That’s supposed to keep you from being monitored by bad actors over public Wi-Fi, iirc.

Ok… I’ve never seen on a log on a plate before.

“Oh yes sure please make my comfort food more difficult to eat thanks”

I’m right there with you. Serving shrimp tail-on might as well be serving something on a log instead of a plate.

I don’t doubt that someone might be thinking that, but I do doubt that any lawyer thinks it’s necessary. As far as I know nobody has ever brought suit against a TV show for a suicide case.

But I’m not an attorney.

iirc, that’s the protocol that lets a connected device turn a display on via HDMI.

The profile picture says “We’re Fake News” on it. It’s almost certainly a parody account.

The profile picture says “We’re Fake News” on it.

Yes, I think you’re correct, but using browsers to coerce the web back into static documents will result in companies creating their own apps so that they can continue to deliver experiences. And the past 10+ years has shown that users will absolutely follow them.

Dang, that comic will be ten years old next week.

It’s not a whatabout, but since you have your mind made up, by all means don’t let me get in your way with facts.

No, in theory, they work like a well-funded savings account: you put in a predictable amount of money every month, and they store it for you until you need to withdraw it; with an added benefit that they would allow you to withdraw more than you have (internally using other people’s money to cover the difference) under the assumption that any shortfalls that result will all come out in the wash eventually; some people overpay, some people underpay, and you invest what you have in low-risk investments in the meantime. All insurance companies work like that in theory, or at least that’s what they tell regulators. But in reality, they don’t pay out nearly enough to provide the consistency people need.

Yeah, I get it, but like…the same could be said for emails in a world where phishing exists.

With stuff like Tesla and Twitter, it can keep away the weird nerds who search those terms in hopes of white-knight-sealioning a conversation into oblivion. I think it just became part of the lexicon.

Indeed. They have a product. They are withholding it from us.

I’ve been working in full stack for long enough to know that history manipulation is as much a part of the modern web as images and email. I’m not trying to be flippant, that’s just the state of the modern web. Single-page apps are here, and that’s a good thing. They’re being used badly, and that’s endemic to all features. So no, history manipulation is not “bad functionality,” though I admit it’s not fully baked in its current implementation.

Yeah, I get it. But I fear that ship has sailed long ago.

I’d prefer not to let the bad actors dictate browser design.

“Let’s get rid of images since companies can use images to spoof browserchrome elements.”

“Let’s get rid of text since scammers can pretend to be sending messages from the computer’s operating system.”

“Let’s get rid of email since phishing exists.”

Nah. We can do some stuff (like the aforementioned forked history) to ameliorate the problem, and if it’s well-known enough, companies won’t find it necessary anymore. Heck, browsers like Firefox would probably even let you select Canonical Back as the default Back Button behavior, and then you can have the web the way you want it (like people who disable Javascript).

That would absolutely make everything worse, no question; the web should be more integrated, not less. We shouldn’t incentivize even more companies to silo off their content into apps.

Looks to me like that’s what this screenshot is of.

I don’t know about “easily.” replaceState() is actually intended to make single-page apps easier to use, by allowing you to use your back button as expected even when you’re staying on the same URL the entire time.

Likewise, single-page apps are intended to be faster and more efficient than downloading a new static page that’s 99.9% identical to the old one every time you change something.

Fixing this bad experience would eliminate the legitimate uses of replaceState().

Now, what they could do is track your browser history “canonically” and fork it off whenever Javascript alters its state, and then allow you to use a keyboard shortcut (Alt + Back, perhaps?) to go to the “canonical” previous item in history instead of to the “forked” previous item.