this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
531 points (93.7% liked)

Technology

55952 readers
3425 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 93 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I think it's less that it's "impossible" but rather that it's expensive.

Honestly we've in general shoved too much shit into the browser that's not strictly related to just browsing web sites.

And you "have to" support all the layers and layers and layers of added stuff, or you can't "compete".

But, at the same time, the goals of making a good-enough browser that mostly works and isn't completely enshittified and captured by corpo big tech interests is a very worthy project and 100% support what they're doing.

[–] sugartits@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

JavaScript was a mistake.

And it went downhill from there.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 30 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Eh, scriptable content was probably fine.

Techbros going 'holy shit, we should make EVERYTHING a website!' was the curse that doomed us.

[–] pentagrammar@programming.dev 28 points 2 weeks ago

Pushing for bloated web apps instead of having optimized and perfectly functional websites was what killed it for me.

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 30 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It was fine when it was contained to an actual web site instead of infecting desktop software too. To me, using JS for that purpose feels like using PHP to write a 3D video game.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

using PHP to write a 3D video game.

Somewhere, someone just had a really bad idea.

[–] chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net 16 points 2 weeks ago

It’s a general language (though primarily adopted by web as backend engine), so you can basically expect people already have had this idea.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I feel like the internet is such a lost cause at this point that it would be better to invest in other efforts like the Gemini protocol.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Gemini protocol

IDK, but I don't think that the problem is that any particular application protocol is bad so much as it is capitalists going to capitalist, and they've shit all over everything in the Quest to Make a Buck.

It's not like a new protocol, if it becomes as widely adopted, won't see the same vultures swoop in and strip mine any value they can find there, too.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

A more lightweight protocol limits the attack surface for capitalism. The web sucks because basically anything can be wrapped in http, including ads, tracking cookies, data collection JavaScript, etc.

Gemini protocol only carries markdown

That's a fair assessment. I'll admit to having a severe case of doomerism when it comes to tech lately, and the levels of shit tech bros will go to to monetize shit has me skeptical there's any sort of protocol or technology that could be made bro-resistant for more than a short period of time.

EEE is pretty prevalent and has been a very standard practice with these tech companies for a long time. See: Meta and Threads for a recent example.

[–] rainynight65@feddit.de 1 points 1 week ago

How would you drive the adoption of such a protocol in an environment that is largely hostile towards attempts at demonetising things?

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, I'd have accepted too expensive as an answer. They were ready to die on the hill that no one could possibly create a new browser from specs.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hilarious, I suppose, given the origins of Chrome and that it was a team of people sitting down to make a new browser from the specs.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My thoughts exactly.

Also nothing is stopping someone from forking an open browser and throwing money/bodies at keeping it up.

It's be a shame to lose free updates, but certainly not undoable.

Agreed. As much as I understand the urge to build your own shiny new thing, I'd pay real actual human money for someone to take Blink, and put it in a non-lobotomized, non-enshittified, non-garbage UI that has things like a self-hosted sync server, built-in adblock/noscript/etc, and the ability to use extensions for things like password managers.

But no crypto stuff, no gaming stuff, no VPN services, no browser password managers, no sponsored links, no sponsored default search engines, no email client, blah blah blah.

Browser, adblock, self-hosted sync, done.