4 ms·

The irony of telling people how to use something you're opposed to... It's clear that mainstream browsers have become the exact opposite of user agents. Unfort

The irony of telling people how to use something you're opposed to... It's clear that mainstream browsers have become the exact opposite of user agents. Unfortunately I don't see an easy solution to that problem beyond educating web developers and users, to change course to avoid all this hostile complexity, and possibly creating more alternative browsers that explicitly don't support things like this (or will lie about it to preserve the interests of the user: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36935843 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36935843 )

pdpi 2y ago
> The irony of telling people how to use something you're opposed to... To a certain extent, I expect people to do exactly that as part of an argument in good faith, especially in a technical context. If you can't explain to me how something works, why should I trust your feedback, be it positive or negative?
- userbinator 2y ago
  I don't care how something works if I'm against the purpose. The same "but we should have a technical argument" BS was used by proponents of WEI, and thankfully most people saw through it. No means no. DO NOT WANT. End of argument.
  - pdpi 2y ago
    I think you misunderstood me. I'm not trying to move the goalposts by suggesting "we should have a technical argument". Discussing whether the feature should even exist is itself a technical discussion. Let's use WEI as an example. You're clear enough in your opinion: you think it shouldn't exist. Why, though? What does it do that you object to? Do you understand how it works well enough to be sure it does the bad thing you think it does? Imagine I'm interested in the discussion, but haven't formed an opinion. I just have Google on one side talking about guaranteeing the integrity of the browser environment somehow, and you saying "DO NOT WANT" on the other. You'll have a much easier time convincing me of your point of view if you can simply show me that you actually understand WEI, and if you can make me understand it too.
    - userbinator 2y ago
      I don't care how it works. When the goal is the problem, the method is irrelevant. WEI is a problem because it takes away user's freedom to interact with sites using the software they want. It doesn't matter at all how it accomplishes that goal.
josh-at-banxa 2y ago
Understanding how something works is the first step in circumventing it.
Dylan16807 2y ago
> The irony of telling people how to use something you're opposed to... It's a documentation site. You want it to pretend the API doesn't exist, or what? > It's clear that mainstream browsers have become the exact opposite of user agents. If I'm interpreting you correctly, please explain how you got from "mozilla.org documents this API" to "firefox is not acting as a user agent".
- userbinator 2y ago
  It's Mozilla's documentation site. Firefox doesn't have the API. It has no obligation to even mention its existence. The only thing that documentation is doing is helping Chrome. If I'm interpreting you correctly, please explain how you got from "mozilla.org documents this API" to "firefox is not acting as a user agent". I'm speaking about browsers in general.
  - croes 2y ago
    It's bigger than that >MDN Web Docs content is maintained by Mozilla, Google employees, and volunteers (community of developers and technical writers). It also contains content contributed by Microsoft, Google, and Samsung who, in 2017, announced they would shut down their own web documentation projects and move all their documentation to MDN Web Docs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDN_Web_Docs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDN_Web_Docs
    - userbinator 2y ago
      In other words, it's already been infected by the enemy.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > It's Mozilla's documentation site. I kind of want to emphasize "Mozilla's" too. It's not firefox documentation, it's web documentation. > I'm speaking about browsers in general. But you're specifically including firefox because of this page, right? That's a hell of extrapolation to make from them "helping" chrome by writing/hosting an article.
yapyap 2y ago
[dead]

pdpi 2y ago

> The irony of telling people how to use something you're opposed to... To a certain extent, I expect people to do exactly that as part of an argument in good faith, especially in a technical context. If you can't explain to me how something works, why should I trust your feedback, be it positive or negative?

userbinator 2y ago
I don't care how something works if I'm against the purpose. The same "but we should have a technical argument" BS was used by proponents of WEI, and thankfully most people saw through it. No means no. DO NOT WANT. End of argument.
- pdpi 2y ago
  I think you misunderstood me. I'm not trying to move the goalposts by suggesting "we should have a technical argument". Discussing whether the feature should even exist is itself a technical discussion. Let's use WEI as an example. You're clear enough in your opinion: you think it shouldn't exist. Why, though? What does it do that you object to? Do you understand how it works well enough to be sure it does the bad thing you think it does? Imagine I'm interested in the discussion, but haven't formed an opinion. I just have Google on one side talking about guaranteeing the integrity of the browser environment somehow, and you saying "DO NOT WANT" on the other. You'll have a much easier time convincing me of your point of view if you can simply show me that you actually understand WEI, and if you can make me understand it too.
  - userbinator 2y ago
    I don't care how it works. When the goal is the problem, the method is irrelevant. WEI is a problem because it takes away user's freedom to interact with sites using the software they want. It doesn't matter at all how it accomplishes that goal.

josh-at-banxa 2y ago

Understanding how something works is the first step in circumventing it.

Dylan16807 2y ago

> The irony of telling people how to use something you're opposed to... It's a documentation site. You want it to pretend the API doesn't exist, or what? > It's clear that mainstream browsers have become the exact opposite of user agents. If I'm interpreting you correctly, please explain how you got from "mozilla.org documents this API" to "firefox is not acting as a user agent".

userbinator 2y ago
It's Mozilla's documentation site. Firefox doesn't have the API. It has no obligation to even mention its existence. The only thing that documentation is doing is helping Chrome. If I'm interpreting you correctly, please explain how you got from "mozilla.org documents this API" to "firefox is not acting as a user agent". I'm speaking about browsers in general.
- croes 2y ago
  It's bigger than that >MDN Web Docs content is maintained by Mozilla, Google employees, and volunteers (community of developers and technical writers). It also contains content contributed by Microsoft, Google, and Samsung who, in 2017, announced they would shut down their own web documentation projects and move all their documentation to MDN Web Docs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDN_Web_Docs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDN_Web_Docs
  - userbinator 2y ago
    In other words, it's already been infected by the enemy.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > It's Mozilla's documentation site. I kind of want to emphasize "Mozilla's" too. It's not firefox documentation, it's web documentation. > I'm speaking about browsers in general. But you're specifically including firefox because of this page, right? That's a hell of extrapolation to make from them "helping" chrome by writing/hosting an article.

yapyap 2y ago

[dead]