"Github no longer supports this web browser."
Gitlab loops you on a "checking your browser" web page.
Good job, W3C.
Welcome back to days of Internet Explorer, but there are three Internet Explorers: the one Google makes, the one Google feeds, and the one Google stole which was in turn stolen from KDE.
If you don't use one of these, whether your browser can support standards is of no substance.
Web is like those public toilets which you look at then go, "I'd rather go into the woods.".
At least, back in the day, the divide between IE and others was a functional divide: IE had one set of functions, sometimes useful, and the others didn't/couldn't.
Now, it's basically having the wrong user agent string or fingerprint. There's no big difference between Firefox 57, Chrome from 2 years ago, or Safari, Edge, or whatever, apart from version numbers, with regards to rendering standards compliant web pages.
A great deal of this mess comes from the drive to use the Web browser as a "platform" for applications ― in effect, an operating system, rather than a document viewer. (I'm sure I've said this before.) The most positive thing I can say about this is that it strikes me as a truly boneheaded approach to the problem of cross-platform compatibility!
@publius The saddest part of it in my case is that I was on the bandwagon for a long time, after when this shitshow started early 2010s. In hindsight, there were a lot of clues, and more should've seen that it wouldn't end with a couple fancy "semantic tags" and some CSS QoL.
More globally sad part is, all this stuff is unused. Notifications? Only for spam. Websockets? Mostly for spyware. <canvas? Spyware. CSS3? Who doesn't use Sass/Less/...? HTML5? Everything's in JSX now.
@be When cars became a commodity they started to shape our cities. Pedestrians were defenseless meatballs so they had to comply. Soon enough we started building entire cities around cars, esp. in North America, such that not having one meant you couldn't fetch your basic needs even. A more detailed history of this is available in videos of City Beautiful and Not Just Bikes on YouTube, tho surely there would be books that go way more in depth. In any case, now we're
@be left with cities that are dependent on this tech that's inevitably a waste and a huge pollutant, whether it be petrol, or even electric, given a car that uses up so much material and space to carry just one person, even if it was a perpetual motion machine, would be a waste, if of nothing else time as it'd inevitably lead to traffic jams where suburbia meets the urban.
Why di that happen? It happened because it was profitable. Car people sold cars, gas people
@be sold gas, builders built inefficient houses, etc. So it kept on happening, despite being a terrible way of urban design and housing. Now we're in huge crisis part due to our motorised lives, and the solution is public and/or green transport.
In a similar vein, in the 2000s, especially 2010s, the web became the core tech that everything happened around, because there was money to be made. Tech entreprise commodified our data and our gaze. Soon the tech that's
@be useful to them became the thing we desing the entire internet around, where we're stuck with inefficient tech stacks, our social lives hostage to silos, and the set up is optimised to maximise profits, with no care whatsoever to whether people affected by these trends are okay. People, especially those that aren't affluent able bodied people of the "correct" social background, are a second thought, just like they were in car centric cities. They want to vilify
@be ad blockers and piracy just like they did with "jaywalkers" and homelessnes. Criminalise away the undesirables.
Tech wise, what we have is highly inefficient, just like cars and car-topia, but it's desirable, because just like public transport is, the solution to terribleness of web is boring, it already exists, is not luxurious, and ultimately does not generate obscene amounts of money out of thin air, unlike ad tech or venture capital. So we continue to
@be accumulate profitable inefficiencies, despite their harm to ecosystems they're found within, whether literal or metaphorical.
So that's a fairly uncooked one, as I didn't really thing it that long through, and of course no analogy is perfect, but both cases are examples of how capital and social good is at odds and conflict ensues that helps no one and nothing, and the solution is not through innovation or entreprise but community action.
@cadadr I hate web crap as much as the next guy (probably a little more since I grew up in the rural US where bad internet is all you can get and most webdevs really don't think about what using their app in a situation like that does.)
But again, some of this sounds pretty silly on mastodon: a tool using the ActivityPub web standard that allows your social media to be silo free. Most of the web is also a far better alternative to the platforms Google and Apple are pushing on everyone.
@swiley @cadadr @clacke @publius I don't think anyone is saying that all web tech is bad or that it has no good uses. But when I see shit like this... wtf?!
@robbystk @cadadr @clacke @publius @swiley I spent two weeks with a trauma surgery service in a hospital in one of the most violent areas of the US. About half of the injured people that came into the emergency department were hurt in motor vehicle collisions. Yet what does public discourse talk about?
@be We can turn a blind eye to _a lot_ when not doing that would bring about a huge disaster like for example the possibility of some minor and unlikely inconvenience.
Thing is tho, I've never been to US but from what I've learned online in a lot of US zoning has been expressly anti-public-transport. We've some similarly planned areas in Istanbul and it's hard to make public transport work in such places even with a strong, pre-existing network.
@publius As someone who used them a lot esp. during my undergrad in Istanbul, my observation is they have their upsides and downsides. They have to mix in with the all the traffic at least sometimes which can slow them down a lot. But they are way smoother to ride compared to buses, and of course greener and way more silent. And from my experience in Eskişehir, they are a great fit for small <1mln cities, where a metro network would be an overkill.
Streetcars are also exceedingly useful for peripheral circulation in large metropolitan areas. Basically, an underground is most suitable for the most heavily built-up areas, but you can then carry a lot of traffic on streetcar lines which serve medium density areas around or on the fringes of the subway area. Munich & Toronto both do this effectively (although more lines are desperately needed in both cities).
Helsinki is another place which co-ordinates streetcars with subways. Also the northernmost subway in the world, which I have ridden ― by apparently about 50 km compared to that of Petrograd! Not, however, the most northerly electric street railway, which is elsewhere in Finland, & which I have not ridden.
basically, the cost of a subway and the optimal ridership is so high that in many cases, street-level transit like light rail/trams/streetcars is better.
wrt toronto, our city is on a grid layout and the main subway lines are north-south and east-west, so it is easy for streetcar and bus routes to feed into the subway lines.
"I appreciate SDF but it's a general-purpose server and the name doesn't make it obvious that it's about art." - Eugen Rochko