this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2026
451 points (98.7% liked)

PC Gaming

15369 readers
283 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 62 points 2 days ago (4 children)

All of these wed based uber-projects are built on Chrome. This is bad. This gives more control to google and strengthens their strangle hold over web technologies.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 52 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's also bad because why the fuck should a web browser have that much access to the hardware to begin with?!

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 14 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Considering they made Chrome an entire OS... It was sort of necessary for that and probably minimal to bring it to the regular desktop browser.

Otherwise it doesn't really need to, other than simplicity for the end user. Being able to just go to the website regardless of platform and not having to install anything, or keep anything up to date, is a nice end user experience.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Considering they made Chrome an entire OS… It was sort of necessary for that and probably minimal to bring it to the regular desktop browser.

That's both plausible and insightful on your part. Thanks!

That said, just because they could easily do it on the non-ChromeOS version of the browser doesn't mean they should have.

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 2 points 1 day ago

Chrome OS existed long before this API, it has a Linux base to handle this kind of thing.

[–] PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 days ago

it doesn't really need to, other than simplicity for the end user

Not being a jerk, trying to be succinct, but this is you missing or disregarding a crucially important point, in a dozen words.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Also why the fuck is the OS giving the web browser the option of giving it that access to the hardware?

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 7 points 2 days ago

As long as it's doable from userspace the OS doesn't know what's a browser or what is being controlled with external code. Blame the concept of ambient authority

[–] Sv443@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Cause WebUSB still only exists on Chrome, even though Mozilla and Apple had 9 years to catch up: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebUSB_API#browser_compatibility

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Maybe some of the other browsers should implement the tech needed to do this kind of thing then? Cause as far as I know, Chrome is the only browser that can give a websites access to USB.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because it's complex, a security problem and largely unneccessary.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

unneccessary

It seems pretty necessary for doing this kind of universal update system to me. If you've got a way to do it without it though, please share.