So apparently this is a thing that exists now. I don't think I can trust Google (or any web-browser vendor for that matter) with my file system, and if Mozilla implements this, I really hope there...
So apparently this is a thing that exists now. I don't think I can trust Google (or any web-browser vendor for that matter) with my file system, and if Mozilla implements this, I really hope there will be a flag to disable it. The further we go, the more I wish for OSes to port OpenBSD's unveil and friends. Am I too paranoid?
Definitely. Sensitive information like location, microphones, etc. already require security prompts. This is actually a lot better than the desktop approach where running an exe grants full access...
Definitely. Sensitive information like location, microphones, etc. already require security prompts.
This is actually a lot better than the desktop approach where running an exe grants full access to your hardware.
This is solving an issue with an old paradigm where the new paradigm has already annihilated this space. There is no need for a native file system API because the paradigm no longer requires and...
This is solving an issue with an old paradigm where the new paradigm has already annihilated this space. There is no need for a native file system API because the paradigm no longer requires and in extreme cases even recognises the existence of a 'local' anything.
If you're online to use a web app then you have access to cloud storage. And that is the API that web services require. Link in to Dropbox, OneDrive, iCloud, etc - that is their storage and retrieval system, the local drive has no need for their input and they have no business touching anything on it at all.
I'm not sure I agree. Cloud storage providers have different limitations than local disk. I have a few GBs of Dropbox space left, but hundreds of GBs of local space. Existing platforms like iOS or...
There is no need for a native file system API because the paradigm no longer requires and in extreme cases even recognises the existence of a 'local' anything.
I'm not sure I agree. Cloud storage providers have different limitations than local disk. I have a few GBs of Dropbox space left, but hundreds of GBs of local space.
Existing platforms like iOS or ChromeOS may try to hide or abstract the local disk, but even they still lean on it at times. To be a modern platform it's not sufficient to pretend the local disk doesn't exist.
I have terabytes of available storage in multiple cloud providers. There are different cost scales, sure, but cloud is on the cusp of 'solves 99% of the needs 99% of people have', which will...
I have terabytes of available storage in multiple cloud providers. There are different cost scales, sure, but cloud is on the cusp of 'solves 99% of the needs 99% of people have', which will change the requirements (and thus economic availability) of local storage. You'll have your data archivist and privacy buff holdouts (and these will be wildly over represented on ~s), but they're the laggards on the technological adoption curve and are utterly meaningless for mainstream behaviour.
I don't claim there is no need for local storage. What I mean is that it is increasingly a pipeline for cloud content where the 'primary version' is online. We're all not quite there today (though I am and every business I've dealt with in the last few years is), but you don't make a new API for today, you make it for 1-10 years later.
I think that's a fair appraisal of our current direction. I just don't think we're at a point yet where we can abandon the local disk. Perhaps an open protocol for cloud services would make the...
I think that's a fair appraisal of our current direction. I just don't think we're at a point yet where we can abandon the local disk.
Perhaps an open protocol for cloud services would make the most sense. Then cloud or local hosting could be accessed via the same API.
I wonder how operating systems that obfuscate the filesystem to the user would display this to the browser? I'm imagining iOS would surface iCloud Drive or potentially any application which hooks...
I wonder how operating systems that obfuscate the filesystem to the user would display this to the browser? I'm imagining iOS would surface iCloud Drive or potentially any application which hooks into CloudKit, similar to how the Files app functions at the moment.
So apparently this is a thing that exists now. I don't think I can trust Google (or any web-browser vendor for that matter) with my file system, and if Mozilla implements this, I really hope there will be a flag to disable it. The further we go, the more I wish for OSes to port OpenBSD's
unveiland friends. Am I too paranoid?It'll probably require a dialog asking for permission to access the real filesystem. Atleast in the implementations.
Definitely. Sensitive information like location, microphones, etc. already require security prompts.
This is actually a lot better than the desktop approach where running an exe grants full access to your hardware.
Firejail is a thing and had been a thing for a long time. Also I only install electron apps via flatpak on my PC.
This is solving an issue with an old paradigm where the new paradigm has already annihilated this space. There is no need for a native file system API because the paradigm no longer requires and in extreme cases even recognises the existence of a 'local' anything.
If you're online to use a web app then you have access to cloud storage. And that is the API that web services require. Link in to Dropbox, OneDrive, iCloud, etc - that is their storage and retrieval system, the local drive has no need for their input and they have no business touching anything on it at all.
I'm not sure I agree. Cloud storage providers have different limitations than local disk. I have a few GBs of Dropbox space left, but hundreds of GBs of local space.
Existing platforms like iOS or ChromeOS may try to hide or abstract the local disk, but even they still lean on it at times. To be a modern platform it's not sufficient to pretend the local disk doesn't exist.
I have terabytes of available storage in multiple cloud providers. There are different cost scales, sure, but cloud is on the cusp of 'solves 99% of the needs 99% of people have', which will change the requirements (and thus economic availability) of local storage. You'll have your data archivist and privacy buff holdouts (and these will be wildly over represented on ~s), but they're the laggards on the technological adoption curve and are utterly meaningless for mainstream behaviour.
I don't claim there is no need for local storage. What I mean is that it is increasingly a pipeline for cloud content where the 'primary version' is online. We're all not quite there today (though I am and every business I've dealt with in the last few years is), but you don't make a new API for today, you make it for 1-10 years later.
I think that's a fair appraisal of our current direction. I just don't think we're at a point yet where we can abandon the local disk.
Perhaps an open protocol for cloud services would make the most sense. Then cloud or local hosting could be accessed via the same API.
I wonder how operating systems that obfuscate the filesystem to the user would display this to the browser? I'm imagining iOS would surface iCloud Drive or potentially any application which hooks into CloudKit, similar to how the Files app functions at the moment.
This is a terrible idea and I hope it never happens.