WASM just means these apps will be faster, with closer-to-native performance.
WebAss is a technical solution to an economic problem: lackluster SW sales and adblocking
WASM, if it allows to run high level languages like c#/vb/python/java, will enable a huge developer base to start writing truly cross platform, productive apps with a single code base. So it would be a solution to a fundamental technical problem: the fragmentation and incompatibility of proprietary platforms.
As a side, it would have another benefit (which would make it even less palatable to Apple but should motivate Microsoft to develop a CLR for WASM): as the apps would be cross platform, it would lower the barrier to entry for alternative mobile platforms. If the same app compiled to WASM runs on every platform, a Windows mobile OS (or any other challenger) would immediately have access to the same apps that are available for iOS or Android.
I'm not against portable bytecodes (though I find it pointless, and proven to have failed in the past); it's the mating to the Web that I'm concerned with, and the infinite potential for tracking and other privacy invasion.
To bring portability in a meaningful way, Apple and Google have to agree on a common API for touch, phoning, GPS, USB, power management, proximity, NFC, UI. Not going to happen.
So why bring yet another avenue for tracking and malware to browsers? To top it, lets base it on C and SIMD primitives. Lets ditch HTML and draw to a canvas all the time, accesibility, hyperlinking, etc. be damned. Because we don't like JavaScript.
It's an open source project that compiles Java to all OS's including iOS, Windows (UWP), Android (obviously) as well as JavaScript (with threads etc.)
If you embrace only the good / modern parts of ES6/ES7, you can really write elegant, modern, functional-style code. Not sure there is much left to complain about, other than the lack of built-in type system, which many others (but certainly not me) argue is a good thing.