As long as Google doesn't sell Chrome to OpenAI.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
One browser tab holding a few YouTube visits consumes about 350 MO of memory. I think we have added enough functionality to the browser
Title made me think… Aren’t we end of the Browser development cycle yet? What improvement browsers can benefit from now on? What else on the roadmap?
Are we at the end of the operating system development cycle? A browser is an operating system that abstracts away your operating system, at this point.
Anyway, there's a lot of ad tech and tracking stuff to be implemented. You'll love it, Google decided so.
~~Necessary~~ Necessity is the mother of invention
Thank you, my spell checker was "helping"...
this is my most controversial take in computing in general:
i’ve always hated the browser. the reason there are only a few working browser engines is that HTTP and the HTML/CSS/JS tech stack is a gigantic pile of tech debt, and even using Chromium and Firefox you run into edge cases where, for certain edge cases, they don’t always follow the specs as defined in these ancient RFCs. and these specs: why tf are they treated as gospel? which software product specs drafted 50 years ago get this kind of reverence? why is it that other GUIs have had tons of iteration, not just of their spec but their full stack implementation (Wayland, .NET, Kotlin Compose, SwiftUI, etc), but we’re all just fine with this mess of janky boomer protocols cuz it lets startups get to market faster? why is downloading an entire app (less some caching) every time you want to use it feel less cumbersome than installing something native to the runtime environment where the protocols can be tightly controlled by the developer and not subject to whatever security and storage protocols whatever browser implementation decides is good for you? cookies? really? the browser should be reimagined with a tighter set of protocols that allow you to look at brochure sites and download content, ie apps. even the best web apps are a janky mess and have never worked better than properly developed desktop GUI. /rant
Well, I do think you're wrong about quite a lot of that. So yeah that is in fact controversial. Upvoted.
But I agree websites are a bloated mess that shouldn't be made on a giant javascript stack of unreadable unmaintainable garbage. It'd be cool if we got something more like applets. But then we'd have to design a framework that operates in a sandbox and is limited to only functions that are safe to perform on your computer without trusting the author and make it easy to write so developers can build it and.... we're back at html+css+javascript.
I think the big thing we need to do is fully replace javascript.
Have a look at Gemini and the Gemini capsules. Seems more like what a browser should be, in my opinion.
i know i’m in the minority here so i’m not going to bury myself in this hole, but i do think those are addressable problems. many of them have been addressed. replacing Javascript is exactly what i’m talking about.
Isn't that what wasm kinda is?
not really. using WASM as your full stack for your front end is just adding to the complexity and jank. WASM is there for compute heavy stuff. you can use it that way if you want.
there may be a little angst from reading and rereading the “Max-Age” portion of the cookie RFC that caused this trauma
I think browsers are unique because it's how laypeople interact with their computer the most.
So I spent two days hacking together a Gemini client script in tcl/tk. It's near 700 lines already, some of those are dead weight (client certs, stuck cause pki module in tcllib doesn't know of hashing algorithms newer than sha256), but it's usable for reading pages, viewing images, saving either and answering prompts, with basic history. A fully functional client is supposed to be doable in 1-2 days in like 200 lines of code in something. So it's a clumsy mess.
And yes, it feels like it's a lot of what we need web for. Suppose I got client certs working and this were a Gemini service. I'd follow a link saying "post something", I'd type this comment into a prompt and send the request, and on the next update it would be here, right under CN from my client cert used as nickname. One could have such links under every comment. One could build threads.
So maybe yes.
There are four of them?
Firefox, safari, chrome, edge. Depending on your perspective that's either 3 or 4.
This is another bullet point on the list of MAGA stopping or confusing the flow and accessibility of information.
We are to know nothing about what they are doing in the world, ideally.
Sounds wonderful