What we also forget is that Chromium (+ HTML, Javascript, SVG, ect) is starting to be in a market dominance position where Windows was in past decades: We're at the mercy of a market winner who improves it at their pace.
At times, it appears that web standards have evolved from their open nature to primarily supporting Google's agenda. If Google wants a certain product to run the browser, they will bend the standards to do that.
I bet as soon as a Google product needs this feature, the bug will be fixed.
But Chromium is open source. Opera and Microsoft, among others, contribute frequently. Igalia is a consulting firm that takes commissions for Chromium browser work. So the correct statement would be that anyone with enough time and/or money could make this work, not just Google.
This is called "the paranoid style", political scientists talk about it as a unique feature of American politics.
It's hard to interact with because falsifying it requires invoking it yourself.
ex. here, we'd have to say "I bet you'd be right here complaining if it was fixed that Google was allowing arbitrary remote loads in not provably secure context." It requires a whole lot of supposition and negativity.
Oh, probably. That's a pretty standard pattern; I know of a feature that was lacking from Apple's window manager until they found a need for QuickTime to use it and added it in.
Comments
What we also forget is that Chromium (+ HTML, Javascript, SVG, ect) is starting to be in a market dominance position where Windows was in past decades: We're at the mercy of a market winner who improves it at their pace.
At times, it appears that web standards have evolved from their open nature to primarily supporting Google's agenda. If Google wants a certain product to run the browser, they will bend the standards to do that.
I bet as soon as a Google product needs this feature, the bug will be fixed.
But Chromium is open source. Opera and Microsoft, among others, contribute frequently. Igalia is a consulting firm that takes commissions for Chromium browser work. So the correct statement would be that anyone with enough time and/or money could make this work, not just Google.
This is called "the paranoid style", political scientists talk about it as a unique feature of American politics.
It's hard to interact with because falsifying it requires invoking it yourself.
ex. here, we'd have to say "I bet you'd be right here complaining if it was fixed that Google was allowing arbitrary remote loads in not provably secure context." It requires a whole lot of supposition and negativity.
Oh, probably. That's a pretty standard pattern; I know of a feature that was lacking from Apple's window manager until they found a need for QuickTime to use it and added it in.