Re: What will incentivize deployment of explicit proxies?

On 6 December 2013 14:12, William Chan (陈智昌) <> wrote:
> Hey hey, there's no reason to make this personal :) I never said I
> have no responsibility here. I just tried to make a funny quip that
> the...more passionate factions of the larger Chromium project will be
> very...passionate in their response to certain ideas. Is there a
> reason you wish to make this about me all of a sudden?

You're a soft target, what can I say :)  The comment about
non-specific others having objections is a line that I like to push
back on because it generally isn't productive.  I didn't intend to
single you out.

You are, of course, right.  Any attempt to do this will encounter push back.

> Let me be clear, I in general think it's terrible to burden the user
> with decisions which they are largely unable to reason about. And I
> think it's wrong to expect them to have the knowledge to reason about
> it. And I disagree with the argument that browser vendors must provide
> all possible configuration options so users can do whatever they want.

Very well said.  That sets the bar pretty high, but not unreasonably
so in my opinion.  We should be treating this as a design constraint.
Anything less does everyone a disservice.

I know that most folks involved are aware of this, but I don't think
that everyone fully understands just how important this is to browser
makers in particular.  The principle is pretty widely applicable, and
everyone who interacts with people should tread carefully, but
browsers are highly exposed in this regard.

Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 22:38:20 UTC