Live data from Hacker News

WebGPU Fundamentals

webgpufundamentals.org

41–50 of 211 posts

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#41
post #40
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it bother you that browsers have many features? At this point browsers are essentially a cross-platform VM and it really seems like this trend will only accentuate in the future.

At some point we're going to have to drop the pretense of running an operating system underneath because the browser is the operating system.

Blink is my operating system and Linux is its bootloader.

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#42
post #19

Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.

[deleted]

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#43
post #32
post #19

Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.

Why does it bother you that browsers have many features? At this point browsers are essentially a cross-platform VM and it really seems like this trend will only accentuate in the future.

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chrome

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=firefox

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=webkit

Those are the main reasons. And seeing how browsers are essentially designed to run other peoples code with minimal to no vetting processes, I consider this a serious issue.

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#44
post #19

Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.

Free yourself from the notion that a web browser purely browses The Web.

It's nowadays also a cross-platform insta-deployment GUI application runtime environment with mostly bad native OS integration and performance characteristics (both ~improving, there's even native filesystem access now).

In any case it's Good Enough (C), so it sticks.

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#45
post #19

Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.

> Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached. Sure, but where do you draw the line really? For me, having WebUSB and WebMIDI for example is useful, I want to be able to interact with synths over MIDI in the browser, or be able to access other accessories. I also love the idea of GPU access, so my personal limit has not been reached. Multiply this by every vendor, developer and u…

Browsers are just “standardised” OS at this point. Really, what is the difference? It seems to me that people basically wants a 1 to 1 mapping between every OS feature to browsers. I wouldn’t be surprised if this standard will fall apart in the next decade once Chrome runs everything. That is to say Chrome is the standard. I am already seeing websites drop support for Firefox and won’t even load using it.

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#46
post #32
post #19

Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.

Why does it bother you that browsers have many features? At this point browsers are essentially a cross-platform VM and it really seems like this trend will only accentuate in the future.

https://www.yubico.com/support/issue-rating-system/security-...

Every new feature is more space for security issues to exist.

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#47
post #19

Question for discussion: when have we reached the point where the Browser Feature-creep is too much and we say "okay, a browser probably doesn't need this"? Because after seeing WebUSB and WebGPU I think my personal limit has been reached.

The issue of the Web's lack of distinction between document viewing features and being an application platform (with access to system resources and private data) is decades old. Unfortunately, the question has been academic for decades as well: before the advent of HTML5, proprietary browser plugins gave Web sites the same abilities (ActiveX and Flash being notable, as were their security vulnerabilities). Flash was ubiquitous circa 1998-2008; your typical user would always have it installed. Nor did the typical (non-techie) user know that the Web was not originally intended to be an application platform, or the implications of it being used as such.

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#48
post #43
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it bother you that browsers have many features? At this point browsers are essentially a cross-platform VM and it really seems like this trend will only accentuate in the future.

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chrome https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=firefox https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=webkit Those are the main reasons. And seeing how browsers are essentially designed to run other peoples code with minimal to no vetting processes, I consider this a serious issue.

So how is this any different if we don’t have a browser? People still want to visit “websites” which in your world is even worse. Because now every website is a distinct application (yikes!). The problem is that people are willing to run arbitrary code in the first place.

How many times have _you_ as a developer, run arbitrary scripts from the internet? Blindly accepts packages that you have not vetted?

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#49
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chrome https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=firefox https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=webkit Those are the main reasons. And seeing how browsers are essentially designed to run other peoples code with minimal to no vetting processes, I consider this a serious issue.

So how is this any different if we don’t have a browser? People still want to visit “websites” which in your world is even worse. Because now every website is a distinct application (yikes!). The problem is that people are willing to run arbitrary code in the first place. How many times have _you_ as a developer, run arbitrary scripts from the internet? Blindly accepts packages that you have not vetted?

Too many to count.

Remember Flash? ;)

Re: WebGPU Fundamentals

#50

How do I render text with GPU? Do I render text on texture with CPU and then send that texture to GPU? Do I vectorize it and draw millions of tiny triangles to approximate those vectors? It's interesting for me to explore WebGPU as a canvas for app development, but it's not obvious to me how to draw text and text is everywhere.

One of the most exciting features of WebGPU, especially over WebGL, is the ability to run compute shaders. That opens up an entire class of 2D vector graphics rendering techniques using compute shaders, including Vello. It's still in early stages, but the current code does include text rendering. There's a very rough demo at https://levien.com/vello-demo (the demo doesn't do variable fonts but the code can), and we'l…

Thanks to Google blocking WebGL compute shaders adoption.

We could have had them three years ago.

Post reply on HN