Re: Web versions

[Jean Louis]

* Jacob Bachmeyer <jcb62281@gmail.com> [2021-03-16 10:30]:
>    3.  Web apps stored on "the cloud" are bad because they often do not
> respect the user's freedoms, as even if the software is under Free license
> terms, technical issues can make running a modified version difficult or
> impossible.

Just because there is possibility of abuse one shall reject the
technological opportunity?!

Why then reject all software at all, as I could jokingly paraphrase
that as:

------- jokingly paraphrased ------
   3.  Programs on the distk are bad because they often do not
respect the user's freedoms, as they are often proprietary, as even
if the software is under Free license terms, lack of user's skills
and technical issues can make running a modified version difficult
or impossible.
------------------

GNU/Linux has been abused by people since its inception, it is still
insecure, and we still use it. It is being used worlwide millions or
billions times to subjugate users who run software remotely on
GNU/Linux systems -- all that is not relevant.

Possibility of some abuse or evil conduct is not reason to say not to
create free software on a free software platform (Webassembly).

Is it useful to create software? If yes, why not.

> Therefore:
>    Porting to "the Web" is simply not practical or appropriate for most GNU
> software.  This does not exclude the possibility of writing useful Free
> software for "the Web" but the GNU project is focused on the GNU operating
> system.

GNU Operating Systems are various, they may already contain
Webassembly if some of GNU systems include Firefox with it. For
example in Parabola GNU/Linux-libre, the system I use on this computer
there is package "wabt" with description "The WebAssembly Binary
Toolkit is a suite of tools for WebAssembly".

Thus GNU project already delivers tools for further development of
Webassembly. "GNU Operating System" is the one I am running here, and
I can install that package for Webassembly within seconds.

Logic fails there. Or maybe you wanted to define "GNU operating
system" as only those software packages developed by GNU, but not
those software packages delivered with the GNU operating systems like
Parabola in my case? 

Webassembly already has envisioned POSIX API. Please see:
https://webassembly.org/docs/use-cases/ where it says: "POSIX
user-space environment, allowing porting of existing POSIX
applications" -- so why not?

Then read: "Developer tooling (editors, compilers, debuggers, …)." --
so that means one can in future, as how it is envisioned, develop new
programs for platforms X by using editors and compilers. For me that
means using GCC and Emacs or similar tools. Existing POSIX
applications will work in Webassembly.

> Therefore:
>    Porting to "the Web" is simply not practical or appropriate for most GNU
> software.  This does not exclude the possibility of writing useful Free
> software for "the Web" but the GNU project is focused on the GNU operating
> system.

Things are not practical when they are not implemented and not
integrated. Webassembly makes it practical as it provides
integration. It may not be the best method to run compatible
applications on multiple OS-es. But then who is to make it better?
There were various attempts to have toolkits that work well across
OS-es and they are still there, this attempt with Webassembly makes it
possible. It is of course there because Apple, Google and Microsoft
and Mozilla have envisioned how it will be useful for them, but there
is also the use for free software developers. It is new direction, new
platform, seem to be the most advanced in the under developed 21st
century. I have expected much more of computing in 2021, we are back
in the era of Netscape and Javascript introduction, just on a new
level.

By the way, back in time, I remember that all kinds of plugins were
installable in browsers, so all kinds of programs could run anyway
inside of browsers. I have been running perl remotely executed on my
browser. Here are some traces of that technology:
https://www.brainbell.com/tutors/Perl/newfile295.html and I remember
using similar technology before 1999.

It is possible to modify browsers to run any kind of code. There is
nothing new to the concept. Webassembly is attempt to make it in a
safe environment. Those large companies are not known to keep the
things safe, I know, but still, that is so far one of advanced cross
platform environments.

Let us develop software for it.

I am sure that my Hyperscope system can be modified to run in any
browser. It will become possible to develop Dynamical Knowledge
Repositories as envisioned by Engelbart and request documents of any
kinds and see/view them without modifying the OS. Open up DJVU
document on any computer, use Emacs from any worldwide Internet cafe
or point, play your favorite game without installing anything on a
host computer.

> The GNU operating system is not supposed to depend on external network
> resources for routine operation.

I agree with it, it is because it is made in specific environment for
specific purposes at specific time in human history.

Now is 2021. There is different period in human history and different
technologies sprung and offer us different opportunities. Would
Webassembly appear before 20 years, it would be proprietary, right now
it seem to be free software upon which people may develop, including
develop GNU software. We have to keep ourselves busy for next 50-100
years. We cannot expect only old technologies to remain forever and
nothing new to come in soonest future.

For me, Webassembly does not dictate necessarily "external network
resources". Why not speak of the concept of running software in
Webassembly without using external network resources, such as it is
GNU Health, that could eventually in future, run inside of Firefox or
modified Firefox browser in local area network. That is useful. There
would be no need to install clients on every computer, it would be
just enough to run the computer even from the USB stick, fire up
browser, and one could manage the hospital. Software could be
downloaded for execution from local area network. GNU Health is part
of GNU system and GNU package, GNU software, routine operation of
hospital management is to run GNU Health to manage patients and their
health improvements.

> I believe that "Who Does That Server Really Serve?" better applies
> to these issues than "The JavaScript Trap" does: the former warns
> against relying on systems outside of the user's control, even if
> those systems are also running Free software, while the latter
> applies to a widespread means of "sneaking" non-free software into
> otherwise-Free environments under the user's proverbial nose.

Sure I understand that viewpoint. I just don't think of proprietary
viewpoint. There is plethora of free software already written for
Webassembly. https://github.com/search?p=2&q=webassembly&type=Repositories

You can install applications yourself, you can install them on your
computer or your local area server or your own server.

As platform for development of free software Webassembly is great
tool. Let us think of free software.

Here is one example how Perl runs in Webassembly:
https://webperl.zero-g.net/democode/index.html

Or Vim editor ported to Webassembly:
https://github.com/rhysd/vim-wasm why we don't have Emacs running?

Or speech recognition in browser:
https://github.com/syl22-00/pocketsphinx.js

Or collaborative PDF annotation environment:
https://pspdfkit.com/guides/web/current/pspdfkit-for-web/getting-started/

And more: https://github.com/mbasso/awesome-wasm

Webassembly for GNU Toolchain binutils, gcc, glibc:
https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/binutils/2017-03/msg00044.html
https://github.com/pipcet/binutils-gdb

Did we speak all time about GNU running in Webassembly? Buhahahahahah.

Jean