no_way

I agree somewhat, but what about poorer regions of the world like parts of Africa or Asia, what is the solution for them? Most of the people there would not or could not pay for every website to use. It would be unfortunate if the web is inaccessible for most people.

Maximising profits and being sustainable are 2 different things. Museums do not need to make money because they are funded externally. It is like saying artists do not need to make money. You seem to go to the very extremes.

Web needs to make money. Giving tools to advertisers while making sure user privacy is preserved is better than free reign of tracking we have before, no?

I myself do not like ads or tracking, but we need to be realistic and there needs a way to make web sustainable.

How to do that and making sure that monopolies like Google are in check is a valid concern though, but in these conversations is the only point I hear. Ironically Google does not even need these apis because it already has so much data on users, it is primarily for smaller companies.

Every one of my phones before was rooted with custom os flashed, but now I feel exactly the same a as you, it's just not worth it. Kinda sad how stuff is being more and mored locked down.

> The "web standard" part is meaningless considering that most production websites will bundle the files together as part of their build/optimization process for size and loading speed, leaving only a giant chunk(s) that resembles nothing like the original ES modules.

I mean code itself will be non readable, but in modern build ouput chunks are using regular esm modules, at least for Vite, Rollup, Parcel and so on. Webpack might be different story, but still.

From my experience, if things work in Chrome, they will likely work with Firefox too, excluding very new apis, it isn't much of maitenance burden. With Safari every project I work o I discover new Safari quirk or bug. If you can make it work in Safari you can make it Firefox too.

WhatsApp always comes up in comparison to Twitter, but they are fundamentally different. WhatsApp is mostly one on one interaction, while Twitter potentially allows every user to interact with every other user, it's unbelievably more complex to do that at scale compared to WhatsApp, not even talking about all the extra features Twitter has. Search probably being best example of complexity differences.

Chat apps are mostly one on one interaction, it is much harder run an open platform where every user can potentially interact with every other user, not even talking about search and how complex it gets. If Twitter is bloated or not is a valid discussion, but comparison it to WhatsApp is not.

You clearly never looked into how much tracking mobile apps have. There are a lot of tracking SDKs which literally track every click. At least on the web you can block things where mobile is black box.

I like JSX too, it allows multiple composable components in the same file, but Sveltekit support for typescript has been amazing so far, the whole framework has been written with typescript in mind and it shows.