This will actually make asm.js code more readable than it is right now.
Everybody do most definitely not know that PNaCl is the way to go. PNaCl suffers from many difficult problems, such as being based on LLVM bitcode, which is not static, but is machine-specific and has undefined behaviour. The PNaCl team has put a huge amount of effort into working around those fundamental problems, with quite a bit of success, but it's still not in any way a very good solution.
wasm will take advantage of some of that work, it seems, but its bytecode will be more strictly defined and designed for the purpose, which will help a lot. wasm is much more based on asm.js, being at first just a binary encoding of it. That in itself is a huge improvement on the hacky way it was originally implemented, though.
In other words, it's exactly like Java
Point A: Unlike Java.
Point B: Depends on your definitions, but fairly unlike Java.
Point C: Unlike Java.
Point D: Unlike Java.
Point E: Unlike Java.
How you can be given five different ways that wasm is unlike Java and conclude that it is "exactly like Java" is not easily comprehended.
asm.js already exists, and already runs in your browser, and is not the cause of any known security issues. This is just a different packaging for the exact same thing.
So basically, we have no evidence, but there are reasons why we have no evidence so we should just trust the claims blindly.
"It's other people's fault for being butthurt!"
(Subreddit gets deleted)
"HOW DARE YOU HOW DARE YOU MY BUTT IS HURTING SO MUCH YOU CAN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND"
Yeah, rings a little bit hollow.
You realise battery life depends extremely heavily on installed apps, and how often they query the network in the background?
The context of the output causes scripts to change the format of the output.
So you also hate ls, and lots of other unix tools that change format depending on whether output is going to a tty or not?
The only shell I can think of that could possibly be called "modern" would be PowerShell, so this question is a bit odd.
"Such a group"? That is, a group that wants people to be shot to promote their prejudices?
I struggle quite a bit to see how you could possibly infer that from what I said.
As opposed to nothing what-so-fuck-ever.
Both sides here are perfect and utter shitheads. Both sides wanted this fight, which benefits nobody except feeding their own hate-filled little minds.
Fuck all of them.
However, I think the point Anonymous Coward was making is that if it were reversed, and someone lost their job for supporting same sex marriage, you'd never hear the end of it.
First thing to remember is that this is not someone who lost their job, it's a boss being rejected by his employees. That is a very special and unusual kind of situation, where normal power relationships are inverted. You can't really say the person in question is being oppressed here.
So if a company rejected their boss for agreeing with same-sex marriage, if the rest of the company was by and whole against it, I wouldn't be happy about it, but I would not claim they had done anything morally wrong (beyond to whatever extent I think holding such an opinion is morally wrong).
So what you're saying is, nobody has ever had freedom of speech?
Thanks for clearing that up.
Existing Firefox users lost their freedom to use modern versions of Firefox with a usable UI.
This is not a freedom which exists, especially since it makes no sense at all.
Eich lost his freedom of expression.
He did not.
Or, you know, you could just turn off Gatekeeper if you don't like it.