4 ms·

Every time I hear some argument against "the modern web", I always try to imagine if you could apply the same argument to anything in computing. And for this o

Every time I hear some argument against "the modern web", I always try to imagine if you could apply the same argument to anything in computing. And for this one, you could. Native applications might seem like you'll "submit the form when you click on the submit button, but something else entirely happens" because it's a general computing environment, just like the web. So in reality, it seems you're just against "modern" computing in general, not specifically the web. Because you can have that behavior anywhere, not just in the web platform.

_moof 5y ago
Take "the modern web" as a cultural descriptor then, not a technical one. There has been a huge shift in the last decade-plus. Software does not serve the user's interest anymore, and it sucks. Yes, this sort of thing has been technically possible across a range of platforms for a while. But the difference is that people weren't doing this kind of garbage before, and now it's everywhere. Casual gaming is an excellent example of how this has changed. The whole purpose of the software is different. It used to be that you would buy a game—a piece of software purpose-built to entertain you. Now you are no longer buying a game; you are buying a value extraction device that uses a game as bait. Software just isn't built for users anymore.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  > It used to be that you would buy a game—a piece of software purpose-built to entertain you. Now you are no longer buying a game; you are buying a value extraction device that uses a game as bait. This applies to a lot of things besides games nowadays. A lot of software (and certain hardware - "smart" devices, etc) are built/sold at a loss with the primary objective being to generate "engagement" and/or collect personal data. The functionality of the device is purely there as a bait to get the mark to buy/adopt the software or device and would not be there if there was a way to get the marks to "engage" anyway.
  - root_axis 5y ago
    I think the OPs point still stands. This has nothing to do with the web, it's the same thing with mobile apps and desktop apps on every platform except open source ones.
feanaro 5y ago
Well there is a case to be made that the web should not necessarily be a general computing platform. Or at least that there should be a separate mode in which it assuredly is not because it is a hypertext platform instead. This use case has not disappeared just because the web grew additional capabilities. But it can feel as if the capability to act as a hypertext platform has disappeared, because you now have to worry about it doing things that are not aligned with this purpose. Remember, there is power in limitations, as type theory teaches us. And even for use cases where more than simple hypertext is needed, there is still a vast, nuanced chasm between that and full-blown Turing completeness.
- BlueTemplar 5y ago
  Indeed : see also PDFs being (ab)used as a general computing platform.
- lolinder 5y ago
  In the end, any hypertext-mode solution is going to need to be client-based, because without robust client protections there's no incentive for a company to not just opt in to app mode. A limited form of this already exists—noscript. Browse with JS off, but add exceptions for true web apps. It should be possible to expand on this to create a middle ground where certain JS operations are allowed (say, DOM manipulation) but most are not (no network requests).
- mftb 5y ago
  You might want to investigate Gemini. It appears to be one response to the case you are presenting. It starts at the protocol level and they are starting to build up an ecosystem of servers and clients which are more hypertext focused (No JS, limitations on content-types, etc...). I believe the name Gemini was chosen to imply a middle-ground between Gopher and HTTP (Gemini was the NASA project between Mercury and Apollo).
tsimionescu 5y ago
That's exactly it. The web was supposed to solve a problem of document distribution. Documents are not general computing environments, and that's exactly what you want. I want to read this news article, not run general software on my own system. The biggest problem with the web is that it has been made into a general computing environment. Instead of creating another separate network - the web for docs, the app web for apps, with different url schemas etc - the web has been co-opted for this second case, thereby making it much less useful/safe for its original purpose.
switchbak 5y ago
I'm also against native clients that are inherently user-hostile. Does that mean I'm against modern computing? I'm also against people working against my interest that only use pen and paper. Perhaps this issue is more about privacy and ethics than some judgement of being for or against some "modern" notion of computing. Personally I'd prefer platforms that have privacy (and security) guarantees built in. Given the strong conflict of interests at play, I don't think we can expect that from any of the big players (if it's even reasonable at scale).
liketochill 5y ago
Me too, I miss the days where software wasn’t constantly updated and networked for no good reason. In fact I run a number of VMs with no internet access to keep my tools under my control.

_moof 5y ago

Take "the modern web" as a cultural descriptor then, not a technical one. There has been a huge shift in the last decade-plus. Software does not serve the user's interest anymore, and it sucks. Yes, this sort of thing has been technically possible across a range of platforms for a while. But the difference is that people weren't doing this kind of garbage before, and now it's everywhere. Casual gaming is an excellent example of how this has changed. The whole purpose of the software is different. It used to be that you would buy a game—a piece of software purpose-built to entertain you. Now you are no longer buying a game; you are buying a value extraction device that uses a game as bait. Software just isn't built for users anymore.

Nextgrid 5y ago
> It used to be that you would buy a game—a piece of software purpose-built to entertain you. Now you are no longer buying a game; you are buying a value extraction device that uses a game as bait. This applies to a lot of things besides games nowadays. A lot of software (and certain hardware - "smart" devices, etc) are built/sold at a loss with the primary objective being to generate "engagement" and/or collect personal data. The functionality of the device is purely there as a bait to get the mark to buy/adopt the software or device and would not be there if there was a way to get the marks to "engage" anyway.
- root_axis 5y ago
  I think the OPs point still stands. This has nothing to do with the web, it's the same thing with mobile apps and desktop apps on every platform except open source ones.

feanaro 5y ago

Well there is a case to be made that the web should not necessarily be a general computing platform. Or at least that there should be a separate mode in which it assuredly is not because it is a hypertext platform instead. This use case has not disappeared just because the web grew additional capabilities. But it can feel as if the capability to act as a hypertext platform has disappeared, because you now have to worry about it doing things that are not aligned with this purpose. Remember, there is power in limitations, as type theory teaches us. And even for use cases where more than simple hypertext is needed, there is still a vast, nuanced chasm between that and full-blown Turing completeness.

BlueTemplar 5y ago
Indeed : see also PDFs being (ab)used as a general computing platform.
lolinder 5y ago
In the end, any hypertext-mode solution is going to need to be client-based, because without robust client protections there's no incentive for a company to not just opt in to app mode. A limited form of this already exists—noscript. Browse with JS off, but add exceptions for true web apps. It should be possible to expand on this to create a middle ground where certain JS operations are allowed (say, DOM manipulation) but most are not (no network requests).
mftb 5y ago
You might want to investigate Gemini. It appears to be one response to the case you are presenting. It starts at the protocol level and they are starting to build up an ecosystem of servers and clients which are more hypertext focused (No JS, limitations on content-types, etc...). I believe the name Gemini was chosen to imply a middle-ground between Gopher and HTTP (Gemini was the NASA project between Mercury and Apollo).

tsimionescu 5y ago

That's exactly it. The web was supposed to solve a problem of document distribution. Documents are not general computing environments, and that's exactly what you want. I want to read this news article, not run general software on my own system. The biggest problem with the web is that it has been made into a general computing environment. Instead of creating another separate network - the web for docs, the app web for apps, with different url schemas etc - the web has been co-opted for this second case, thereby making it much less useful/safe for its original purpose.

switchbak 5y ago

I'm also against native clients that are inherently user-hostile. Does that mean I'm against modern computing? I'm also against people working against my interest that only use pen and paper. Perhaps this issue is more about privacy and ethics than some judgement of being for or against some "modern" notion of computing. Personally I'd prefer platforms that have privacy (and security) guarantees built in. Given the strong conflict of interests at play, I don't think we can expect that from any of the big players (if it's even reasonable at scale).

liketochill 5y ago

Me too, I miss the days where software wasn’t constantly updated and networked for no good reason. In fact I run a number of VMs with no internet access to keep my tools under my control.