Hacker News Reader

Comment by akamaka | Hacker News Reader

Not supported on most browsers, as opposed to what the headline suggests: http://caniuse.com/#feat=same-site-cookie-attribute

View on HN

Even worse, if a browser doesn't support it I guess it will default to ignoring the policy!

I think this is a smart enough idea that I think most of the browsers will implement this soon, and then since most of the browsers that matter now are evergreen, most people will have it eventually.

depends what he means by "most". depending what source you look at, chrome has the majority market share so even if it's the only one to implement it, it still counts as "most".

Most browsers != the most frequently used browser in the context of an audience that develops software for a living.

most : the majority of, nearly all of.

"most browsers" would become "the majority of browsers". If there were 5 browsers, "the majority of 5 browsers" would be "3 browsers or more". It doesn't make any difference which ones are most used, the sentence (apparently now changed or removed) wasn't "most of the requests will be protected", or even "most users will be protected"

At the same time, though, you can pretty easily make the argument that the majority of browsers is Chrome. After all, if there were five internet browsers and four of them had one user each, it would be a bit silly to say "Well, most browsers haven't implemented this feature".

But if "the majority of browsers" means "Chrome" (following your reasoning) it would be more than a little silly to ever use that comparatively convoluted phrase. You would just say "Chrome".

This is the same "type vs instance" issue that plagues discussions about copyright. In the sense of how effective something is at preventing errors, "most browsers" seems to map most reasonably to "most browser instances", rather than "most types of browser software".

It's this kind of mentality that led to 'This site works best in Internet Explorer'.

Do you mean innovation and driving forward the web? How else do things improve?

The problem is that the sites that had that moniker tended to be old, badly written and in ignorance of the actual web standard. Firefox's tracker suggests that standardization work on the feature is ongoing. So if you implement it now, you're going to be stuck with a Chrome-only version that may or may not end up being the standard. (Usually it does, because Chrome marketshare beats objections over not well thought out features in it, aka the "IE effect")

Chrome, aka the IE of 2017!

In the US, sure: https://clicky.com/marketshare/us/web-browsers/

In Germany, nope: https://clicky.com/marketshare/de/web-browsers/

Germans sure love their Firefox. Now, that may not matter for you depending on what market you're targeting but not everyone is as lucky.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com