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

WASM Is the New CGI

roborooter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 311 posts

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#151

Post by gnz11 »

silvestrov wrote: post #111
vbezhenar wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java and Flash failed to deliver its promise of unbreakable sandbox where one could run anything without risking compromising host. They tried, but their implementations were ridden with vulnerabilities and eventually browsers made them unusable. Other mentioned technologies didn't even promise that, I think. JavaScript did deliver its promise of unbreakable sandbox and nowadays browser runs JavaScript, downloaded fr…

Most of all the problem with Java Applets was that they were very slow to load and required so many resources that the computer came to a halt. They also took much longer to develop than whatever you could cook up in plain html and javascript.

Too be fair, they were slow to load if you didn’t have the browser extension and correct JRE installed.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#152

Post by chgs »

adrianN wrote: post #93
cheema33 wrote: post #6

I have a different take on this. I think local-first is the future. This is where the apps runs mostly within user's browser with little to no help from the server. Apps like Figma, Linear and Superhuman use this model very successfully. And to some degree Stackblitz does as well. If somewhat complex apps like Figma can run almost entirely within user's browser, then I think vast majority of the apps out there can. S…

CGI is alive and well. It’s still the easiest way to build small applications for browsers.

Nobody talks about it because people who use it just use it and get on with their life. It’s painfully easy to develop and host.

However it’s likely that generations who weren’t making websites in the days of Matt’s script archive don’t even know about cgi, and end up with massive complex frameworks which go out of style and usability for doing simple tasks.

I’ve got cgi scripts that are over 20 years old which run on modern servers and browsers just as the did during the dot com boom.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#153

Post by lagrange77 »

cheema33 wrote: post #6

I have a different take on this. I think local-first is the future. This is where the apps runs mostly within user's browser with little to no help from the server. Apps like Figma, Linear and Superhuman use this model very successfully. And to some degree Stackblitz does as well. If somewhat complex apps like Figma can run almost entirely within user's browser, then I think vast majority of the apps out there can. S…

> WASM could succeed as well.

I would guess WASM is a big building block of the future of apps you imagine. Figma is a good example.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#154

Post by sausagefeet »

cheema33 wrote: post #6

I have a different take on this. I think local-first is the future. This is where the apps runs mostly within user's browser with little to no help from the server. Apps like Figma, Linear and Superhuman use this model very successfully. And to some degree Stackblitz does as well. If somewhat complex apps like Figma can run almost entirely within user's browser, then I think vast majority of the apps out there can. S…

> I think local-first is the future. This is where the apps runs mostly within user's browser with little to no help from the server. Apps like Figma, Linear and Superhuman use this model very successfully.

The problem is: Figma and Linear are not local-first in the way people who are local-first proponents explain local-first. Both of them require a centralized server, that those companies run, for synchronization. This is not what people mean when they talk about "local-first" being the future, they are talking about what Martin Kleppman defined it as, which is no specialized synchronization software required.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#155

Post by [deleted] »

cheema33 wrote: post #6

I have a different take on this. I think local-first is the future. This is where the apps runs mostly within user's browser with little to no help from the server. Apps like Figma, Linear and Superhuman use this model very successfully. And to some degree Stackblitz does as well. If somewhat complex apps like Figma can run almost entirely within user's browser, then I think vast majority of the apps out there can. S…

[deleted]

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#156

Post by fwsgonzo »

iainmerrick wrote: post #119
singularity2001 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

except that WASM has a huge classloader / linker problem: It's still very hard to combine two wasm files into one and get the memory merger right. Maybe component model can fix it but it comes with so much bloated nonsense that an adaption in Safari might take forever.

It's a problem for some use cases, but is it really a "huge" problem in general? You can't easily publish a library in WASM and link it into another application later. But you can publish it as C++ source (say) and compile it into a C++ application, and build the whole thing as WASM. What are the scenarios where you really really want libraries in WASM format?

I have to say that yes, it's a PITA. Ever tried to enable exceptions in one part, and disabled in the other? It simply won't load.

Or any other option. Really. So many investigations, so much time wasted.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#157

Post by kaba0 »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #41
pjmlp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, by folks that most likely used to bash Application Servers from early 2000's. Not only JVM, also CLR, BEAM, P-Code, M-Code, and every other bytecode format since UNCOL came to be in 1958, but lets not forget about the coolness of selling WASM instead.

That's a bit oversimplified. I had this thought too and tried to figure out why this is different, and I think there are some major points. The biggest one is in which order they were built and designed. If we take Java and ask why applets didn't take off since they could do everything WASM offers and more, two things come to mind: it was fucking slow on contemporary machines, and the gui framework sucked. WASM is th…

Wasm is more open, because we effectively have 1.5 browsers left, and whatever google decides will be the de facto “web standard” everyone should follow. If google were pushing for a slightly revamped jvm/applet model, that would be the standard (as the JVM is as open/standardized as it gets)

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#158

Post by pen2l »

mattdesl wrote: post #21
cheema33 wrote: post #6

I have a different take on this. I think local-first is the future. This is where the apps runs mostly within user's browser with little to no help from the server. Apps like Figma, Linear and Superhuman use this model very successfully. And to some degree Stackblitz does as well. If somewhat complex apps like Figma can run almost entirely within user's browser, then I think vast majority of the apps out there can. S…

I’m not sure I’d call Figma local first. If I’m offline or in a spotty wifi area, I can’t load my designs. And unless it’s recently changed, if you lose wifi and quit the browser after some edits, they won’t be saved.

A better example than Figma is Rive, made with Flutter.

Works well local-first, and syncs with the cloud as needed. Flutter space lends itself very well to making local-first apps that also play well in the cloud.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#159

Post by curtisblaine »

swiftcoder wrote: post #132
curtisblaine wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how do you do that without essentially downloading the whole social network to your local machine? Are other people's comments, quotes, likes, moderation signals something that should stay on the server or should be synced to the client for offline use? In the first case, you can't really use the social network without connecting to a server. The second case is a privacy and resources nightmare (privacy, because…

Usually folks looking for this sort of social network are also looking for a more intimate social experience, so we're not necessarily talking about sync'ing the whole Twitter feed firehose. I don't think it's unreasonable from a resources perspective to sync the posts/actions of mutual followers, and from a privacy standpoint it's not really any worse than your friend screenshotting a text message from you.

Sure, but they're a tiny fraction of the mainstream users and you can already have that sort of experience with blogging and microblogging. Relevant social networks as the public knows them are hard to develop local-first. Even the humble forum where strangers meet to discuss is really hard to do that way. If it needs centralized moderation, or a relevance system via karma / votes, it's hard.

Re: WASM Is the New CGI

#160

Post by perching_aix »

vbezhenar wrote: post #59
junto wrote: post #8

Can someone explain to me what the difference really is between WASM and older tech like Java Applets, ActiveX, Silverlight and Macromedia Flash, because they don’t really sound much different to me. Maybe I’m just old, but I thought we’d learnt our lesson on running untrusted third party compiled code in a web browser. In all of these cases it’s pitched as improving the customer experience but also conveniently push…

Java and Flash failed to deliver its promise of unbreakable sandbox where one could run anything without risking compromising host. They tried, but their implementations were ridden with vulnerabilities and eventually browsers made them unusable. Other mentioned technologies didn't even promise that, I think. JavaScript did deliver its promise of unbreakable sandbox and nowadays browser runs JavaScript, downloaded fr…

> JavaScript did deliver its promise of unbreakable sandbox

Aren't its VM implementations routinely exploited? Ranging from "mere" security feature exploits, such as popunders, all the way to full on proper VM escapes?

Like even in current day, JS is ran interpreted on a number of platforms, because JIT compiling is not trustworthy enough. And I'm pretty sure the interpreters are no immune either.

Post reply on HN