[swyx]

^ didnt realize who posted the opposition - this is Jake Archibald, a longtime googler on the Chrome team, now joining Mozilla and posting opposition to the Chrome API. no wonder the criticism is so well argued. most be a relief to not have to toe the party line on this one.

[jaffathecake]

Aww thanks! To be fair I didn't toe the party line when I was at Google (imo). Although, that caused me increasing amount of grief internally, until I left. From what I hear, things have gotten exponentially worse in that regard for folks still on the team.

[sundarurfriend]

I've been feeling more optimistic about Mozilla recently than I had in years, since their language in communication seems to have shifted from a Stepford-ish tone of corporate speak to something that feels more authentic and closer to their roots. I don't know if it's the new CEO, or a general cultural shift. (Or just me projecting from little intangible bits of evidence to something I hope for!)

Hearing about positive personnel shift like this now gives me a bunch more optimism on this. I really hope I can go back to the days of unambiguously being in support of Mozilla and their many awesome efforts, without always having to be a bit dubious about their next (mis)step.

[tuesdaynight]

Hey, Jake, not related with your post, but I just want to say that HTTP203 were one of the best web dev content that I've ever consumed. Amazing mix between humour and tech discussion. Thank you!

[jaffathecake]

Aww thanks for saying that! I've been doing little videos on https://www.youtube.com/@FirefoxWebDevs (and accounts of the same name, pretty much everywhere). Although they're designed to be short, so they're pretty different to HTTP203.

[Xunjin]

This channel should definitely get more visibility ;)

[swyx]

co sign, tuning in to you and Das riffing was one of the highlights of my webdev career. bring it back!!

(lmk if you'd like an ai.engineer stage to do it on)

[benatkin]

He's very familiar with standards-positions repos no doubt, and it reads like a typical defense against Google rolling something out without getting input. They don't suggest changes, they just try to throw out the whole thing. I think they might be hoping that if it ges thrown out, a collaborative effort will be formed to write if from scratch rather than start from the perspective of the Google Chrome team. I haven't seen it happen that way much, though, so I think it would be better if they just suggest specific changes to it rather than rejecting it.