2 ms·
We do not need browsers, but for different reasons than the author uses. Browsers are just one of many tools to consume one of many types of data on the intern
by DanielBMarkham 11y ago
We do not need browsers, but for different reasons than the author uses.
Browsers are just one of many tools to consume one of many types of data on the internet. The fact that we'd fallen into this browser-web-address-as-a-location-app-content-mining paradigm initially does not mean that it is the optimum one going forward.
To see how misaligned we've gotten, play a thought-game: if I were a blind, privacy-sensitive person, how would I consume content on the web? I wouldn't want or need ads, user-tracking, or any of the rest of it. All I'd want is somebody to read me some text for 5-10 minutes, maybe a few times a day. Each time I might have something to reply -- or not. This would provide me everything the current web does, and would be much more lightweight and flexible. 99% of the bytes we're pushing and the interactivity we experience from browsers has nothing at all to do with long-term value. It's much more focused on stickiness and engagement. One might use the word addiction. The core text data itself, while somewhat useful, is not very much at all compared to the rest of it.
Browsers are not built in users' best interest. Therefore I predict they'll be around for a very long time.
- JadeNB 11y ago> I wouldn't want or need ads, user-tracking, or any of the rest of it. Does anyone, blind or not, want or need ads or user tracking? (I suppose you could argue that any login constitutes a (hopefully) benign form of user tracking; but then I could say that blind people will need such logins too!)