• 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    169
    ·
    1 year ago

    Web 2.0 or: “Instead of loading all code from the same URL the website now needs a dozen of different scripts from a dozen of different URLs, gives a shit about CSP and only shows a blank page when JS and/or cookies are disabled.”

    • MyFairJulia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      138
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Don’t worry, texteditor.com is also available as an app on Windows, macOS and Linux thanks to Electron.

      It only needs 300 megabytes and you can style it with CSS.

          • scarilog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Man it’s not lightweight, but damn, if CSS and JS isn’t a really easy way to build cross platform UIs than other options like Qt. There’s a reason why electron is so popular.

            • Terrasque@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It doesn’t have to be.

              One of my experiments, an overlay for a game using camera position API to draw a 3d scene over the game, rendering things as if they were in the game (with some limitations) uses electron and three.js

              It’s pretty fast, uses about 100-150mb ram, and works pretty well. A similar overlay using same approach but written in C and opengl take ~200+ mb and a c# one 150-250 mb. The c# one has more features overall so it’s not a complete comparison, but then my overlay can do things the other can’t too.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So was all this bloat inevitable as hardware got better, or is there a way to go back? It feels like a ripoff that our computers are 1000x better but they’re maybe 10x faster once all the shitty software is taken into consideration.

        • ZILtoid1991@kbin.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have a few suggestions:

          1. Better education. Don’t scare people who’re learning programming away from the lower-level stuff, especially as people are even getting scared to use type declarations, not just the pointers (of which I was fearmongered with in college, as they told me Java is the future).
          2. Better portable APIs. Thanks to WebAssembly, one could easily have both something portable in a web browser and as a native desktop app, except instead we get browsers running said applications. I had some thinking about such a project, but then I remembered my iota project (a D-native replacement of SDL/SFML/GLFW, but without bloat by including standard library features), and then stopped thinking about it immediately, since a much smaller project already causes me too much headache. (Someone has a handy guide on win32 API? I have issues on getting certain messages produced, like input language change, and I don’t know if I glimpsed over some functions that enable them and just weren’t included in the documentation of the input language change event codes.)
          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You know, I haven’t worked on a super big project, but I feel like every time I’ve gotten a type error in a static language it’s pointed to something wrong with my underlying reasoning.

          • ZILtoid1991@kbin.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            In the short run, yes. In the long run, this just makes a bunch of coders that are now afraid of type declarations, because they were scared away from it with the “what if you have to choose?” tagline, thus making turning back to the proper way of doing things harder.

            • scubbo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Can you talk more about this? I’ve never heard that tagline and can’t figure out what it’s supposed to mean.

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Just from context, I’m guessing it means that you might type things one way and then need to use them another way later, and dynamically typed languages are sold as not having that problem.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was thinking about this a bit. Does that mean you can develop a piece of software much more cheaply now? I have a fear that companies writing software get a 10% discount from writing bloat, while clients wind up using 10,000% the resources and are just so used to it they don’t complain.

        • renlok@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not really inevitable, it’s just a consequence that develops can get away with being lazy because the hardware can cope with it.

      • AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of course! And it definitely does not try to pry all info about the user that it can and definitely the company behind would not use that in any way.

      • ivanafterall@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I like that you can just install it straight from the Windows Store, no need to even bother opening Edge to download it.

  • mawkler@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure which is worse. I mean most desktop programs are just glorified web browsers anyway (i.e Electron)

    • grue@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      What do you mean, “most?” Electron apps are the vast minority of desktop apps.

    • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But you can use more shortcuts!

      I hate editors in browser. With Chrome at least --kiosk turns them in proper apps. In Firefox it’s impossible to turn off browser shortcuts and use them to work.

      What barbarian do they think I am, using a mouse to do stuff on my editor. I need long complex absurd keyboard shortcuts to function

    • MyFairJulia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Kind of. First you have to buy a Texteditor token and then the license says you’re permitted to open the IPFS link in order to use Texteditor.

  • aluminium@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bruh, I actually prefer the “Web 2.0” solution. That way the god damn editor can’t just start accessing all the shit on my drive.

    • TheOldRazzleDazzle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lol but included in the source for www.texteditor.com is analytics, beacons, etc from Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, Cloudfare, and a bajillion different ad networks that send the content of your text file to AI models.

    • grue@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My text editor doesn’t access shit on my drive (unless I ask it to) because it’s Free Software and my Linux distro package maintainers audit it to make sure it doesn’t contain malware like that.

      You’re praising a pathological solution to a problem that shouldn’t exist to begin with.

      • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Forever audits of free software are unsustainable in my opinion.

        To truly audit every piece of software, you need an independent party to spend time (often more than the development) to look through the code, that person needs to be equally or more experienced than the developers of the software, and have specific knowledge for vulnerabilities and malicious techniques.

        They then need to audit and monitor all of the channels of distribution for that software, including various websites and repositories. This needs to be done constantly.

        You effectively need to double or more the total level of effort for all software.

        Yes, high profile software (sometimes) gets audited regularly, but the assumption that anything you grab from your package manager has been truly audited leads to a false sense of security, additionally the assumption that an audit being performed means there are no issues with the code also leads to problems.

        The reality is that most open source software doesn’t get audited because it is too much work.

  • XYZinferno@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just stick a single line of HTML in the address bar and use that as a text editor. It’s just a giant test field taking up the page with a dark background and white text.

    Useful if I just want to write text without any need to format it.

    • LoafyLemon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      Given that JavaScript stands as one of the most prevalent vectors for infections, I am inclined to disagree.