[Discuss] Hoggish software was: Linux Kernel Building

[invalid at pizzashack.org (Derek Martin)]

On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 06:14:43AM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 3:36?PM Rich Pieri <richard.pieri at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd mentioned that browsers are effectively operating systems unto
> > themselves these days. That's not hyperbole. [...]
> 
> I think there are at least three categories to consider: rendering the
> page, running any scripting language components (which might never
> stop), and (as you suggest) browser add ons.
>
> [...]
>
> I'm not sure it would be appropriate to blame a word processor for
> the piggy nature of a document that someone sent me any more than it
> is to blame a web browser for what a web site sent.  I suppose you
> could blame the browser for having the features that a web site/page
> can exploit poorly.   I don't know if browser add-ons (extensions?)
> have a good analogy in an office suite, but it could be argued that
> it is the users fault for installing a bad extension.

I'm kind of mixed on this take.  I mostly agree in principle with what
you've said, but in practice, I think it's a bit oversimplified.  The
average user knows so little about web/browswer technology that
blaming them for, for example,  installing some hideous, insidious
extension, when all they really know is along the lines of, "I need
this extension to make this thing I want/need to work at all," isn't
very charitable.

When it comes to stuff (i.e. scripts) running in the browser, there's
plenty of blame to go around.  I'd agree that page designers bear the
largest portion, but the browser vendors are arguably too permissive,
and what browser hasn't had memory leak problems in recent memory?

The problem with browsers is kind of similar to my problem with Perl:
A coworker once told me something I already knew about Perl--if you
pay attention, you can write very readable, maintainable code in Perl.
That's absolutely true. The trouble, though, is that many people
writing Perl code aren't that meticulous, or experienced or skilled
enough to exercise good judgement about such things. Also if you
provide (mis)features in your language/browser/etc., invariably at
least some people will (mis)use them, however ill-advised it may be,
especially if those features are touted or perceived as being
cool--people love cool.

At the end of the day, it's all software, and I know two things that
apply to all non-trivial software:

1. Designing complex systems without tradeoffs is usually impossible,
   and designing them without flaws is at best extremely difficult.
2. All non-trivial software systems have implementation bugs.

So mainly my take is, it's hard to see how the current situation was
ever anything but inevitable...

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.