>I'm not sure how the porting to old Windows helps this goal, as it's complex and also closed source. If something works on old Windows, then chances are that

>I'm not sure how the porting to old Windows helps this goal, as it's complex and also closed source. If something works on old Windows, then chances are that it will also work on ReactOS, which is open source. In other words, if new Chromium can work on old Windows and then on ReactOS, then when it completely and successfully works on ReactOS, now you've got open source for the OS and the Browser. But, we shouldn't stop at ReactOS... Full ReactOS compatibility with no issues is just a step on the path of getting it to still older/simpler Operating Systems, like Minix 3 -- which in turn is a much simpler open source Operating System than even ReactOS. And even that isn't enough... the code for the whole Browser, in conjunction with the code for the underlying OS -- need to be refactored down much further, I'm guessing at least a 10x LOC reduction -- with no loss in functionality -- and a probable upgrade in speed... and much better documentation... By "Freezing" Chromium -- I mean "don't add any more features until the aforementioned refactoring has taken place". In other words, stop adding lines of code -- and start subtracting. >"For example with video, the landscape was pretty horrible in the early 2000s, but now, the major players are actually collaborating on open standards, like the av1, and the result is that we all win." Agreed totally! >"Back to simplicity, I'd love it if we had a popular, lo-fi version of the internet, like how the Gemini protocol is. It would be a great thing if, for example, one such spec would be governed by law, and government services, banking, email and other such things would be accessible by it. If done well, this would be something that really uplifts the people, well, at least as much as access to digital services can." Nothing prevents the government, any government, local or federal, foreign or domestic -- from creating their own protocols (as many of them as they want) and legislating those protocols as they see fit. Of course, there may be issues with cross-border, cross-jurisdiction, cross-country compatibility between a protocol created in one region by one government of a certain scale and used in another region by another government of a different scale... Then you have to ask who is legally bound by what, when, where, and why... Of course, governments that are free to enter into legally binding agreements with other governments -- are always free to enter legally binding agreements with other governments to legislate how/what/when/where/why their protocols are used... In other words, they're more than free to implement their own protocols, and subsequently legislate their usage (subject to their own Constitutions and sets of laws, parlimentary procedures, law approval processes, etc.), if they should so wish...