oscargrouch

> This is an old trope that has been disproven not only in law but also in practice.

Which practice? Boeing? which law? the same one that have a tendency to favor this bad practice?

What about blind trust? People trusted their children to Priests, thinking they deserve trust because "of course they are priests, and priests are inherently good people right?"

People trusted their lives to Boeing entering their airplanes, because "Hey, its Boeing! they care a lot about safety, and you know those Boeing board members, CEO and that top management, and top airplanes experts cares a lot about my safety, i dont even need to bother".

An yet, there was something rot. And for me, its in the design of the whole system. It eventually will lead to another disaster like this, and i bet a lot of us will just point to the direct culprits, as to not spoil the whole game where a lot of people are doing great..

About the security aspect of those, the web have a permission system, have sandboxes, and a lot of security already implemented, that could let to the user to see if the site he is visiting really need what they are asking for. In the end isn't how people install apps anyway? If thoses features are security threats, why apps can use them? But you wont get Apple to discuss in this level, because they know, they wont be able to stand their argumentation, if its showed to them that the same level of security of apps, can also be there in the Web. They wont, because its not in their interest to do so, and it has nothing to do with their users.

Truth to be told, i dont like the trend of the web to become a whole OS... its flawed by design to do this sort of thing. But i expect Apple to be the worst kind of judge to this sort of thing, because they know that theres a tendency to develop for the Web even for phones, because its cheap for companies to follow this path.

They will as long as they can, to make the web platform appear weak in comparison to their private offerings. Why not? I even expect them to do this, as long as they can get away with it. And as long as Apple has users that believe and trust them, they will get away with it. As you have said, you voted with your wallet, and a lot of people are willing, not aware, or dont care.. they just dont want to bother.

The same security they implement for apps, they can implement for the web, permissions systems, sandboxes and the like.

I've seen the list, and as long as there a permission system, and there's not a security flaw in the browser being exploited, i cant see a reason why not to allow this, except for the most obvious reason, and a lot of other practices from Apple that make obvious that they care more about being in control, otherwise not only its users security, but freedoms would being taking into account.

Less features, more secure, of course.. So they will always be able to get away with this kind of excuse.

But as Microsoft have learned, its not just about the users, but also making the developers happy. In the end is the collective of devs, and all the hours they expend in the platform, that will make the experience in that platform great for the end users.

I already do. I never touched anything Apple because i don't want to be owned by what i own.

Apple has no proper concept of digital property, as it thinks its entitled to do anything with the machines that i own, and of course, to make it less offensive, they will use the card that they are doing this always thinking of me like a loving mother.

Its not just Apple, but any company, giving the financial games they need to play, the goal is to maximize profits, so the well being of its user or consumer is secondary to that (You know that CEO XYZ that actually were thinking about the user first? gone.. the board kick him out of the company because the profits were bad in the last quarter). If they can get away with using BS, where people buy the reasons their are using to justify their actions, they will do it, because its good for their real goals.

If you want context, we can use the same on this thread. Where you can clearly see that is reasonable from the security perspective to bar some of them, but a lot of others, is to bar the web platform to compete with their app platform.

Its not just now, nor just this.. if you have been following closely, aware that they do this kind of thing, you see this pattern in a lot of other places.

With Apple is not even difficult to create a Dossie to point this out. But if you didnt notice this since the beginning of the iphone launch, i guess theres little i can do here.

Apple is very good at creating a emotional bound with its things.

I dont like this "evil vs. good" kind of narrative, and Apple is not evil or good per-se (this is a childish pointf of view). Its a tech company that will use their power and position to survive and thrive. But we also need to be aware that with novelties, new problems will arrive. And we need to be aware that sometimes with the sweet, there's also this sour taste that may become a big trouble in the following years, if we are not aware of it.

Cant you see which web apis, from the ones that were bared, that are not actually security threats, but would become a threat not to security but to their monopoly on the app platform in the devices they ship?

But wait, we can just use Chrome right? nope.. because Apple is forcing every other browser to use their own version of Webkit.

Even without the need to go through every move Apple is making, isn't that clear to you?

Its clear for me how Apple is and will be the new "IE 6" of tech, being a impediment not just to the evolution of the web, but all the tech moving forward, all because they need to maintain their feud where we end with less and less option of what we can do with the stuff that we own.

Its not very clear right now, because they are still moving the needle, but if you looked into te Microsoft of the nineties, you would also not believe it.. and yet in the 2000's it happened..

So you trust a third-party, a company, to define what is 'forbidden' for you to install, if they say they do this "to protect our customers"?

At least in democracy we can elect the people who define whats allowed or forbidden to us, and they can only do it, in the constraints of a constitution.

If we let companies get away with it, we are allowing them to create shadow states, a sort of new digital feudalism, where our digital overlords can control a big part of our lives. (Remember that we are going to a process of digitalization of our lives and experience, with IOT, AI, smart gadgets, to take into account how powerful a entity who can control all of this can be)

Today, its just Apple. But with people normalizing this kind of behavior, it will be more and more over time, til its too late for all of us.

By enforcing other browsers to use their implementation of Web platform, for instance, they knew they could control the Web from being a good contender to their exclusive application platform.

This kind of action alone, should be outlawed, because is pure uncompetitive behavior, not to say its hurting their customers freedom to choose whats best for them, and that actually have nothing to do with the privacy or safety of their users.

I've seen Apple get away with this bad monopolistic behavior through hypocrisy more and more.

Apple is denying people their real rights to install whatever they want in their own machines, forcing everything to go through their app store, where they have the last word of who can or cannot distribute software to the platforms they have created.

They know that if they use the common "we are thinking of your well being" their customers and fans will just believe they are a good-willing company with no other interests than their users safety and well being.

I don't know why the majority of the crowd here in HN, who use to be so harsh in pointing out this kind of behavior in companies like Google and Microsoft, have this blindness with everything that has to do with Apple.

It will worth nothing, if after have defeated this beast with GNU, Linux, the Web, open software revolution, etc.. we end up not protecting what we have achieved so far, because somehow one company trying to secure their profits and its position in the market, get away with behaviors that can ultimately destroy the culture of freedom, open-source software and ultimately, digital rights, which our legislators are not prepared to defend, really understanding the threats and the dire future they represent if we dont uncover the true intentions behind this BS.

> I’m still not super clear on how exactly the interior pages are structured and how the pointers to their child pages work. It’s time to sleep now, but perhaps that will happen another day!

Luckily. The SQLite source code is very well documented, and the 'btreeInt.h' has something about how the btree pointers are laid out

I happen to use the SQLite btree directly without the SQL layer (the VDBE) as a key-value store on top of a userspace filesystem (chrome cachefs) and even with this configuration it works wonderfully.

   ** The basic idea is that each page of the file contains N database
   ** entries and N+1 pointers to subpages.
   **
   **   ---------------------------------------------------   -------------
   **   |  Ptr(0) | Key(0) | Ptr(1) | Key(1) | ... | Key(N-1) | Ptr(N) |
   **   ----------------------------------------------------------------
   **
   ** All of the keys on the page that Ptr(0) points to have values less
   ** than Key(0).  All of the keys on page Ptr(1) and its subpages have
   ** values greater than Key(0) and less than Key(1).  All of the keys
   ** on Ptr(N) and its subpages have values greater than Key(N-1).  And
   ** so forth.
   **
   ** Finding a particular key requires reading O(log(M)) pages from the 
   ** disk where M is the number of entries in the tree.
   **
   ** In this implementation, a single file can hold one or more separate 
   ** BTrees.  Each BTree is identified by the index of its root page.  The
   ** key and data for any entry are combined to form the "payload".  A
   ** fixed amount of payload can be carried directly on the database
   ** page.  If the payload is larger than the preset amount then surplus
   ** bytes are stored on overflow pages.  The payload for an entry
   ** and the preceding pointer are combined to form a "Cell".  Each 
   ** page has a small header which contains the Ptr(N) pointer and other
   ** information such as the size of key and data.

I guess if she go straight to use the btree layer, bypassing the SQL layer, it will be easier to figure it out how the pages and pointers works and relate to each other.

After this, try it out with the SQL and see how it works.

---

Edit: just to add to this, this line here

> Each BTree is identified by the index of its root page

When you call 'sqliteBtreeCreateTable()' it will return to you the root page of the table it creates. In my experience it starts from 2, and my guess is that 1 is probably some master root page (i bet Julia will dig into this later).

This is how i've manage to have "keyspaces" here. i use the first created table as a meta-table, keeping the index of keyspace names with their root page number counterparts, and on opening the db, is just a matter of recovering this info and put it in a hash table (keyspace => page number) for later use.

For me there are six genius level directors: Tarkovsky, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Fellini, Chaplin and Kurosawa.

Amongst them, at least for me, Tarvosky's movies stays with you longer, and take a little time to digest. Movies are a language that can go straight to your subconscious and great cinematographers knew this.

Edit: Bergman might belong to that list too.

A "application browser" based on p2p technologies like bittorrent.

Its based on a (heavily modified) Chrome codebase, and the application sdk its in Swift and later also one for C++.

Apart from the application process use to remote render the UI, i have a "instance" process that run for the "apps" that works for handling the RPC messages (which is in gRPC).

The instance process, will expose the RPC interfaces as in a background service, where the RPC is designed by the app developer accordingly to its needs. (For instance it can even control when to launch the app window).

The RPC can be exposed to the outside or only internal, and im using the bittorrent DHT as an update service with a constant address that the app developer can share so others can install and update the apps.

The application is container like, where you can have key-value databases and files already there. So when you launch the instance process (aka. the service process) it can use this persistent layer as its state. Files, databases, assets, applications and the shared module to be loaded by the instance process will be all there already (as in zip, git or docker).

On top of that there will be the common window, the same as browsers, only that its shared by installed applications that was synced through torrent.

The cool thing is that giving theres a instance/daemon process for each app, they can run and handle RPC' s or network in the background and notify you about events, where you can optionally launch the app UI to see them.

(Eg. a messenger can receive messages via RPC, handle them in the instance process, and persist them without any UI, than let you know about it through the common window, where you can launch the new UI)

(Im also planning to let install in "standalone mode" where it will install and be exposed as a ordinary app in the native OS)

The SDK will have direct access to the web layer, and it will be easy to develop a web browser for instance. The rendering layer is the same used by chrome and blink.

The biggest motivations to this, was not only something i've always wanted to have, but also political, as in civil rigts, giving it will give us more control of our digital lives.

Imagine a search index like Google only being able to index your contents if you allow them, and only what you want. Or the capacity to have your personal list of friends and the social networks will have access to the list if you want and not own them like they do now.

Im about to launch it in about a month, but giving i was already in a bad financial shape (because i have dived all the way for this project), now with the pandemic, i dont know if i can launch something really stable and finale, be it for health or the world economy nosediving (i hope it wont affect me that much and i can do at least this).

Suffering has a lot to do with the current psychological state of our minds and how our surroundings affect our subjective perception.

You are thinking in terms of materialistic well-being which plays only a part of the whole well-being we can achieve.

The thing is that right now, even if you are in the "comfort zone" of the society it doesn't mean you will feel happy, fulfilled and in a balanced state of mind, because we are all filled with those destructive/unbalanced parts of our "cultural DNA" that together with our subjective destructive/unbalanced behavior will make the whole life experience not that much fulfilling the way we know it can be.

Particularly, i think our societies are "culturally sick" in a lot of areas and there's a lot of evidence of our downfall in those areas.

I can bet with you that i life in a remote tribe in Africa for instance would feel much more fulfilling and happy than a life in our society surrounded with material comfort and tech gadgets that make our lives more bearable.

I wonder if we are actually inclined to invent those stuff, because we feel miserable and we think that they will remedy this problem at least a little bit (guy invent a social network because he feel lonely).

Sure, the answer is not to go back and live in tribes, but i wonder what we have lost in the way. This civilization where at the same time, we are so proud of, but is also the reason we will feel more sadness than happiness, because in the end our problem is not in how materially safe we are, but how contempt we feel with our current situation.

Also lets not forget how about making more things, we ended up in a state where we need more things to feel happiness in our current cultural status quo.

Wanting things and not being able to have them, is part of our misery, and we are always creating new things so people will have the urge to desire them.

The paradox is that the material comfort gives you with one hand, and take with the other.

On the other hand, i think we are having better lives, because we are becoming more civilized as a whole and more educated and sophisticated. The social sphere and how we relate to others is a key part to our happiness.

How much tech and progress are helping us to achieve this? (and other possible side-effects that actually contribute to our mood balance)

Nice to see GN there. I wish more people knew about it.

For me is as powerful as Bazel, but without the need for a JVM and all the insanity that comes with it in a desktop/dev environment.

The syntax is great, powerful (insane customization) and together with Ninja theres nothing like it.

Its in C++ and even being as powerful as Bazel, its a light, standalone library that can handle a huge amount of source code, dependencies, tools and configurations.

I dont think this is a good idea, because it would need a lot of cash and man-hours to burn just to have a mediocre finished mockup at the end.

Microsoft had a better approach once, still expensive/buggy, but at least more doable, which was adapting the various iOS kits and calling back window primitives in the backend.

And yet, they abandoned because its also a bad move in the sense that nobody will care about your platform if they just need to target iOS.

You will be doomed and have to chase and implement everything they do in iOS, even if it doesnt make sense, and nobody will care about your platform.

You will also end with more bugs and application crashes, so your platform will be seing as something inferior to Apple (emphasizing the "nobody cares about you" effect)

By the way, Blackberry took that route by implementing Android and we can see how nobody cares about Blackberry as an app platform, because in the end you know they will have to follow Android.

For me the only way to get out of this trap, is to have a distinct platform, that for some reason, people want to develop for it.

I mean, the web did this trick once, Linux is also doing this. Its doable, but its a lot of hard work and community effort based a lot in other goals other than cash.

Another way to do this trick, is to create a consortium, and to create some base API, inspired by iOS, Android and the Web, and to have a lot of industry leaders onboard.

They would need to finance the prototype or the reference implementation on top of something like Linux.

It was tried with Tizen, but given it was more of a Samsumg project without community to drive it forward it failed. Also, i dont think it can compete with Android and iOS in platform quality.. so this probably was also one of the reasons they have failed.

I think this wheel of fortune will continue to roll, of course, from one hype to another. If someone want to be the `sucker` that believes that creating a LLVM on node.js is a good idea, no one will stop that person of course, but the trends of the current reality will at some point with an unavoidable nosedive.

Theres a difference between being a pioneer or an adventurer from being a fool who let their emotions turn technology akin to a religious cult.

Node.js, of course, can be a great tool, but only if you know when and where to use it (just like the demonized PHP, can be great and work like a charm, you should also know when to nevermind the boll..).

I dont know if is just a impression of mine, but people are getting more realistic and less romantic about this stuff, really understanding the limits and the use-cases, letting Python do what it does best but leaving some parts of the system to be managed in a AOT-compiled platform like C.

I think a lot of people got burn when they adhered to the "i want to use just this thing for everything" mantra, which is pure illusion. And as with all illusions we tend to nurture, it will lead to a crash with the status-quo of reality.

This was also what happened with Javascript. If you used it as the script language that it is meant to be, everything will be fine.

The problem, as i understand it, is trying to follow the misguided and over-hyped steps of Java.

I've worked with lot of different codebases in my life, but nothing ever like the one im dealing now, so thats why i had no idea how/if i could handle it.

Of course theres a erosion process if you dont touch that piece of code for more than 1 year, and it happens with a codebase of that side, but the 'partial data' is is still there, and with a couple of minutes dealing with it, you recover the information.

Its better when you shape the code yourself.. when you lay down the objects, methods, etc.. But this also works great with code i've happen to just use.

For the architecture and where things are.. be it files, methods, or where i could find something i want.. there were no lost.

I feel i need this partial recovery process mostly for codebases with 2 or more years, and the lost is minimal and can be recovered quickly.

Now being more specific over your question, for me it fells more like a map, smaller maps or trees connected to top-level maps... But yes, it feels a little like rooms as in a quadtree, where you need to specialize and ignore the other parts of the tree for a bit, much like the occlusion/visibility process that algorithm gives.

By the way is great that you have used this analogy, because this is also part of an observation i've had about laying down the information for a specific goal i have in mind.

I cant wait to experiment with this as soon as i finish this thing im working on, to see if its really cool as my intuition is telling me..

This is a great observation. Our tools would be designed according to our experience of the world.

But theres another catch, the tools we use change the shape of our mindset, leading us to design other tools that now map to this new perception of reality we have with the new mindset we built by using the former tools.

The hunter-gatherer example given in the first comment for instance, i bet with enough evolutionary steps, we will not be able to trace back to that mindset, because we have "patched" our own mindset so many times with new tools(over tools) that we will have very little "mindset identity" to share with our former "hunters-gatherers" primordial cousins.

As someone working on something that i think is somehow related to both Sandstorm and Solid(at least in some of the key goals), i've turned into a distinct path.

The most reasonable thing to do, of course is something like Sandstorm did. You get the technological 'status quo' of the web and mix it into a self-sustained, autonomical node.

I think that when you need to have this level of autonomy, the design meant for the web doesnt solve this very well.

This is the reason why i think both Sandstorm and Solid didnt 'hit the nail' yet, because we need a couple more "iterations" to solve this in a more satisfying way, and it goes deep down into the architectural choices.

Having said that i think Sandstorm, Solid, DAT and IPFS have the right mindset, and the sort of meditation that are pointing us to a future.

The real danger here, is that the web on its own will get trapped by the mobile walled gardens of both Apple and Android were you dont have any choice of distribution or reach without saying yes to a digital overlord that can terminate your channel within the digital realm over any bogus reason presented.

And unfortunatelly our legislators are still not prepared to deal with our current digital citizenship and to make the proper stand on our civil rights.

Without a proper solution, we are heading to a dystopic digital feudalism, and this is one of the reasons why im also working hard to launch something that will at least try to make this dark looking future not so unavoidable.

(And thats why i have a utter respect for projects like Sandstorm and Solid)

I repeat; The web stands no change and will become a "channel" within a bigger internet ecosystem, and a symptom of this is the web being embedded as a app platform for mobile and in the near future desktop apps.

The web has a great future as a application platform, but this free, utopian world where we have a more free and descentralized way to share information is losing a lot of ground, and if we dont keep some great values the web stand for in new tech incarnations, we stand no chance to keep all this.

I am a solo in a multi-million line of code codebase, and im always amazed about how many detail are still in my memory, even when i dont see those particular chunks of code for a year.

It amazes me mostly because this is not the sort of tasks our brains were specialized in doing, by estimating our development path in nature as mammals.

We discover and/or create new models and yet, we are able to adapt to them with some effort. Our new environments will probably affect the DNA that have the brain design, and we will pass all of this as a legacy to our kind.

The brain is such a masterpiece of nature.

Just to make it clear that im not blaming you, just that your post reminded me of the exact trap things like ChromeOS are.

They are platforms that put Google strategic plans first and the user in the background.

If they teach (and phones are teaching this) that is ok/normal to have everything in the cloud and not stored locally, we are doomed in the long term if we dont fight this trend.

You are a tech-savy person that can use Gallium instead, but you are a minority and the normal person who bought a Chromium OS wont understand why you got into the trouble in the first place.

If we forget and ditch the culture that came with GNU/Linux, personal computers will be akins to TV's and big tech corps will have absolute control over our lives.

Anyway, your post just reminded me about this trend. Not saying that you are directly involved in it, just to make it clear, but is a possible scary outcome if this thing get out of control.

This is why i think a OS like Chrome is designed exactly to be this sort of trap. A cloud computing trap, where we are perfectly ok with alienating our digital life/data to third-parties without understanding the depth of the problem we are getting into.

The ones who control our digital properties, can control the world (information is power, remember?). They might not, but they can, and also can aid third parties with shady intentions (see all the Facebook fiasco). By the way, we should have learned this lesson already.

Also, people often forget how groundbreaking was to have a compiler (GCC) directly embedded with the OS because you could mess with the source and compile it yourself. Its very liberating to have a platform where you can code and modify it.

So i think a future where the likes of Chrome OS took over the world, is pretty scary as we ended turning our powerful and liberating computers into a sort of "interactive TV".

As i understand it, they will try to make it very easy for us to buy into this platform utopia, the problem is, in my point of view, that in the long term this will lead to some sort of digital feudalism. Lets not forget we are "digitalizing" our lives day-by-day, til the day there are very few useful things we do in the physical world.

So in the future if Google for instance want to ban your account, this could have severe problems, as a side-effect of your digital ostracism. (access to capital, bank, employment, etc..)

At least in these benchmarks that phoronix run time-to-time, (so they at least can be compared to their older self) LLVM, in its Clang incarnation, is finally getting some parity in execution times with GCC

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc-clan...

Of course, benchmarks, yada yada, but at least is some sort of comparison axis where the improvement over the years is clear.

You are forgetting a important detail here. If BSP was already succesfully used in games by a pioneer, you would be right. The question is, to recognize an algorithm and apply it, with the proper changes to a novel field, being the first to recognize this, in my experience at least, is not for the average intelligence.

We all have trouble with tagging someone a "genius", because its not clear what this is, or if we are using this too much and in a wrong way (and i think we do)

But i also need to remind you about the early nineties, and how hard was to get into information, papers and research, compared to now. Also the limitation of the computers back then forcing people like Carmack to use very clever algorithms to thrive. We always need to take the context people were in to properly estimate this kind of things.

By the way, he did not just solved that, but a lot of other hard problems with different, successful outcomes.. So its not just because of the BSP he have this level of recognition.

If im not mistaken, what you want is basically this:

https://kythe.io/

Also lets not forget that LLDB can basically be that (at least for LLVM languages)

https://lldb.llvm.org/resources/architecture.html

"LLDB converts debug information into Clang types so that it can leverage the Clang compiler infrastructure. This allows LLDB to support the latest C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++ language features and runtimes in expressions without having to reimplement any of this functionality."

By the way, Visual Studio and Code with the C++ plugin is using the embedded version of SQL Server database.. so they probably have this sort of architecture, for index, debugging, etc..

So somewhere they might at least decribe how they (Microsoft) are doing this in Visual Studio architecture.

By looking into your code, it looks your Btree is a in memory implementation, correct?

I guess is a important information to put on the Readme, and also if you have any plans to create a persistent one, how you will approach this (if you will try to replicate the SQLite Btree here)

Also, i guess the most easy way to make a pesistent btree happen, is to get that one from that neat key-value store in Go that mimic the LMDB Btree (I dont recall the name right now).

The algo behind the LMDB kind dont need to use journal files, so will be reliable AND fast (is it inspired by Rodeh's Btrees ?). I just dont know about the paging aspect, if its any good as the one SQLite uses.

I think we also choose our favorite programming languages based on our psychology, not only the technical features.

The ones who like C and C++ are like Toretto from the Fast and Furious franchise choosing a classic muscle car for a race. They are super fast, give you much more options, but because of that, they are not the safest.

A muscle car requires more skill to drive and win than a modern fast-shiny-and-safe car. But because you know they are more dangerous to drive, is likely that you will try to improve your skills to make it less likely to have an accident with it.

Thats one of the reasons why im still skeptic to jump into the Rust bandwagon, once you turn into a good muscle car driver, its hard to choose for safer but more limiting options, but you totally get it why someone without experience in fasters cars would choose for the safer version.

From my subjective perspective, Zig, of all the languages, is what feels most the modern successor of C.

I think, it even does a better job than C++ which share some of the C syntax.

The problem i guess is complexity and productivity. Zig here is a hit while Rust is a miss as much as C++.

The question Zig was trying to answer is: Can we have a simple, free and powerful language as C but with a more modern approch?

While Rust in its cruzade to be seen as a C++ competitor were not aiming at simplicity and user ergonomics.

So my feeling is, Zig is much more compeling as a C substitute than any other language out there, and probably thats the reason why your friend like it more than others.

Change the file from "Popularity" to "Recently added" will probably do the trick.

Not everything like a torrent indexing service, but also theres a lot of stuff, not only the popular titles.

Im doing "this" using the chrome codebase and using DHT and torrents for content distribution.

The chrome codebase mostly help me for the multi-process IPC communication and reusing the UI compositor for UI and Web.

I wont say much more, because i want to keep some idea of novelty for when i launch this here on HN.

For me is what a mix of what a Browser + App platform should be, with the idea of people owning their data, devs distributing without centralized control, and without forcing you to use some hardware or specific OS.

The problem with your line of reasoning, is that you are thinking in technological progress only through individual achievement.

This is what technological iterations, through generations of human beings, give us all. Humans achieve super-human level of technological achievements because we iterate over what others have left for us.

Knowledge is like a stair, made from the hard work of many great human beings, and even for hard problems, with enough ammount of iterations, and with consecutive progress (without social deterioration) we can achieve anything.

Somebody will fill that "last" step in the stair that will make a paradigm shift to all of us..

There are two distinct paths for what the browser/web should become.. more appish like or more like a collection interactive documents. In the end they tried to mix both, but the appish view is eating whats left of the open world of data the web was designed to be.

This is the path Google decided it should go.. They have Android if the strong 'app list' contender wins over web and on the other end they can index the web with AI and Chrome whats left to be indexable (making it hard for contenders) and also bloating the browser (with a huge set of API's) making it hard for other players to try other visions for the web that require and can be done with a simple engine.

I get it that it had to compete somehow with the app store. But for me, the better option would be to split into two products, each one following one path, but with browsers not following the path that would eventually kill them.

I just see a 'dead end' with the web mostly being a framework to be embedded for rich apps(its also a great tech for this end).

Thats why im trying something new here.. a different sort of a "browser", but i dont think it can be called that way in the end.

I've started a couple of years ago, and im almost in the finish line now..

I hope that i can deliver a platform where information can flow free without leading to centralization and digital monopolies that can choke all the rest, but i cannot know if it will really deliver that, because its not just about the tech..

I miss the days Javascript were only considered a script language for HTML/CSS and we use it for silly things like hover on buttons or simple animations.

The whole thing got completely out of control and we lost the transparency of the web. We could open the source, see how it was made and learn some new tricks. The indexers like search engines could index and understand the content only by reading the data and metadata of a site.

Now is such a black box, that if you need to index for instance, you will need to use a browser to render the whole page before you or any automated process can understand it. Search engines now need to have ML based image and language recognition just to understand the contents of a site (this is nuts). The free trade of information is much more expensive and the web is turning into a black box day-by-day..

The whole "appization" of the web for which the biggest leader is Google, is leading to the fall of a medium of information that have so much potential.

Sorry for the rant, this is not the best place, but i cant see any move that can change the course of this medium serving mostly the big guys, leading to more concentration of power and resources.

Thats why i've think the only answer that can turn the table, need to start fresh, because the game the web is in, is already rigged, and i think that it has a lot to do with the design, not just the politics, strategy and the big money.

(dãhh.. sorry for 'SOUP' instead of SOAP)