Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chrome breaks the Web

tonsky.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 473 posts

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#391

Post by defined »

halr9000 wrote: post #249
ysavir wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case, the browser is the agent of those advertising to the user. It's not protecting your interests, it's protecting Google's interests. If it was protecting your interests, it would be a toggleable setting that defaults to normalized behavior.

> It's not protecting your interests, it's protecting Google's interests. But you can always install (or develop) another browser that might do this job better for you . > If it was protecting your interests, it would be a toggleable setting that defaults to normalized behavior. The problem with this view is that the vast majority of end users do not want, and in fact will never know about or use a new setting, and s…

IMO, breaking an established API with no reliable way to work around it is very bad. I have been bitten by this, and only now understand why. I will probably switch to Firefox.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#392

Post by laumars »

gcb0 wrote: post #387
laumars wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Netscape is irrelevant. Netscape is entirely relevant. The question was raised about how different Google / Chrome are compared to Microsoft / IE and the answer is Netscape. Microsoft tried to tie the internet into their own platform, Windows + IE, due to them pushing non-standard rendering and ActiveX. Whatever your opinion of Chrome's break from standards might be, Google simply are not trying to lock people into…

> [google] intent is very different from Microsoft in the 90s with Internet Explorer as Google are not trying to control the web How very wrong you are on this one point, your argument was going on the right line but here it took an unexpected turn. Microsoft was the one truly not trying to control the web. The web was a causality for something else (killing java). Now, Google. Google is the one that must control the…

I was there at the time, the whole IE Vs Netscape thing started long before Java became a threat (though you are right about how Microsoft also fought that war as well). Plus Bill Gates has said in interviews since that he was trying to lock the web into Microsofts ecosystem because he saw the threat very early on about how it could be platform agnostic.

While you can argue that Chrome and AMP serve the same goal, they're approaches are very different. One helps diversify a market place and doesn't lock developers onto its ecosystem nor users into its product via anti competitive practices; while the other seeks to create a "second web" who is controlled by Google by locking companies into their promise of reduced bandwidth and users into their hosts and advertising via leveraging their massive market share in search as an effective sweetener/bribe (use us and be placed before the search results).

You can complain about Chrome all you like but overall have more browsers on the market is better and Chrome doesn't lock people into anything aside brand loyalty. Where as AMP is a very different beast.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#393

Post by Torn »

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #154
Spivak wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that some sites decided to use autocomplete=off to impose their feeling about password managers on users and make them more difficult to use. It's the same reason I have to turn off clipboard events because some sites think it's okay to block copy/paste.

I especially hate websites that think it's ever reasonable to disable pasting into inputs! Luckily in most cases you can just right-click -> Inspect Element -> $0.value = ' paste '. You can also copy text with right-click -> Inspect Element -> copy($0.innerText). Although you'd use $0.value for an input or textarea.

The "don't fuck with paste" extension is worth checking out: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/dont-fuck-with-pas...

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#394

Post by desas »

techdragon wrote: post #355
robryk wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> asking for the other user's password What? Why would the other user ever provide their password to this user?

How about an Administration interface that allows you to set a password to a known value for the user to use so they can log back into their account. So the helpful support person can now go "Your password is now 'foobar' and you will be asked to pick a new one when you login."

That doesn't sound like a safe way of resetting passwords. You should supply them a token they can use to set their own password. Your employees should not know your users passwords.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#395

Post by zaarn »

desas wrote: post #394
techdragon wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about an Administration interface that allows you to set a password to a known value for the user to use so they can log back into their account. So the helpful support person can now go "Your password is now 'foobar' and you will be asked to pick a new one when you login."

That doesn't sound like a safe way of resetting passwords. You should supply them a token they can use to set their own password. Your employees should not know your users passwords.

In a corporation, this is totally okay as long as the reset password is safe or the account is locked from external access until the password has been changed.

The employee should of course change their password and that should be enforced policy, the admin shouldn't know user passwords.

Tokens work too but it's a bit of an overhead, especially in smaller SMB where the admin is probably just across the corridor or atleast in the same building.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#396

Post by marijn »

> The gist of it: if you mark onscroll/ontouch event listener as passive, Mobile Google can scroll your page faster

onscroll has never been cancelable, and is fired after the actual scrolling takes place. So I don't see how it being passive by default changes anything. Is this an oversight in the article (and a bunch of comments here), or am I missing something?

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Events/scroll

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#397

Post by currysausage »

tree_of_item wrote: post #312
CydeWeys wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is a program that I run on my computer. It protects my interests, not the interests of random crappy website developers doing horrible things like hijacking clipboard events. I'm all for the defaults being whatever is best for me. The browser is the agent of the user.

If the browser was the agent of the user, the user would decide this behavior.

Adding another preference certainly won’t solve the underlying usability issues.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#398

Post by deno »

gsnedders wrote: post #363
deno wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Chrome shipped with opt-out UI option to disable janky scrolling, would it be any better? Web is not a static target. Being afraid to break things gets you a decade of Flash websites. Things that are important will be maintained, and things that aren’t… well good riddance. Personally, I think we are way past due HTML6. A sort of Vulkan-like platform for Web[1]. HTML5 should be build on top of this next-gen low lev…

> A sort of Vulkan-like platform for Web[1] Note that this is essentially what Houdini is for CSS.

Houdini + WASM combo has the potential to be (say it like Trump/Bernie) HUUUGE. I think it’s really exciting.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#399

Post by jrockway »

techdragon wrote: post #355
robryk wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> asking for the other user's password What? Why would the other user ever provide their password to this user?

How about an Administration interface that allows you to set a password to a known value for the user to use so they can log back into their account. So the helpful support person can now go "Your password is now 'foobar' and you will be asked to pick a new one when you login."

Why would you use input type=password for that?

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#400

Post by crottypeter »

hinkley wrote: post #293
pathseeker wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Either googles solution is better or its not. No, it's better for users who read the auto-filled boxes to make sure they are sane (which is what I do). It's not good for users that don't understand what auto-fill is (i.e. they think the website is suggesting it to them).

Or people staring at a form that is two screens long... Easy to miss things.

Or people unlucky enough to land on a site that has adopted "in-field labels".

Once those autofill, it's anyone's guess whether you have put the right data in.

Post reply on HN