Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites • Hacker News Board

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#151

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 4:34 PM UTC

nix23 wrote: post #148

shadowgovt wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a RasPi is a GNU/Linux platform and can run general-purpose apps. You misunderstood my comparison; RasPi is a computer. I'm saying nobody considers an Arduino a "computer" in the same category as a Raspberry Pi is a computer (and similarly, nobody should consider Kristall a web browser, though it is something else, which is cool).

> a raspi is a GNU/Linux platform I run BSD/BSD on it and it's not a platform but a Computer. >nobody considers an Arduino a "computer" True, because it's a f*** Microcontroller understood?

Yes, we're saying the same thing.

And by analogy, Kristall is a "microbrowser" and I think HN had a bad reaction to it because the top-level description was "a browser."

It's the Arduino of browsers.

That doesn't make it bad, but this site is full of pedants and when you call a tool by a slightly-different name, you get "um-actually'd" to death.

(Sometimes, you even get someone swearing at you because they think you don't know the difference between a general-purpose small computer and a microcontroller ;) ).

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#152

Post by ndriscoll » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 4:37 PM UTC

shadowgovt wrote: post #141

ndriscoll wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What flaws allow sites to hijack passwords if pages aren't programmable? Are you talking about phishing, and how would js help? My mental model here is that the browser's password manager autofills a password that the user doesn't even know, and without scripting or dynamic resources, it's not possible to exfiltrate that data automatically. Without styling, form buttons would have a standard look so it's harder to tr…

HTML and CSS alone allow you to concoct a webpage where a user's input appears to be going to one place but is in fact going somewhere else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framekiller

The OP link is a browser that doesn't support CSS. Not supporting frames seems like it'd also solve that problem.

Edit: also, in a modern browser, passwords are autofilled by the browser which knows where input is going and can't be tricked. You could make an argument about other sensitive information, but that sounds like it's the same as plain ol' phishing.

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#153

Post by toastal » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 4:39 PM UTC

Jakob wrote: post #64

ho_schi wrote: post #41

Like Links[1] then? Really. I want Epiphany and Firefox to allow me turn off JavaScript like I can allow/disallow {Audio, Video, Webcam, Location, Notifications...}. The single wrong decision was following Google into that JS-Show. JS has it rationals, I'm using it as programmer sometimes. But JS was consider harmful for the reasons! Google intention was using JS for it's so called web-application/single-page-applica…

I use uBlock origin with JavaScript disabled by default. You can set a shortcut to enable JavaScript (“Relax blocking mode”, cmd-J for me. I don’t remember whether that was the default.) You can persist enabled JavaScript for the current domain for the future. I find that with JavaScript enabled on some 20 websites, the rest of the web works pretty well with the occasional cmd-J in case it doesn’t. On mobile I haven’…

There are annoyances. 1) many sites can't even be bothered with a basic noscript or it was the default message from some “starter” app rather than something meaningful/descriptive 2) basic sites like blogs are putting their image loading behind JavaScript for no reason (unless they or WordPress plugin developers aren't aware of ) 3) too many folks are relying on third-party CDNs and client-side parsing for something that should obviously had been done at build time like code syntax highlighting and rendering LaTeX (almost every ‘modern’ docs project fails this so our tech industry fails here).

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#154

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

ndriscoll wrote: post #152

shadowgovt wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTML and CSS alone allow you to concoct a webpage where a user's input appears to be going to one place but is in fact going somewhere else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framekiller

The OP link is a browser that doesn't support CSS. Not supporting frames seems like it'd also solve that problem. Edit: also, in a modern browser, passwords are autofilled by the browser which knows where input is going and can't be tricked. You could make an argument about other sensitive information, but that sounds like it's the same as plain ol' phishing.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, there's no language for querying the client "Do you support CSS" / "Do you support frames" without CSS so Google is forced to err on the side of caution and reject browser that don't support JS (because they can query that).

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#155

Post by Shared404 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 4:51 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #45

I have nitpicks and criticisms about Gemini, and it's not a protocol that I use very often (if at all), but I also don't see the harm in it. It seems to have a pretty strong grasp of what its goals are and (minor criticisms aside) it does a decent job of accomplishing those goals. Nowadays I tend to compare Gemini more to things like Pico-8 or Markdown rather than think of it as a web competitor -- and as a result I'…

> Nowadays I tend to compare Gemini more to things like Pico-8 or Markdown rather than think of it as a web competitor

That's also how Gemini thinks of itself. I'm a fan personally, I'm all for projects that just go and do their own thing and do it well.

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#156

Post by Shared404 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 4:53 PM UTC

If the dev is reading these, just know that a lot of us here _do_ quite like this. I'm in the "market" for a small internet browser these days, and this is one I very well may get good use out of.

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#157

Post by rchaud » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 5:14 PM UTC

seszett wrote: post #123

turtlebits wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't call it an internet browser if it doesn't work properly on 99.99% percent of existing pages. It's like calling telnet a browser, when it only accurately displays text/plain.

> internet browser But it's not a small internet browser it's a small-internet browser . It is made to browse the "small-internet", which is not the same thing as the internet.

There is no definition of 'small internet', so is the UX of this browser dependent on pasting in URLs and see if they load?

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#158

Post by danShumway » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

BizarreByte wrote: post #99

I don’t think I’ve ever seen HN react so negatively to a project, but I think that has to do with the image people have of what a “browser” is. Kristall isn’t very useful for HTTP even though it supports the protocol. That said its goal is the “small internet” and very basic sites on HTTP will work, which is is inline with that goal. Some have complained even Google search doesn’t work, but Google search doesn’t fall…

I wonder if it's a time-zone thing with when the link was posted.

I think I remember reacting myself at least somewhat negatively to Gemini first time I heard about it, so on some level I understand how someone's initial reaction could be hostile -- but I also feel like "limited tools producing tight-knit communities and specific community-tailored content" is right up HN's alley, and I am also surprised to see so many people questioning why this should exist.

"It doesn't work for the majority of the web."

So? I assume the project isn't lying, it does actually support HTML. I just don't see how it's a bad thing to have a lightweight browser that handles static HTML; I don't think anyone is advocating that anybody uninstall Firefox over this.

----

I'll kind of go a step further here and give a mildly hot take: nobody should be doing normal browsing on an indie browser in the first place; I consider that a likely security/privacy risk. The vast majority of indie browsers do not have full-featured uBlock Origin support, they don't have the browser hardening features that something like Firefox ships with by default.

So on some level I feel like "can I use this to read CNN" is not necessarily a great metric to use for an indie project, because if you're reading CNN it should probably be in Firefox with uBlock Origin installed (or something comparable, but I typically advocate that Firefox and its derivatives have better tracking protection than other mainstream browsers).

In contrast, if something loads in this browser, what is your security risk? Limited MITM attacks and network analysis? I don't feel the same aversion I feel to most indie web browsers when I think about someone reading a limited number of indie web articles in this thing or building projects around it.

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#159

Post by jamil7 » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

shadowgovt wrote: post #135

jamil7 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is nothing about HTML/CSS/JS that prevents simplicity You're right, there isn't yet here we are. Where I need to download and run a React program every time I want to read an article.

It would be great if React could be built directly into browsers, but it would greatly curtail the current flexibility of server-vended React. The project is able to evolve quite quickly unshackled from a w3c process and the pulse of major browser updates. (IIUC, there was a proposal in Firefox decades ago to make the engine into several flexible modules and a page could declare which modules it depended upon, then t…

I haven't done any professional web stuff in a few years, wasn't this kind of the idea of web components? As you said, The React team can move a lot faster than w3c and each browser vendor.

Re: Kristall – a browser without support for CSS/JS/WASM or graphical websites

#160

Post by danShumway » Thu, Jan 12, 2023, 5:30 PM UTC

leidenfrost wrote: post #80

danShumway wrote: post #45

I have nitpicks and criticisms about Gemini, and it's not a protocol that I use very often (if at all), but I also don't see the harm in it. It seems to have a pretty strong grasp of what its goals are and (minor criticisms aside) it does a decent job of accomplishing those goals. Nowadays I tend to compare Gemini more to things like Pico-8 or Markdown rather than think of it as a web competitor -- and as a result I'…

I think of Gemini less like a competitor to the web but more as ham radio. Radio amateurs can communicate through the internet with their phones and it would be faster, simpler and easier. But radio gives them both the nostalgia feeling and a niche community to belong. Gemini is kinda like that.

I don't use Pico-8, and I find its limitations frustrating; I am never going to make a game in Pico-8. But I do use stuff like Jummbox when I compose music, for basically the same exact reasons other devs use Pico-8 for games, and I love Jummbox's limitations for music composition.

Limitations are a way of fostering community (ham radio enthusiasts all kind of get to know local operators, Jummbox makes sharing song sources in a digestible way super-easy). Limitations also allow you to not care about complications that would be barriers to building things -- I don't want to set up a VST before I start writing music.

So my feeling on Gemini has shifted from being a curmudgeon about honestly kind of really nitpicky, shallow stuff like the ability to mark-up inline language transitions -- into realizing that when you step away from thinking of the project as some kind of attack on the web then yeah, it actually makes a ton of sense to build a small community around a very limited format that forces everyone in that community to be standardized in how they share with each other, keeps the community a little bit niche so that the people in it are a bit more friendly and personable, and forces its participants to focus pretty much only on what they're writing and nothing else.