Theres another option. Better vetting for apps and extensions that use dangerous API's. It's disingenuous to say "these API's are too dangerous to use" when th

Theres another option. Better vetting for apps and extensions that use dangerous API's. It's disingenuous to say "these API's are too dangerous to use" when the browser itself does all the things the API could. Why should people trust Chrome or Firefox more than their extensions? Google/Apple got themselves in this situation by having their official stores. People assume it's on the store, it's safe. Now they take away API's because they don't actually police their stores, they just made them to have a captive market. Now they blame extension developers and take away API's because they don't want to admit they don't police their own stores enough. Before the days of official stores most people were careful what they downloaded. And they would be again if it wasn't in these companies perverse interests to convince users that store apps are safer than non store apps. Because people would stop using the stores and take away the money train. The right way to fix this would never happen. Decentralize the stores and let users make their own decisions. And take away all the api restrictions because once people realize the risk they'll be more careful. PC's are and have been an open market for decades, yet getting viruses is rare. I have no reason to believe it would be different for phones and extensions