4 ms·

Some people here are complaining that this is a hack, technical debt, etc. I thought the point would be the political one, as it were. YouTube.com gets special

Some people here are complaining that this is a hack, technical debt, etc. I thought the point would be the political one, as it were. YouTube.com gets special treatment in a major web browser, whereas Sal's discount video website has to conform to standards like all the other plebs. It's an erosion (however minor, by itself) of the idea of an open standard.

scarface74 4y ago
Apple has a list of websites with quirks that don’t support its “generate strong passwords” feature even though there is HTML spec where you can specify the types of passwords you support. https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources Many of these sites are quite obscure.
- dopa42365 4y ago
  https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources/blob/main/quirks/password-rules.json https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources/blob/mai... For being "quite obscure", I've at least heard of most of these sites before. Banks with "maxlength: 8", you love to see it.
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    QQ: why do they embed the rules in a string and not just regular json?
  - scarface74 4y ago
    I just actually looked at the JSON, I just assumed the rule was going to be defined as regex, not a human readable pattern.
  - d12bb 4y ago
    I just love that apple.com itself is included there.
- yreg 4y ago
  Apple also has a list of websites it autocompletes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30903246 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30903246
masswerk 4y ago
If this goes against your philosophy, you can actually disable this: Develop Menu > Disable Site-specific Hacks
- maest 4y ago
  That doesn't solve the GP's complaint. Defaults are powerful.
  - masswerk 4y ago
    However, moving YT videos (and ads!) from embeds or old Flash-code to isolated iframes may be a sane default.
ironmagma 4y ago
I’d rather have the companies fighting for the user. What is the purpose of a standard anyway, other than to serve the users? The idea is counterproductive if it results in a worse UX, even if just in the medium term. In this case, getting those companies to fix their broken code is unrealistic. Less realistic than just providing a whitelist anyway.
- sennight 4y ago
  You think Google is doing this because they "fight for the user"?! Maybe in the same way cattle ranchers "fight for the livestock" by plumbing wells and seeding grasslands. BTW, almost anything can be justified with this logic: "We propose a convoluted device level tracking scheme that locks down all advert/databroker revenue... a tech moat so wide that, coincidentally, we are the only potential beneficiaries... because we fight for the user!"
  - ironmagma 4y ago
    I just appreciate that the end result is a better UX. How we got there, I don't care. The standards are important, but they're ultimately there to provide a nice UX and that's it.
    - sennight 4y ago
      > How we got there, I don't care. Well that is a good way of ensuring that the same class of problems will endlessly reappear, while also providing a broken utilitarian end-justifies-the-means rationale that is certain to be abused. > The standards are important, but they're ultimately there to provide a nice UX and that's it. No, standards are there to make interoperability possible, which overcomes the hazards of market network effect, leveling the field for more competing solutions, thus yielding a better <insert literally anything in the whole world, including UX>.

scarface74 4y ago

Apple has a list of websites with quirks that don’t support its “generate strong passwords” feature even though there is HTML spec where you can specify the types of passwords you support. https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources Many of these sites are quite obscure.

dopa42365 4y ago
https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources/blob/main/quirks/password-rules.json https://github.com/apple/password-manager-resources/blob/mai... For being "quite obscure", I've at least heard of most of these sites before. Banks with "maxlength: 8", you love to see it.
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  QQ: why do they embed the rules in a string and not just regular json?
- scarface74 4y ago
  I just actually looked at the JSON, I just assumed the rule was going to be defined as regex, not a human readable pattern.
- d12bb 4y ago
  I just love that apple.com itself is included there.
yreg 4y ago
Apple also has a list of websites it autocompletes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30903246 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30903246

masswerk 4y ago

If this goes against your philosophy, you can actually disable this: Develop Menu > Disable Site-specific Hacks

maest 4y ago
That doesn't solve the GP's complaint. Defaults are powerful.
- masswerk 4y ago
  However, moving YT videos (and ads!) from embeds or old Flash-code to isolated iframes may be a sane default.

ironmagma 4y ago

I’d rather have the companies fighting for the user. What is the purpose of a standard anyway, other than to serve the users? The idea is counterproductive if it results in a worse UX, even if just in the medium term. In this case, getting those companies to fix their broken code is unrealistic. Less realistic than just providing a whitelist anyway.

sennight 4y ago
You think Google is doing this because they "fight for the user"?! Maybe in the same way cattle ranchers "fight for the livestock" by plumbing wells and seeding grasslands. BTW, almost anything can be justified with this logic: "We propose a convoluted device level tracking scheme that locks down all advert/databroker revenue... a tech moat so wide that, coincidentally, we are the only potential beneficiaries... because we fight for the user!"
- ironmagma 4y ago
  I just appreciate that the end result is a better UX. How we got there, I don't care. The standards are important, but they're ultimately there to provide a nice UX and that's it.
  - sennight 4y ago
    > How we got there, I don't care. Well that is a good way of ensuring that the same class of problems will endlessly reappear, while also providing a broken utilitarian end-justifies-the-means rationale that is certain to be abused. > The standards are important, but they're ultimately there to provide a nice UX and that's it. No, standards are there to make interoperability possible, which overcomes the hazards of market network effect, leveling the field for more competing solutions, thus yielding a better <insert literally anything in the whole world, including UX>.