3 ms·
Sockets, hopefully. For example, it should be possible to build websites for downloading YouTube videos that does not use server side code execution or bandwid
by simula67 4y ago
Sockets, hopefully.
For example, it should be possible to build websites for downloading YouTube videos that does not use server side code execution or bandwidth. These were popular at some point but disappeared after Java applets stopped being supported by most browsers.
- lxgr 4y agoOr just an XMPP web client.
- heywhatupboys 4y agoi dont understand how this is not already possible?
- jeroenhd 4y agoAnd make every website part of a botnet? I sure hope not. WebSockets are already a problem because many web devs don't know that other origins can connect to them and potentially fetch data they're not supposed to (even ignoring the fact you can construct these without a browser), unleashing raw sockets to the web platform would be hell. WebRTC and WebSockets provide more than enough already. If you need even more, your browser just isn't the place for this type of code IMO.
- madacol 4y agoInstead of fighting against that feature, why not instead ask permission from the user?, just like the APIs of location and notifications do
- tracker1 4y agoOr... you can use a websocket gateway if you need this type of functionality... a lot of people already are for things like VNC or Terminal interfaces.
- fshr 4y agoI my experience, normal users don’t read the permission prompts. They immediate click Allow or Accept and then wonder later why they’re getting popup notifications in Windows pretending to be an anti-virus or think their entire computer has been hacked because “something is wrong.”