenov 6y ago

What’s to stop the US from blacklisting the PWA too?

rsa25519 6y ago
The technical barrier. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I think Chrome & Firefox would put up a much bigger fight than App/Play Store. The latter is already a walled garden.
- ac29 6y ago
  The US doesnt seem to have a problem taking down websites its found to be illegal, I don't know why a PWA would be much different. They dont need any buy-in from browser developers.
  - phillipwills 6y ago
    Pretty sure they do this by taking over the domain... Not sure if that would work in this case...

busymom0 6y ago

I don’t think this will just be the app itself. It will be network traffic based.

kortilla 6y ago
I don’t think there is infrastructure in place in the US to prevent access to an IP space.
- ptx 6y ago
  Perhaps Huawei might be willing to provide it.
- busymom0 6y ago
  Shouldn’t this be a very basic thing to do network wise?
  - kortilla 6y ago
    For an individual ISP, yeah. But there are thousands across the US and what I think doesn’t exist is a central list they all look at for IPs to block.
- oefrha 6y ago
  You just ask ISPs to not resolve the domain names. That would make it inaccessible to the vast majority of people, which is more than enough to kill a social network.
  - xxpor 6y ago
    I would hope ISPs would refuse to cooperate. Ban it at the store level.
dragonwriter 6y ago
No, it will most likely be restriction on business operations based.

burtonator 6y ago

I'm not even sure POTUS can ban a site just by an executive order... unless I'm REALLY weak on US law... but a PWA wouldn't stop this. Most of the mobile APIs aren't available on PWA and if the site is blocked via route it won't help

dragonwriter 6y ago
> I'm not even sure POTUS can ban a site just by an executive order... unless I'm REALLY weak on US law... Being ignorant of the special area of law that is “Presidential emergency powers regarding trade with foreign nations” isn't necessarily being really weak on US law generally, though that narrow area of law ends up contravening a lot of what you might correctly understand elsewhere when it is triggered. It's not clear exactly what the content of the order will be, without which we can't really begin to assess whether he has the power to issue it, but there are certainly, at a minimum, things he could due to obstruct their ability to fully interact with US markets under Presidential emergency powers. Given that Trump's I formal descriptions preceding executive actions have not been a particularly good guide to the details of the actions, I don't know that any deeper analysis wouldn't largely wasted.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Hopefully this will raise awareness on PWAs He's not talking about banning the TikTok app narrowly, but banning TikTok from operating in the USA (which, assuming he's acting under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, could also including either preventing or directing and compelling sale, transfer, etc., of any of their property — or any property in which any foreign person holds an interest.)