[quickthrower2]

I predict the opposite: more movement towards code running in the browser. Not that it is necessary always a good thing!

[lgas]

I think we'll see both, with a sort of push to the two extremes initially, and then the two extremes coming back together to meet in the middle again as WASM gains popularity on both the client and the server leading to a lot more "isomorphic" (stupid term in this context, but whatever) codebases.

[dmak]

I highly doubt WASM will gain much ground. It may for games, but I am willing to take a bet that there are more web apps out there than games.

[mhuffman]

I think the eventual common use for WASM will eventually be DRM and related types of page code "security" and obfuscation. Basically a way for companies to "protect" their tech/IP from easy duplication while not having to carry the expensive burden of the cost of back-end processing in the cloud.

[egeozcan]

Is WASM harder to de-obfuscate than your typical transpiled/minimized JS soup?

[mhuffman]

From the perspective of salespeople and managers ... maybe!

[quickthrower2]

WASM allows you to run code “isomorphically” on the front and back end, which is a convenience that will be hard to resist.

[dmak]

That's not often a requirement for many companies. Most companies end up with a different backend technology for a diverse range of reasons.

[osrec]

I agree with this.