Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Firefox gets hundreds of millions from Google alone in royalties, that is not enough to build a web browser? Empirically, it is not. Even Microsoft gave up that chase. Browsers are staggeringly complex and expensive to build. Which may be an indictment of the Web itself, but in the absence of a simpler alternative (Gemini?), the Web we have is the Web we've got, and browsers have to meet it where it is.
> simpler alternative (Gemini?) I never heard of that before. I'm off to investigate. I've often thought we need to rewind the clock on the internet, as the whole thing has gotten way out of hand. What's to stop feature creep of Gemini, though?
They claim to stop feature creep by not including any kind of optional data support like headers and the spec team will reject any feature additions.
While I would be happy to have HTML/CSS exactly as it is and replace JS with a minimal WASM implementation that lets the website bring whatever tools it wants rather than relying on 1 billion JS apis.