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

Things you can do with a browser in 2020

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 387 posts

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#201

Post by jakub_g »

rkagerer wrote: post #28

As a user, so many of these I wish did NOT exist. E.g: Push Notifications, Banners, Web Share, Contacts, Page Visibility, Badging. Uncertain about USB, Bluetooth, Locks, Keyboard Lock, and Native File System. I don't want my browser doing those things.

You actually got me an idea. It should be pretty easy to block many of those with a simple Tampermonkey script. Gotta check over the weekend. In JS you can't generally override host objects, but you can generally modify the functions they expose.

@include *

@run-at document-start

navigator.something.someMethod = () => {} // noop

https://www.tampermonkey.net/documentation.php

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#202

Post by squaresmile »

ohbleek wrote: post #191
Igelau wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that's one good use case for Push Notifications. It would take about 10 minutes of browsing to find 10 bad ones.

I never liked the idea until I started using a browser based pomodoro timer and I enabled the desktop notifications, it's been a useful feature. Now, I'm wondering if there are other benefits I've been missing out on since I have always disabled desktop notifications by default.

I find the browser notifications useful for discourse forums. There are some stuffs that I would like to be notified but not by email.

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#203

Post by Nicksil »

saagarjha wrote: post #135
asjw wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is letting Google, Facebook or Apple control every aspect of our lives by sending them all our personal data, contacts and network information voluntary more secure? I would rather run every application in its own VM under a different unprivileged user P.s. the browser is the main attack vector on mobile, not only because it's so complex that bugs are everywhere, but mostly because web app security sucks

> the browser is the main attack vector on mobile Citation needed. Browser-based attacks are difficult to come by, because it's just easier to attack an application instead.

>Citation needed. Browser-based attacks are difficult to come by, because it's just easier to attack an application instead.

You require a citation then make an assertion with with no supporting source.

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#204

Post by taeric »

untog wrote: post #195
taeric wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer copying the link to the page I'm on to share. No popups, native or otherwise. Similarly, I like not having an app running so that you could just send me a text. Sms is bad for security, but great see sending short notifications. Almost better, as it is so limited.

> Almost better, as it is so limited. Except that with web push the block button is two taps away. Once I’ve given away my phone number that’s it, it can be sent to anyone, I can receive messages from anywhere.

Is this a thing that happens often? Used to, your phone number was in a publicly available book. Pretty sure we use legislation to block abuse of that kind.

Similarly, used to, my browser was not a bloated application capable of sending me messages. Such that there have been times just launching chrome I get notifications I didn't know my family were going to accidentally enable...

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#205

Post by jakub_g »

taeric wrote: post #181
untog wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you're out of step with what users want these days. Nothing wrong with that! But to take an example, when I hit a share button on a page I want to see the native share box, not some hideous iframed monstrosity that only works with Facebook. So I want Web Share. And I don't want to download an entire native app just so that I can receive a push alert when my food order is on the way, a web site works much better…

I prefer copying the link to the page I'm on to share. No popups, native or otherwise. Similarly, I like not having an app running so that you could just send me a text. Sms is bad for security, but great see sending short notifications. Almost better, as it is so limited.

FYI on Chrome/Brave Android, when you use 'share' button -> copy URL, it uses link rel=canonical meta tag if available (which generally doesn't have all FB tracking crap in the URL etc.)

Much better than directly copying the URL.

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#206

Post by Nicksil »

AgentME wrote: post #196
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to a strong incentive to stick to Chrome?

Chrome is open-source, cross-platform, built on open standards, securely sandboxes code run inside it, and it's interoperable with other web browsers. Considering operating systems and web browsers as app platforms, I think it's better and safer for people to use apps on app platforms that are built on open standards, that are able to freely run on many and free-and-open-source devices, and that securely sandbox apps…

>Chrome is open-source, cross-platform, built on open standards, securely sandboxes code run inside it, and it's interoperable with other web browsers. Considering operating systems and web browsers as app platforms, I think it's better and safer for people to use apps on app platforms that are built on open standards, that are able to freely run on many and free-and-open-source devices, and that securely sandbox apps so they don't have full access to people's data by default. (Android comes close to meeting these criteria, but my main complaints would be the difficulty in running Android apps on non-Android devices, the fact that apps are harder to run than visiting a URL, the lack of alternate implementations of the platform, Google's full control over the platform APIs, and Google's de-facto control over distributing apps.)

A lot of your argument here is based on the assumption Google Chrome is open source software. Google Chrome is not open source, it's proprietary.

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#207

Post by hoten »

myself248 wrote: post #198
scubbo wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such an important realization. I, too, personally wish most of those features didn't exist. But I acknowledge that I am in the minority.

Wishing isn't the point for me. A lot of us were taught a particular security model, and then that changed silently, and now we might make bad decisions because of it. I wish I could at least control these things. I'd like to turn them all off and see what happens to the modern web, and at least understand what I'm allowing when I turn them back on.

Look up Chrome Feature Policies.

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#208

Post by untog »

taeric wrote: post #204
untog wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Almost better, as it is so limited. Except that with web push the block button is two taps away. Once I’ve given away my phone number that’s it, it can be sent to anyone, I can receive messages from anywhere.

Is this a thing that happens often? Used to, your phone number was in a publicly available book. Pretty sure we use legislation to block abuse of that kind. Similarly, used to, my browser was not a bloated application capable of sending me messages. Such that there have been times just launching chrome I get notifications I didn't know my family were going to accidentally enable...

> Is this a thing that happens often? Used to, your phone number was in a publicly available book.

When you could only call that number. Messaging is pretty different.

And sure it happens! Phone numbers are (nearly) immutable. It's a valuable piece of personal information. Your web push ID is... not.

Re: Things you can do with a browser in 2020

#210

Post by nine_k »

dijit wrote: post #125
nine_k wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't need that, you can cmd-comma and disable that. But there's no such an easy way to enable a feature you need, but which wasn't implemented.

I do not want an opt out, I do not want it. I _do_ _not_ want it. I do not want it to be expected. I do not want it to be assumed. I do not want to have to configure anything. _I DO NOT WANT IT_

So, you're fine with it to be off by default?
Post reply on HN