With that said, I was under the impression that sites will need to support TLS 1.0 for a good long while, and if that is indeed the case, would they not be better off using RC4? From my understanding, the RC4 attacks seemed less practical than attacks against the implementation of CBC mode in SSL 3.0 / TLS 1.0?

I found a lot of this film incredibly interesting. But just seeing the behavior of wild tigers in the presence of humans (especially compared to what many of us have likely seen in a zoo) was incredible. The look they give to humans just screams pure murder and unexplainable hatred.

Anyway, watching that documentary also made me watch other tiger related ones, of which this one ranked pretty well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LljDuIUtvbQ (Operation Snow Tiger) also by BBC (and I recall correctly it is in 2 parts).

Just guesses though, I really couldn't find anything concrete about it.

I'm not sure I follow you when you say "keep parts of HTML". Are you suggesting that we should have a canvas element that spans the entire region of the page, store the actual markup of the page hidden somewhere on the page, and then parse and render that markup to the canvas element using JS+WebGl+? Or are you saying that the browser should simply give up on rendering HTML markup, and give it over to your JS App which will render it itself using WebGL?

> We now have many competing programming languages, competing frameworks, and so on, with a few mainstream ones and improvements/replacements all the time. Rendering entire websites in WebGL enables having the same world-wide innovation in presenting web sites and web apps to users.

If the rendering is done in user/app space, I find it hard to believe there would be any uniformity at all. Everyone would end up having their own unique dialect of HTML that behaved and displayed differently in their own customized WebGL based rendering engine.

EDIT: Disregard that last bit, I misread what you were saying to imply that it would be more uniform than what we have now.

Reference 1st and 28th pages of: http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jul/31/nsa...

If on the other hand by 'query' you mean, for example, using operations like diff, intersect, and union on sets that store keys (for the purpose of knowing what data to pull) -- I actually haven't ran into performance problems yet. If what you're saying is "it's important to spend time to think about HOW you're going to be determining what data to access", then yeah, I'll completely agree that this is crucial. However, I will also point out that this will be true even if you're using a relational database -- though those are expected to be "queried" so perhaps designing a feasible solution is a bit less demanding.

> The fact web browser technology are mostly the same across browsers is great for developers, but users never cared: because the market leading web browser defined the technologies people could use. And the people using the market leading web browser were unaware of the compromises other web browsers used.

What is being said here? That respect towards web standards is not important? Sure, when Internet Explorer had over 90% market share and was in the actual position of defining what the web looked like users didn't care. And they continued not to care for over 5 years as IE stagnated the entire world wide web due to the simple fact there was no competition and therefore no reason to innovate.

The author thinks today's browsers are bad? Without Firefox causing Microsoft to wake up you'd probably still be using IE6 today. At least with standards in place it's possible to have some reasonable balance between browser competition and an actual functioning web.

> My other problem with Safari is that they are doing fuck all with it. It gets updated, what, twice a year?

That's what I mean by "incoherent/convoluted -- at times arguing against itself".

The rest of the rant is just assigning opinion based importance to certain features over others. I personally couldn't care less about sharing my tabs across devices -- in fact, with my personal workflow that would often end with my cell phone automatically trying to load 50+ tabs that I left open at work while researching a problem. While on the other hand, I could not get by without a searchable browser history, even if it is just to find some news article I read 6 hours ago. The author claims this feature is useless because of Google -- yet I don't find Google to be a sufficient answer when trying to find content which was only posted a few hours ago.