Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Most people do need those things, because assuming there's no civilisation spanning project to literally rewrite 90% of the web, without them their sites would break

Sites most people visit do not require backwards compatiblity. And aside from like Google Docs, I doubt most folk are doing anything with WASM (outside plugins).

Look, in a world where Google subsidises browser development, this isn't an issue. We don't need to compromise. But if that funding stream disappears, you do have to compromise. And I'd argue a simple browser doing away with some of the more-complicated stuff would be (a) maintainable and (b) popular enough to pay itself back.




Maintainable, maybe. Popular, no. A browser where a good chunk of the web doesn't work is a browser that almost no-one will use.


Unless you can make it so the only part that doesn't work is the bad part. A browser where ads don't work and tracking doesn't work but everything else works is a good browser.


> browser where a good chunk of the web doesn't work is a browser that almost no-one will use

I think it could—it’s sort of the case on mobile—but it’s not a view I hold with the strongest conviction.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: