Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | do_not_redeem's comments login

Safari is like IE for not implementing standards everyone else has agreed on and implemented.

Some of those unimplemented “standards” are to protect user privacy. I know this is not universally the case, but it’s worth calling out.

You can fingerprint a browser to > 99.9% accuracy because of Google's lax approach to privacy and security when adding new features.

Of course this benefits the advertising side of the business immensely.


Such as?


So, things that are either impossible (touch events or vibration) or ridiculous (why would I want a website to know my battery level or directly access system hardware?)

I'd guess for the same reason we want native apps to be able to do that.

Who said that we want native apps to be able to do that?

There are some use cases for those permissions but we (some) would like more control into that. I can't fight most of the websites as a user (they will tell me to use chrome) but it is for them hard to tell me if you want the service (along a billion other user) then move to android. Apple for a better or worse have much more sway than individual user.


Just because Google implements something does not make it a standard.

Did “everyone” agree on and implement them, or did Google implement them and force everyone else in the WHATWG to play catch-up since they’re dominant?

Maybe there are specific examples of that? But I can't think of any, and it certainly doesn't strike me as common. Random example:

https://caniuse.com/input-inputmode

Firefox: 2013

Chrome: 2017

Safari: Any decade now, I'm sure of it


Where "everyone else" means Google used Chrome to make it the standard.

Safari states their position on standards here: https://webkit.org/standards-positions/

IMO they have good reasons for opposing most of the standards


I searched that page and their github repo for "inputmode" (my example from before you posted) and couldn't find anything.

https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues?q=input...

I'd love to find out if anyone on the webkit project is aware of that part of the standard, and if so, the project's official position on it. I can't imagine why they'd oppose it.


They don't even implement the standards that they have agreed to properly.

Or even better, set up a pre-commit hook so that happens automatically.

Or even better, do that in CI.

As someone who works in small companies, and had to endure developers who were using gitlab as "offsite backup" or I guess "push-based 'does this compile?' workflow", please don't do this. CI minutes are rarely free, and for damn sure are not "glucose free". If you can't be bothered to run the local compilation step for your project, that is a wholly different code smell

Not for things like type / lint / formatting errors. Tests too if not too long.

I mean have them in the CI as well, but for sure have them as pre-commit hooks.


Stalling a commit for more than a third of a second is way too much.

Slightly-longer commits to have never-broken commits... hmmmmmm.

If you hit a full second, that's just right back to the svn days where there was just enough friction people wouldn't bother to commit until everything was completely done, then the commit would often be too big to easily describe why things were done in the commit message.

Huh, I guess we have different expectations. I really don't mind a few seconds even to know I didn't totally break things in a commit.

I don't think taking one second to commit is a problem. However, verifying that software builds typically takes a lot longer than a second.

You can! The terms to search for are "isomorphic web apps" and "hydration". It's definitely not a panacea though.

https://react.dev/reference/react-dom/client/hydrateRoot


why? what are the main drawbacks? I imagine the complexity, but can you go a little bit into the details for someone with only little frontend experience

Hydration is not needed tho, frameworks like Qwik allow isomorphic apps without hydration.

Do you think your idea has any more risk than sites like these:

- http://astronaut.io/

- https://obscuretube.com/


Absolutely 100% yes. Difference is these projects themselves are obscure. Opposed to an official Google branded service that will see significant publicity.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: