[rspoerri]

So cool it runs on a browser /sarcasm/ i might not even need a computer. Or internet when we are at it.

It either runs locally or it runs on the cloud. Data could come from both locations as well. So it's mostly technically irrelevant if it's displaying in a browser or not.

Except when it comes to usability. I don't get it why people love software running in a browser. I often close important tools i have not saved when it's in a browser. I cant have offline tools which work if i am in a tunnel (living in Switzerland this is an issue) . Or it's incompatible because i am running LibreWolf.

/sorry to be nitpicking on this topic ;-)

[ftxbro]

> I don't get it why people love software running in a browser.

If you read the article, part of the argument was for the sandboxing that the browser provides.

"Obviously if you’re going to give a language model the ability to execute API calls and evaluate code you need to do it in a safe environment! Like for example... a web browser, which runs code from untrusted sources as a matter of habit and has the most thoroughly tested sandbox mechanism of any piece of software we’ve ever created."

[rspoerri]

Thinking about it...

I don't know exactly about the browser sandboxing. But isn't it's purpose to prevent access to the local system, while it mostly leaves access to the internet open?

Is that really a good way to limit and AI system's API access?

[simonw]

The same-origin policy in browsers defaults to preventing JavaScript from making API calls out to any domain other than the one that hosts the page - unless those other domains have the right CORS headers.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Same-o...

[rspoerri]

OSX does app sandboxing as well (not everywhere). But yeah, you're right i only skimmed the content and missed that part.

[pmoriarty]

There are a bunch of reasons people/companies like web apps:

1 - Everyone already has a web browser, so there's no software to download (or the software is automatically downloaded, installed and run, if you want to look at it that way... either way, the experience is a lot easier and more seamless for the user)

2 - The website owner has control of the software, so they can update it and manage user access as they like, and it's easier to track users and usage that way

3 - There are a ton of web developers out there, so it's easier to find people to work on your app

4 - You ostensibly don't need to rewrite your app for every OS, but may need to modify it for every supported browser

[rspoerri]

Most of these aspects make it better for the company or developer, only in some cases it makes it easier for the user in my opinion. Some arguments against it are:

1 - Not everyone has or wants fast access to the internet all the time.

2 - I try to prevent access of most of the apps to the internet. I don't want companies to access my data or even metadata of my usage.

3 - sure, but it doesn't make it better for the user.

4 - Also supporting different screen sizes and interaction types (touch or mouse) can be a big part of the work.

The most important part for a user is if he/she is only using the app rarely or once. Not having to install it will make the difference between using it or not. However with the app stores most OS's feature today this can change pretty soon and be equally simple.

I might be old school on this, but i resent subscription based apps. For applications that do not need to change, deliver no additional service or aren't absolutely vital for me i will never subscribe. And browser based app's are at the core of this unfortunate development. But that's gone very far from the original topic :-)

[sp332]

Broswer software is great because I don't have to build separate versions for Windows, Mac, and Linux, or deal with app stores, or figure out how to update old versions.

[nanidin]

Browser is the true edge compute.