Seipaho8

> and has access to the network

It does not have access to TCP or UDP sockets.

Because browsers follow a pattern of reinventing the wheel with different tradeoffs, primarily focusing on "secure" execution of untrusted code from the web. Just look at the stack of web technologies, they provide an ever-expanding set of abstractions and reinventions of what OSes already provide.

Well, I wanted a list of values that, for them, rank higher than human lives. I mean every donation has an opportunity cost, and that cost can be lives not saved. People are implicitly willing to make such tradeoffs. What I am asking is to think about it and make those preferences explicit.

The point is that they are not a single central entity easily siphoned off by an org that'll sell the information for profit.

> who value things differently

Can you try to formulate those values?

> I would add that the Make-A-Wish foundation has a very significant quality of life impact on the kids AND their support network

But given the costs per instance that impact is only on a small fraction of all cases. A smaller impact for everyone or one that only materializes in the future would likely generate more utility if you add them up.

> Recently used domains will be cached in will thus still work.

Except for the many domains that set very low TTLs for load balancing and cloudiness reasons.

> While sophisticated users can turn to cloud-based “open resolvers”

Sophisticated users run their own resolvers instead of relying on unverifiable promises from for-profit entities.