AkshitGarg

You can still use a PAT (personal access token) to authenticate via HTTPS. Instead of sending username and password, you send username and the PAT token for authentication

WebAssembly in the browser currently can't manipulate the DOM directly. Neither can it make HTTP requests. You need to use a JS bridge to do that. That has some overhead. So I don't think webassembly will replace JavaScript anytime soon. It might be reserved for high-performance compute, or maybe canvas based rendering for the time being.

> we now have a generation of programmers who think a GET request only returns JSON, and were never taught it can also return HTML

Can't relate more to this. I sometimes find it difficult to accept that some of my peers in the college thought that fetch is the only way to submit a form. Those were the same people who fetched json to render a static blog post

Along with this, you could maybe also enforce google safe search or similar for search engines? As far as I know, Google allows such a thing

Genuinely curious, how does a company manage their domains after they shut down their services to prevent this kind of stuff

There is also lfe [1] which is a lisp for the BEAM VM

[1] https://lfe.io/

> I don’t understand what is difficult with WebRTC videos.

It is difficult to scale a pure p2p model to multiple participants. Each participant would need to create multiple WebRTC streams, one for each participant. So if some call has 10 participants, each one of them would need to broadcast 9 streams and receive 9 streams with the assumption that each one of them have their microphone and cameras turned on. This would consume a lot of CPU and bandwidth. There are alternate models where you send your stream to a central server, and that server distributes the stream to other participants. This reduces the CPU and bandwidth required per participant, but requires a central server. This looks like the model google follows. So I don't think keeping such a service unauthenticated would be a good idea.

Anbox (https://anbox.io/) does seem to do this. I couldn't try this because I couldn't get it to run on my machine a few years back

That still doesn't hide the IP you are connecting to unless you are on a VPN. They still know that if you are connecting to 209.216.230.240, it _could_ be hacker news. With the widespread use of CDNs, and hosting of multiple services on a single IP, this won't be 100% accurate, but the ISP can still connect the dots I guess

Well they thought that using a CDN over a CDN would be a good idea

No offense but I personally feel the author is more like against Red Hat than Wayland

The backups are unencrypted as highlighted in the UI (if I recall correctly). They re-generate the keys when you switch phones / re-install / clear data. That's when you get to see the "XYZ's security code changed" service message

They are using https://draftable.com/compare

There are a lot of quality resources, be free or paid. Falling for this utter scam is beyond my mind