Dahl doesn't strike me as a business or product person. He's a genius when left to tinker. I get the impression Deno is floundering because of business/VC pressure. I see the original promise of Deno being compromised in an effort to increase users/customers. The project is no longer focused on just making a good JS runtime.
Deno's original positioning was as a second version of NodeJS without the learning cruft cluttering the environment. To that extent I think Dahl and his team was successful.
As is so often the case, once you introduce MBAs/VCs, the focus shifts to ROI and fast. I see Deno Deploy as being part of that attempt.
People still tend to forget that software development tools are not commercially viable. For a long time we have become spoilt for choice with ever more and improving tools.
The "rug pull" I was referring to is more about the general Deno philosophy. It's gone from being a modern forward-thinking JS runtime, to being just a Node/NPM copycat with its own half-baked packaging system.
In regards to Deno Deploy I agree that scaling down is nicer, but they're extremely hush about it. Using Deploy for anything beyond a hobby project is a business risk.
My original view on Deno and JSR was positive and optimistic (it's all there on my blog). I've been using it for years and I still use Deno because it has more convenient/ergonomic APIs than Node.
If Deno halving the Deploy regions twice from 35 to 12, and 12 to 6 doesn't convince you then I don't know what will
It doesn’t convince me. You seem to be determined to conflate two very different things. If I use Deno it’s because it’s a language runtime. Deno Deploy is as the name says.
The title should be, if anything, “the decline of an after thought deployment tool”.
There are regulatory agencies which have specifically told Google it is not allowed to remove 3rd party cookies without a replacement as while Google would be able to continue to function fine, their competitors would take a major loss.
Likewise. Even despite the multiple times Mozilla manages to carefully aim at their feet before shooting, Firefox still seems like the best available alternative.
Seems like the CMA are concerned for other advertisers who profit from 3rd-party cookies, no concern for user's privacy. That poor billion dollar industry, how will it cope?
> This API collates information about people from multiple web origins, which could be a significant risk to their privacy. To manage this risk, the information that is gathered is aggregated using an aggregation service that is trusted by the user-agent to perform aggregation within strict limits. Noise is added to the aggregates produced by this service to provide differential privacy. Websites may select an aggregation service from the list of approved aggregation services provided by the user-agent.
Now that Google have back-tracked on removing 3rd-party cookies[1] I can't help but think any attempts to standardise tracking APIs is only going to add more data to the mix. This seems like yet another source to abuse.
I'm curious if anyone here is hosting any user-facing websites or services on Deno Deploy? Where response times matter. I still have a handful of "if this, then that" type functions I POST to and forget. I tried to host small websites on Deploy but the cold start times and "time to first byte" performance were kinda brutal early on, even for my closest region.
Ah, my favourite complaint for the community website I run. "I can't see any photos on the adverts page." Are you running an ad-blocker? "Yes." What do you think an ad-blocker does...
I guess you could figure out valid states for your page's DOM, and a few seconds after the page has finished loading, scan it for "hostile" elements and CSS styles, and delete them...
Having this idea and opening a random page (from The Guardian) on DevTools, somehow somebody's inserted scripts and iframes pointing to twitter.com.
We tried applying cunningham’s law widely and it created disastrous incentives. It’s better to assume profitable yet destructive incompetence is malice.
yep, it's in Grammarly's interest to namespace or scope their CSS in a way that doesn't conflict. Not doing it adequately goes both ways, website CSS could break their extension, or their extension could break the website.
Unfortunately browsers don't really provide good solutions for extensions that need to inject or change sites. Look at Google's owner in-browser translate extension, its DOM manipulation breaks many interactive apps as well. There are no tools available in browsers for it to not need to do that.
Browser extensions are the equivalent of running random .exe on your computer except that you have to trust every vendor protecting their keys forever due to the autoupdate.
Not much you can do, user agents continue to act as agents for the users, meaning you can serve them stuff but beyond that it's up to them to dictate their experience, for better or worse.
It really sucks when extensions do fudgy stuff in global space and sometimes break your stuff though, agree. Best approach I've found is to have a help page you can link to so people can go through the typical steps of "disabling all extensions, clearing cache, etc, etc" when things break in very unexpected way and you find no causes for it.
Indeed. It's the user's browser and experience, it's not up to the website owner. But it's frustrating to get bug reports when a 3rd party extension is the problem, not the website. Many visitors will just bounce blaming the website too.
Without someone pointing the user to what the issue is, it's very difficult for the user to know it's an extension causing the problem.
Many years ago I had performance issues with a site and the only reason I knew it was due to an extension is I dug into it with the dev tools and managed to identify Dashlane as the problem.
It sits underneath the first paragraph on smaller screens (I've since added an extra sentence at the beginning.) It was unintentionally confusing in this case.
My screen is 1280x1024 which isn't /that/ small and it sits underneth the introudction.
I also thought it was related to the primary subject... and the real image, I thought was an error message from the advert company for clickabuse or something..
So when the author brings up usability and UI issues... should probably recitify those on his own site, before reaching out to others.
