13 ms·

The future of the web is VNC

96 points by edent 3y ago

totetsu 3y ago
Cant we then just point a camera at the screen showing the frame buffer, and then pass the video stream through classifier and segmenter neural nets, and black out the parts that are detected to be advertisements?
- derealized 3y ago
  Google will release a neural net that's convenient to deploy locally and inserts the ads back.
  - gpderetta 3y ago
    Beaming ads directly to your skull is obviously the next step. Then we can get rid of the expensive to produce content for padding space between ads.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - srgpqt 3y ago
      Beaming desires directly to your skull is obviously the next step. Then we can make sure you want to buy a PlausibleBurger as soon as you get your paycheck.
  - Ygg2 3y ago
    No. They wouldn't do that. They will buy Neuralink and download ads directly to your subconscious. Maybe tie them to dopamine triggers so each time you view and buy an ad you get a hit like you are doing meth.
- Joker_vD 3y ago
  Only if the screen itself doesn't implement any visual scrabbling for DRM-protected content.
  - derealized 3y ago
    Well, a camera wouldn't care about that.. only if you're capturing from HDMI.
    - Joker_vD 3y ago
      No, I meant that the screen could mess up the video stream shown so that it would look "fine" for the human eye but as a completely scrambled mess to a camera. You know how hard it was to film a CRT-monitor and AFAIK there have been some (abandoned) research on how to put something like that into LED specifically do defy the screen-capturing.
      - jl6 3y ago
        CRTs were never impossible to film - you just had to put in some effort to adjust shutter settings on the camera. I can’t imagine there existing a technique for emitting photons perceptible to the human eye and yet it not being possible for a camera to capture them.
      - derealized 3y ago
        Got it, that makes sense. With monitors now in 60-120Hz being common, that might be doable.
    - gpderetta 3y ago
      The camera DSP might shut off if it detects a watermarked signal.
- perihelions 3y ago
  I expect FAANG will try to normalize putting cameras in rooms to observe how screens are being used, and enforce a "no cameras pointing at screens" rule with their own cameras. Similar ideas have been stress-tested in the last couple years: eye-tracking in the context of remote academic exams, some work-from-home contracts, some competitive e-sports. Basically, environment integrity: a "trusted", "secure" physical environment — beyond just the software environment – as a mandatory prerequisite for $webThing.
efficax 3y ago
i don’t disagree that google needs to be broken up but in do wonder how chrome development will be funded when the google ad cash hose is shut off
- derealized 3y ago
  Does it really need Google-sized investments though? I know it's a lot but if Google is willing to give it for free(tm), then it's a error mark in their budget which tells me other more focused entitities would have no trouble continuing development (e.g. Brave is a fork, right)?
  - danpalmer 3y ago
    I don't think Brave are doing substantial Chromium development. They turn off a bunch of features, in their fork, but I don't think many changes are flowing back upstream, they're mostly focused on the Browser UX layer than the Engine layer, much like Arc, and arguably Edge (although I think Edge does contribute some back).
- kryptiskt 3y ago
  I doubt that's a problem. What would Google pay to be the default search engine in an independent Chrome?
- oneTbrain23 3y ago
  Linux and Debian, just to name a few, which are way more complicated than Chrome. Chrome or Chromium will easily survive past Google demise.
  - danpalmer 3y ago
    Are they more complicated? The Linux kernel, maybe, although I'd like to see a citation for this because I'm not 100% convinced. Debian? No way. Maybe Debian and all the packages that make up a default install, but most of that isn't Debian so I don't think that's an apples to apples comparison.
- 3y ago
Joker_vD 3y ago
Well, Google had Stadia so... they actually can do that. I mean it, they actually can stream web-pages over VNC to millions of ChromeVNC (nee Chrome) users at bearable costs. Just throw in some YouTube integration as a performance tweak and voila, most people wouldn't even notice.
danpalmer 3y ago
Regarding VNC, Mighty was trying to do this but couldn't make it work. As for the DRM, an open web is clearly important, but we already have plenty of DRM on the web for content – Netflix/Prime/etc won't stream you video unless you're a trusted player, right down to the screen you're viewing it on. This is a business model problem, not a technical or moral one at its root. If the business model didn't require exclusive distribution of expensive to produce content, or if it didn't require viewing of ads to pay for the content, then these wouldn't be issues. Until those business models change, an open standard for how browsers proved they are operating in a trusted way seems reasonable, and would have many security benefits outside of DRM/ads that would benefit users. It's already hard enough to build a browser that there are only ~3, so let's not pretend that adding more browser API surface is suddenly going to make it impossible for an indie browser to exist, they functionally don't already.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  Given how much malware and phishing slips through into ads, ad-blocking is a security measure on the users part. The benefit of WEI to ad and media companies is obvious, but I'm not sure this is a net security benefit for users.
  - danpalmer 3y ago
    I don't have any insider info here, but I've worked in companies doing a lot of marketing on Google/FB/Twitter/etc, and they have pretty robust ad marketplaces. There are layers of review, ads are fairly limited in what they can do, security is high. However these are only a small slice of the market, there's then a very long tail of ad networks that have much less concern for the user, these are where most of the issues are. I once refused to integrate with one (still a major network) because it required allowing them to slurp up all text entered on your site (hell no). They thought it was strange that I pushed back on this. This is post GDPR, in the UK. These are not the companies that will be implementing WEI. They might, but it's probably beyond them technically, and even if not they'll happily just fingerprint as much as they can instead. On the flip side, if you're a content creator making money from content you publish online, it would be nice to know scraping is much harder. If you're an online banking user it would be nice to know that bots will have a much harder time automating the stealing of accounts, and so on.
bradgessler 3y ago
Ultimately I thought this would be the value of Mighty Browser: control the browser runtime on a server and ban the use of add-ons, ad-blockers, etc. for complete and total control over what your users see.
- samwillis 3y ago
  For context Mighty was a browser running in the cloud, vnc style, giving the user more bandwidth and cpu power. It was started by Suhail the founder of Mixpanel, however he wound it down last year and the team pivoted to generative AI. Suhails postmortem: https://twitter.com/suhail/status/1591813110230568963 https://twitter.com/suhail/status/1591813110230568963 The OP immediately made me think of Mighty.
jacknews 3y ago
The other alternative is 'security through complexity', and serve everything as a wasm 'executable'. Flutter seems like an early experiment in that direction, if you try to examine it's inscrutable html.
- giancarlostoro 3y ago
  Is not Flutter on the web was just canvas? I am genuinely asking, I dont know if this has changed or is incorrect.
  - zekica 3y ago
    It was last time I was looking.
jpalomaki 3y ago
Not so far fetched - Clouflare browser isolation [1] seems to be pretty close. Instead of parsing and executing the websites on local computer, they host a remote Chromium instance. The page is rasterized and send to local browser as sequence of Skia[2] Draw commands. (Disclaimer: just did the research 1 minute ago). [1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-and-remote-browser-isolation/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-and-remote-browser-is... [2] https://skia.org/ https://skia.org/
kotaKat 3y ago
I use this for retrocomputing, in a way, to be very silly! tenox7's WRP [Web Rendering Proxy] basically runs headless Chrome and renders pages to gif/png/jpg and shoves them back at a client browser. https://github.com/tenox7/wrp https://github.com/tenox7/wrp
DonHopkins 3y ago
The Revenge of X-Windows. https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398ebd47 https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398...
bob1029 3y ago
I definitely think the future of some things is streaming. Despite the failing of stadia, et. al., competitive multiplayer gaming is still #1 on my list of things to stream. This is the one place I would be entirely happy to participate in draconian DRM, assuming it is packaged in a reasonable manner (aka not a hacky kernel driver). A fair multiplayer game is much more valuable to me than some notion of control over the underlying software/hardware ecosystem. I am happy to surrender control in favor of correctness/fairness in some contexts - i.e. those that allow you to impact the ability of others to enjoy their experience. Now, if you are sitting by yourself watching movies or reading e-books or the news, I agree - this stuff is not much more than senseless oppression and antagonization.
- fluidcruft 3y ago
  Streaming is certainly taking over radiologist viewing stations. It fits very well with a lot of annoying things that the pandemic/remote work put a heavy focus on. It also fits with healthcare IT's enterprisification of everything where everyone is made to be a slave to their tools.
- Kiro 3y ago
  HN is completely moronic about cheating in multiplayer. I seriously can't believe that people here think it's ok. Absolutely disgusting that you're getting downvoted.
  - bob1029 3y ago
    I am honestly not sure that is the reason for the downvote but I don't really give a shit. HN is a weird place. In past attempts to discuss this, the conversation was typically driven into "if it can't be perfect, why even try" kinds of rhetoric. The primary criticism being that you can still use some sort of vision AI/robot to cheat to some degree. My counterargument is that there exist systems beyond deterministic DRM approaches that can be blended in to make it effectively perfect for all practical purposes. Statistical analysis (aka you might be cheating) combined with dynamic active canaries (i.e. fake, 2-frame targets you bait the bot into aiming at) can solve the problem really well. You could put statistical bounds around the likelihood of fair play that look like IBM mainframe uptime figures. The only other reasons I'd expect downvotes: Extreme principled ideologies (aka no DRM ever no matter what I don't care). Or, those who are actually cheating at video games and can't imagine a world where they'd be forced to bust their ass to get ahead at something.
imhoguy 3y ago
Nah, I would go even further with HDCP[0] /s https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Content_Protection https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Conte...
alexpotato 3y ago
There is a Google Edu talk from 2006 from the founders of Second Life where they mention how SL wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for cable modems. Why? Because SL did all physics rendering server side and then streamed the view to the client's PC. This wouldn't have worked with dial up. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrSCjSRMY64 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrSCjSRMY64
- thelastparadise 3y ago
  Seems like the clients could run a speculative local simulation and periodically reconcile with server positions. The server simulation, of course, is always treated as authoritative.
  - dale_glass 3y ago
    Second Life's spiritual successor, High Fidelity (now dead as a commercial project, but which lives in our open source fork overte.org) does something like that. The server picks a client to do the physics for part of the world. It's pretty clever and means a very light server can go a long way, but the downside is that physics gets unreliable. One of our plans is to have an option for a SL-like model where the server is again in charge, for scenarios that require security, reliability, or physics to keep running in the absence of clients.
smackeyacky 3y ago
I wonder how this whole "web protection" racket is going to end up. We are now almost completely reliant on web tech to deliver government services in Australia, so even if I decide to opt out of Facebook/Instagram/Reddit/Google search I still need something to view and interact with websites that isn't going to be some kind of silo'd and DRM'd hell hole. We've been falteringly down this path before (hello ActiveX and government contracts) but if Chrome is the last man standing (via Edge and Chromium even), we're kind of stuffed. I kind of feel like a digital serf already, having pledged my allegience to Google (via samsung and chrome), switching to another lord like Apple just seems like swapping one master for another. Maybe Stallman is onto something.
- thelastparadise 3y ago
  > Maybe Stallman is onto something. I think you're onto something!
- px1999 3y ago
  Firefox is legitimately not bad peformance/supportwise these days. Though, yes, they probably still get a bunch of money from Google.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    And why exactly is that a problem? Google avoids a huge litigation by keeping Firefox alive, while Firefox only have to make it the default browser. Symbiotic relationship without any hidden motives.
- veave 3y ago
  WEI will be opt-in for websites so government websites don't have to use it.
  - donmcronald 3y ago
    In my experience the government loves raining money on tech that claims it will keep them “safe”. All it’ll take is for some huge security consulting firm to recommend WEI and it’ll be required to participate in most western countries.
djbusby 3y ago
Seems a good time to mention Guacamole[0] which is RDP/VNC client in the browser. [0] https://guacamole.apache.org/ https://guacamole.apache.org/
jbverschoor 3y ago
I thought it’d be X11
scottmcdot 3y ago
I think I've seen my workplace do something like this when I visit a github url which is outside of the organisation's internal github. Has anyone experienced something similar?
- thelastparadise 3y ago
  They may be trying to build a case against you for helping competitors/leaking IP/contributing to open source.
  - windowsworkstoo 3y ago
    No, this is the new trend, browser isolation - see Island Browser for example
- destroy-2A 3y ago
  Yes this exists, symantec web isolation basically a proxy that injects a little js on the client, instead of proxying http traffic it opens a vnc viewer in your browser, the proxy renders the site you requested in a per session container inside the proxy cluster and your browser displays the output and sends your interaction with the site to the container. some mostly asian financial regulators mandate this happens for all endpoint devices, mobile, thin client, desktop whatever if a human is on the end it must be "web isolated".
SushiHippie 3y ago
Reminds me of a Show HN some time ago of a website where you can fly around a chromium window in 3d, the chromium window was a complete chromium browser except it was locked down, basically you could "only" browse the web inside of it and it was supposed to be a multiplayer thing like watchtogether except you share a chromium window, which is hosted somewhere else.
irq-1 3y ago
> The thing is, this is coming. There is literally nothing you can do to stop it. Your protests are meaningless next to the desire for some people at Google to sanitise the web. We can stop this by having websites test for "Web Environment Integrity" APIs and refusing to serve clients that implement it.
- thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
  >> We can stop this by having websites test for "Web Environment Integrity" APIs and refusing to serve clients that implement it. That would be an incredibly difficult battle because it would be fighting against big tech companies that make web browsers and profit from ads--namely Google and Microsoft. Getting browsers to adopt and implement Web Environment Integrity is Step 1. Step 2 is where all Google web sites start requiring Web Environment Integrity to be used or they lock you out of the site. Step 3 is where all websites serving Google ads require Web Environment Integrity to be used. Step 4 Profit! Web Environment Integrity is the beginning of the further DRM-ification and enshittification of the Web. Wherever you live, you should contact your government representatives and regulators and put a spotlight on this issue for what it is--monopoly abuse of power. Grassroots efforts are great and it is good to let your friends, family, and associates know what they are doing and why it is wrong. However, government regulation of this abuse is needed to stop it by force of law.
- jsnell 3y ago
  Oh, so you're blocking Safari already on your websites?
tjpnz 3y ago
Last I heard this was the way that astronauts connected to the web from the ISS. The future indeed.
veave 3y ago
They would love to do VNC, but that would cost them a shitton of money. Think of all the money and time they've spent pushing the rendering of websites to the user's browser just so they can save on CPU costs, despite the abysmal experience of client side rendering. Why undo that?
jesprenj 3y ago
Opera mini was simply a product of the web being too bloated to display on phones. It's amazing that the proxy servers are still maintained. How do they profit from proxying? Do they sell user data, include ads?
jerf 3y ago
The main problem with this idea that is probably the only thing preventing it from happening is that even in 2023, this is still too expensive. You can't run all of a user's browsing sessions through a system like that for the ~$20/year income advertising generates on average. (A reminder of the drum I like to beat; these companies do not make anywhere near as much money per person as people tend to think. ~$20/year is a reasonable estimate of the higher end based on Facebook and Google earnings reports; companies that are not Facebook or Google make even less. That's what they're breaking the internet for. $20/year.) If you don't take the raw income from ads but instead look at the profits, the bar is even higher. It's a minimum of an order of magnitude too little money to pay for that (and I think a very solid case could be made for 2 orders of magnitude), so it's going to be some years before it would be feasible even at the current level of web capability. (Add more 3D and heavier weight UIs based on WASM and some raw canvas or other and it gets even worse.) So if it is the future, it's still far enough away that I wouldn't try to found the startup today; you're still way too soon. As big as the cloud is, it is absolutely dwarfed by the amount of computing power not in the cloud. It's not even close. You'd have to get people to pay for it. For that, there has to be something very compelling. I can't think of what that would be. Apparently neither can anyone else, because otherwise like I said this would be a present reality and not a blog post. However, this is just an analysis of this idea from the 2023 perspective. I'm not saying it isn't the future. It's clearly a future a lot of players want. I'm just explaining why, in light of that, it doesn't already exist.
phoehne 3y ago
How about we use generative AI to produce the experience I might like to see if I were browsing the web, based on Google's extensive data on me? That can be rendered to me in a continuous stream on YouTube. Then I would have to stop for YouTube ads and see the ads in the generated video. That solves all sorts of problems, like deciding what to look at next. Or not seeing Ars or Hacker News update fast enough. I would just see the generated world I would be looking at if I were actually browsing the web. All of it loads seamlessly and instantly. All of it unbounded. All of it pixel perfect. Actually, can't wait until all this shit implodes on itself and we're back to browsing through gopher, usenet, and wais.
dublin 3y ago
A bit surprised no one's mentioned Amazon Silk. Though it was for mostly different reasons, the Silk Browser more or less works this way. It's not using VNC (AFAIK), but it does do server-side rendering and then blast some kind of par-boiled stream to the remote device. Sure makes tracking and monitoring easy... I think Silk is still the default browser on all their tablet devices, it certainly is the FireTV products. While you can load alternative browsers, there are few to choose from: even Firefox quit updating their FireTV build a year or two ago.
marcus0x62 3y ago
> Low bandwidth? VNC will simply degrade the quality of what you see. Look, do you really want poor people viewing your expensive website? Not with Trusted Web VNC Extensions(TM), which will stream the content in multiple interleaved layers, with the advertising layer naturally having the highest priority.
nunez 3y ago
As much as I absolutely hate this, this (or something like it, like the many examples discussed here) is probably the easiest way to create a secure and profitable web-browsing experience for the non-technical mainstream. This is assuming that the mainstream web browsing experience these days (in the US) looks something like this: - 65% social media - 25% mandatory work websites that made you wish you were spending time browsing within aforementioned 65% - 10% other And that almost all of this is being done on a mobile device that is already locked down relative to a true desktop (i.e. no Dev Tools for you!)
ofrzeta 3y ago
That's sounds like an amazing solution. Let's call it "TV" as in "Tele VNC".

96 points by edent 3y ago

Cant we then just point a camera at the screen showing the frame buffer, and then pass the video stream through classifier and segmenter neural nets, and black out the parts that are detected to be advertisements?

derealized 3y ago
Google will release a neural net that's convenient to deploy locally and inserts the ads back.
- gpderetta 3y ago
  Beaming ads directly to your skull is obviously the next step. Then we can get rid of the expensive to produce content for padding space between ads.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - srgpqt 3y ago
    Beaming desires directly to your skull is obviously the next step. Then we can make sure you want to buy a PlausibleBurger as soon as you get your paycheck.
- Ygg2 3y ago
  No. They wouldn't do that. They will buy Neuralink and download ads directly to your subconscious. Maybe tie them to dopamine triggers so each time you view and buy an ad you get a hit like you are doing meth.
Joker_vD 3y ago
Only if the screen itself doesn't implement any visual scrabbling for DRM-protected content.
- derealized 3y ago
  Well, a camera wouldn't care about that.. only if you're capturing from HDMI.
  - Joker_vD 3y ago
    No, I meant that the screen could mess up the video stream shown so that it would look "fine" for the human eye but as a completely scrambled mess to a camera. You know how hard it was to film a CRT-monitor and AFAIK there have been some (abandoned) research on how to put something like that into LED specifically do defy the screen-capturing.
    - jl6 3y ago
      CRTs were never impossible to film - you just had to put in some effort to adjust shutter settings on the camera. I can’t imagine there existing a technique for emitting photons perceptible to the human eye and yet it not being possible for a camera to capture them.
    - derealized 3y ago
      Got it, that makes sense. With monitors now in 60-120Hz being common, that might be doable.
  - gpderetta 3y ago
    The camera DSP might shut off if it detects a watermarked signal.
perihelions 3y ago
I expect FAANG will try to normalize putting cameras in rooms to observe how screens are being used, and enforce a "no cameras pointing at screens" rule with their own cameras. Similar ideas have been stress-tested in the last couple years: eye-tracking in the context of remote academic exams, some work-from-home contracts, some competitive e-sports. Basically, environment integrity: a "trusted", "secure" physical environment — beyond just the software environment – as a mandatory prerequisite for $webThing.

efficax 3y ago

i don’t disagree that google needs to be broken up but in do wonder how chrome development will be funded when the google ad cash hose is shut off

derealized 3y ago
Does it really need Google-sized investments though? I know it's a lot but if Google is willing to give it for free(tm), then it's a error mark in their budget which tells me other more focused entitities would have no trouble continuing development (e.g. Brave is a fork, right)?
- danpalmer 3y ago
  I don't think Brave are doing substantial Chromium development. They turn off a bunch of features, in their fork, but I don't think many changes are flowing back upstream, they're mostly focused on the Browser UX layer than the Engine layer, much like Arc, and arguably Edge (although I think Edge does contribute some back).
kryptiskt 3y ago
I doubt that's a problem. What would Google pay to be the default search engine in an independent Chrome?
oneTbrain23 3y ago
Linux and Debian, just to name a few, which are way more complicated than Chrome. Chrome or Chromium will easily survive past Google demise.
- danpalmer 3y ago
  Are they more complicated? The Linux kernel, maybe, although I'd like to see a citation for this because I'm not 100% convinced. Debian? No way. Maybe Debian and all the packages that make up a default install, but most of that isn't Debian so I don't think that's an apples to apples comparison.
3y ago

Joker_vD 3y ago

Well, Google had Stadia so... they actually can do that. I mean it, they actually can stream web-pages over VNC to millions of ChromeVNC (nee Chrome) users at bearable costs. Just throw in some YouTube integration as a performance tweak and voila, most people wouldn't even notice.

danpalmer 3y ago

Regarding VNC, Mighty was trying to do this but couldn't make it work. As for the DRM, an open web is clearly important, but we already have plenty of DRM on the web for content – Netflix/Prime/etc won't stream you video unless you're a trusted player, right down to the screen you're viewing it on. This is a business model problem, not a technical or moral one at its root. If the business model didn't require exclusive distribution of expensive to produce content, or if it didn't require viewing of ads to pay for the content, then these wouldn't be issues. Until those business models change, an open standard for how browsers proved they are operating in a trusted way seems reasonable, and would have many security benefits outside of DRM/ads that would benefit users. It's already hard enough to build a browser that there are only ~3, so let's not pretend that adding more browser API surface is suddenly going to make it impossible for an indie browser to exist, they functionally don't already.

AlexandrB 3y ago
Given how much malware and phishing slips through into ads, ad-blocking is a security measure on the users part. The benefit of WEI to ad and media companies is obvious, but I'm not sure this is a net security benefit for users.
- danpalmer 3y ago
  I don't have any insider info here, but I've worked in companies doing a lot of marketing on Google/FB/Twitter/etc, and they have pretty robust ad marketplaces. There are layers of review, ads are fairly limited in what they can do, security is high. However these are only a small slice of the market, there's then a very long tail of ad networks that have much less concern for the user, these are where most of the issues are. I once refused to integrate with one (still a major network) because it required allowing them to slurp up all text entered on your site (hell no). They thought it was strange that I pushed back on this. This is post GDPR, in the UK. These are not the companies that will be implementing WEI. They might, but it's probably beyond them technically, and even if not they'll happily just fingerprint as much as they can instead. On the flip side, if you're a content creator making money from content you publish online, it would be nice to know scraping is much harder. If you're an online banking user it would be nice to know that bots will have a much harder time automating the stealing of accounts, and so on.

bradgessler 3y ago

Ultimately I thought this would be the value of Mighty Browser: control the browser runtime on a server and ban the use of add-ons, ad-blockers, etc. for complete and total control over what your users see.

samwillis 3y ago
For context Mighty was a browser running in the cloud, vnc style, giving the user more bandwidth and cpu power. It was started by Suhail the founder of Mixpanel, however he wound it down last year and the team pivoted to generative AI. Suhails postmortem: https://twitter.com/suhail/status/1591813110230568963 https://twitter.com/suhail/status/1591813110230568963 The OP immediately made me think of Mighty.

jacknews 3y ago

The other alternative is 'security through complexity', and serve everything as a wasm 'executable'. Flutter seems like an early experiment in that direction, if you try to examine it's inscrutable html.

giancarlostoro 3y ago
Is not Flutter on the web was just canvas? I am genuinely asking, I dont know if this has changed or is incorrect.
- zekica 3y ago
  It was last time I was looking.

jpalomaki 3y ago

Not so far fetched - Clouflare browser isolation [1] seems to be pretty close. Instead of parsing and executing the websites on local computer, they host a remote Chromium instance. The page is rasterized and send to local browser as sequence of Skia[2] Draw commands. (Disclaimer: just did the research 1 minute ago). [1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-and-remote-browser-isolation/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-and-remote-browser-is... [2] https://skia.org/ https://skia.org/

kotaKat 3y ago

I use this for retrocomputing, in a way, to be very silly! tenox7's WRP [Web Rendering Proxy] basically runs headless Chrome and renders pages to gif/png/jpg and shoves them back at a client browser. https://github.com/tenox7/wrp https://github.com/tenox7/wrp

DonHopkins 3y ago

The Revenge of X-Windows. https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398ebd47 https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-x-windows-disaster-128d398...

bob1029 3y ago

I definitely think the future of some things is streaming. Despite the failing of stadia, et. al., competitive multiplayer gaming is still #1 on my list of things to stream. This is the one place I would be entirely happy to participate in draconian DRM, assuming it is packaged in a reasonable manner (aka not a hacky kernel driver). A fair multiplayer game is much more valuable to me than some notion of control over the underlying software/hardware ecosystem. I am happy to surrender control in favor of correctness/fairness in some contexts - i.e. those that allow you to impact the ability of others to enjoy their experience. Now, if you are sitting by yourself watching movies or reading e-books or the news, I agree - this stuff is not much more than senseless oppression and antagonization.

fluidcruft 3y ago
Streaming is certainly taking over radiologist viewing stations. It fits very well with a lot of annoying things that the pandemic/remote work put a heavy focus on. It also fits with healthcare IT's enterprisification of everything where everyone is made to be a slave to their tools.
Kiro 3y ago
HN is completely moronic about cheating in multiplayer. I seriously can't believe that people here think it's ok. Absolutely disgusting that you're getting downvoted.
- bob1029 3y ago
  I am honestly not sure that is the reason for the downvote but I don't really give a shit. HN is a weird place. In past attempts to discuss this, the conversation was typically driven into "if it can't be perfect, why even try" kinds of rhetoric. The primary criticism being that you can still use some sort of vision AI/robot to cheat to some degree. My counterargument is that there exist systems beyond deterministic DRM approaches that can be blended in to make it effectively perfect for all practical purposes. Statistical analysis (aka you might be cheating) combined with dynamic active canaries (i.e. fake, 2-frame targets you bait the bot into aiming at) can solve the problem really well. You could put statistical bounds around the likelihood of fair play that look like IBM mainframe uptime figures. The only other reasons I'd expect downvotes: Extreme principled ideologies (aka no DRM ever no matter what I don't care). Or, those who are actually cheating at video games and can't imagine a world where they'd be forced to bust their ass to get ahead at something.

imhoguy 3y ago

Nah, I would go even further with HDCP[0] /s https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Content_Protection https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Conte...

alexpotato 3y ago

There is a Google Edu talk from 2006 from the founders of Second Life where they mention how SL wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for cable modems. Why? Because SL did all physics rendering server side and then streamed the view to the client's PC. This wouldn't have worked with dial up. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrSCjSRMY64 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrSCjSRMY64

thelastparadise 3y ago
Seems like the clients could run a speculative local simulation and periodically reconcile with server positions. The server simulation, of course, is always treated as authoritative.
- dale_glass 3y ago
  Second Life's spiritual successor, High Fidelity (now dead as a commercial project, but which lives in our open source fork overte.org) does something like that. The server picks a client to do the physics for part of the world. It's pretty clever and means a very light server can go a long way, but the downside is that physics gets unreliable. One of our plans is to have an option for a SL-like model where the server is again in charge, for scenarios that require security, reliability, or physics to keep running in the absence of clients.

smackeyacky 3y ago

I wonder how this whole "web protection" racket is going to end up. We are now almost completely reliant on web tech to deliver government services in Australia, so even if I decide to opt out of Facebook/Instagram/Reddit/Google search I still need something to view and interact with websites that isn't going to be some kind of silo'd and DRM'd hell hole. We've been falteringly down this path before (hello ActiveX and government contracts) but if Chrome is the last man standing (via Edge and Chromium even), we're kind of stuffed. I kind of feel like a digital serf already, having pledged my allegience to Google (via samsung and chrome), switching to another lord like Apple just seems like swapping one master for another. Maybe Stallman is onto something.

thelastparadise 3y ago
> Maybe Stallman is onto something. I think you're onto something!
px1999 3y ago
Firefox is legitimately not bad peformance/supportwise these days. Though, yes, they probably still get a bunch of money from Google.
- kaba0 3y ago
  And why exactly is that a problem? Google avoids a huge litigation by keeping Firefox alive, while Firefox only have to make it the default browser. Symbiotic relationship without any hidden motives.
veave 3y ago
WEI will be opt-in for websites so government websites don't have to use it.
- donmcronald 3y ago
  In my experience the government loves raining money on tech that claims it will keep them “safe”. All it’ll take is for some huge security consulting firm to recommend WEI and it’ll be required to participate in most western countries.

djbusby 3y ago

Seems a good time to mention Guacamole[0] which is RDP/VNC client in the browser. [0] https://guacamole.apache.org/ https://guacamole.apache.org/

jbverschoor 3y ago

I thought it’d be X11

scottmcdot 3y ago

I think I've seen my workplace do something like this when I visit a github url which is outside of the organisation's internal github. Has anyone experienced something similar?

thelastparadise 3y ago
They may be trying to build a case against you for helping competitors/leaking IP/contributing to open source.
- windowsworkstoo 3y ago
  No, this is the new trend, browser isolation - see Island Browser for example
destroy-2A 3y ago
Yes this exists, symantec web isolation basically a proxy that injects a little js on the client, instead of proxying http traffic it opens a vnc viewer in your browser, the proxy renders the site you requested in a per session container inside the proxy cluster and your browser displays the output and sends your interaction with the site to the container. some mostly asian financial regulators mandate this happens for all endpoint devices, mobile, thin client, desktop whatever if a human is on the end it must be "web isolated".

SushiHippie 3y ago

Reminds me of a Show HN some time ago of a website where you can fly around a chromium window in 3d, the chromium window was a complete chromium browser except it was locked down, basically you could "only" browse the web inside of it and it was supposed to be a multiplayer thing like watchtogether except you share a chromium window, which is hosted somewhere else.

irq-1 3y ago

> The thing is, this is coming. There is literally nothing you can do to stop it. Your protests are meaningless next to the desire for some people at Google to sanitise the web. We can stop this by having websites test for "Web Environment Integrity" APIs and refusing to serve clients that implement it.

thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
>> We can stop this by having websites test for "Web Environment Integrity" APIs and refusing to serve clients that implement it. That would be an incredibly difficult battle because it would be fighting against big tech companies that make web browsers and profit from ads--namely Google and Microsoft. Getting browsers to adopt and implement Web Environment Integrity is Step 1. Step 2 is where all Google web sites start requiring Web Environment Integrity to be used or they lock you out of the site. Step 3 is where all websites serving Google ads require Web Environment Integrity to be used. Step 4 Profit! Web Environment Integrity is the beginning of the further DRM-ification and enshittification of the Web. Wherever you live, you should contact your government representatives and regulators and put a spotlight on this issue for what it is--monopoly abuse of power. Grassroots efforts are great and it is good to let your friends, family, and associates know what they are doing and why it is wrong. However, government regulation of this abuse is needed to stop it by force of law.
jsnell 3y ago
Oh, so you're blocking Safari already on your websites?

tjpnz 3y ago

Last I heard this was the way that astronauts connected to the web from the ISS. The future indeed.

veave 3y ago

They would love to do VNC, but that would cost them a shitton of money. Think of all the money and time they've spent pushing the rendering of websites to the user's browser just so they can save on CPU costs, despite the abysmal experience of client side rendering. Why undo that?

jesprenj 3y ago

Opera mini was simply a product of the web being too bloated to display on phones. It's amazing that the proxy servers are still maintained. How do they profit from proxying? Do they sell user data, include ads?

jerf 3y ago

The main problem with this idea that is probably the only thing preventing it from happening is that even in 2023, this is still too expensive. You can't run all of a user's browsing sessions through a system like that for the ~$20/year income advertising generates on average. (A reminder of the drum I like to beat; these companies do not make anywhere near as much money per person as people tend to think. ~$20/year is a reasonable estimate of the higher end based on Facebook and Google earnings reports; companies that are not Facebook or Google make even less. That's what they're breaking the internet for. $20/year.) If you don't take the raw income from ads but instead look at the profits, the bar is even higher. It's a minimum of an order of magnitude too little money to pay for that (and I think a very solid case could be made for 2 orders of magnitude), so it's going to be some years before it would be feasible even at the current level of web capability. (Add more 3D and heavier weight UIs based on WASM and some raw canvas or other and it gets even worse.) So if it is the future, it's still far enough away that I wouldn't try to found the startup today; you're still way too soon. As big as the cloud is, it is absolutely dwarfed by the amount of computing power not in the cloud. It's not even close. You'd have to get people to pay for it. For that, there has to be something very compelling. I can't think of what that would be. Apparently neither can anyone else, because otherwise like I said this would be a present reality and not a blog post. However, this is just an analysis of this idea from the 2023 perspective. I'm not saying it isn't the future. It's clearly a future a lot of players want. I'm just explaining why, in light of that, it doesn't already exist.

phoehne 3y ago

How about we use generative AI to produce the experience I might like to see if I were browsing the web, based on Google's extensive data on me? That can be rendered to me in a continuous stream on YouTube. Then I would have to stop for YouTube ads and see the ads in the generated video. That solves all sorts of problems, like deciding what to look at next. Or not seeing Ars or Hacker News update fast enough. I would just see the generated world I would be looking at if I were actually browsing the web. All of it loads seamlessly and instantly. All of it unbounded. All of it pixel perfect. Actually, can't wait until all this shit implodes on itself and we're back to browsing through gopher, usenet, and wais.

dublin 3y ago

A bit surprised no one's mentioned Amazon Silk. Though it was for mostly different reasons, the Silk Browser more or less works this way. It's not using VNC (AFAIK), but it does do server-side rendering and then blast some kind of par-boiled stream to the remote device. Sure makes tracking and monitoring easy... I think Silk is still the default browser on all their tablet devices, it certainly is the FireTV products. While you can load alternative browsers, there are few to choose from: even Firefox quit updating their FireTV build a year or two ago.

marcus0x62 3y ago

> Low bandwidth? VNC will simply degrade the quality of what you see. Look, do you really want poor people viewing your expensive website? Not with Trusted Web VNC Extensions(TM), which will stream the content in multiple interleaved layers, with the advertising layer naturally having the highest priority.

nunez 3y ago

As much as I absolutely hate this, this (or something like it, like the many examples discussed here) is probably the easiest way to create a secure and profitable web-browsing experience for the non-technical mainstream. This is assuming that the mainstream web browsing experience these days (in the US) looks something like this: - 65% social media - 25% mandatory work websites that made you wish you were spending time browsing within aforementioned 65% - 10% other And that almost all of this is being done on a mobile device that is already locked down relative to a true desktop (i.e. no Dev Tools for you!)

ofrzeta 3y ago

That's sounds like an amazing solution. Let's call it "TV" as in "Tele VNC".