Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Devasta's commentslogin

The economic turmoil in the US is hollowing out the entry level jobs, AI is just the cover companies are using. The constant tariff changing means that companies have to be very pessimistic in their long term planning, as any assumptions they make can be turned on their head with no notice.

One of the nice things about mastodon is that the total lack of centralization and the absence of the dreaded algorithm means you don't have reputation farmer accounts posting bloviating nonsense the whole time. Its really great there.

Mastodon is social like a quiet pub. Twitter and Bluesky are social like a crowd at a concert.


> Mastodon is social like a quiet pub. Twitter and Bluesky are social like a crowd at a concert.

Good analogy. When Twitter started, I took one look at people shouting "I had a delicious sandwich today" and "I just took an amazing dump" and wanted no part of it. When it later turned into a "clever" contest, I wanted even less.

My quiet little Mastodon community, plus some outsiders I have chosen, is the kind of "social" I want. If someone starts behaving like an influencer, they get muted.


XSLT rocks. I have a team who come from business analyst and accounting backgrounds, we manage hundreds of reports for client data to their banks and could never manage it without something simple like XSLT to deal with it all.

You give the employee IntelliJ or some IDE of your choice and a way of uploading the transforms into your application and they'll work away. All the complaints about namespaces and the like that your hear online? Never hear from them, they dont think about it, just stick the declarations up in the top of the file and work away.

Abandoning XML has been one of softwares biggest mistakes.


If XForms was released on browsers today, it would be hailed as a revolutionary technology. Instead, it is just one of the many things thrown away, and even now 20 years after the WHATWG took over we cannot even do a PUT request without Javascript.

What a pity.


For those unaware of XForms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yYY7GJAbOo


The polyfills suggested are for the servers to do the transforms, not the browser.


> Coders have this tendency to value ideology over practicality.

It would be a horrible existence to value anything else. What reason is there to get up in the morning if you think things couldn't be better?


> Part of the community really hated XHTML and its strictness.

A big part of this is that people were concatenating XML together manually, to predictable disaster.

Nowadays they use JSX and TypeScript, far more strict than XML ever was, and absolutely love it.


> Nowadays they use JSX and TypeScript

And we're already moving away from that, landing us into HTMX/hypermedia and other fancy tools which aren't really concerned with JSX. So things come and go, but standards stay to keep things working and options available for people with different constraints. It's not up to Google to be deciding all that just by themselves.


Getting rid of XSLT from the browser would be a mistake, no doubt about it.

You can see it clear as day in the github thread that they weren't asking permission, they were doing it no matter what, all their concerns about security just being the pretext.

It would have been more honest of them to just tell everyone to go fuck themselves.


> their concerns about security just being the pretext.

It seems entirely reasonable to be concerned about XSLT’s effects on security:

> Although XSLT in web browsers has been a known attack surface for some time, there are still plenty of bugs to be found in it, when viewing it through the lens of modern vulnerability discovery techniques. In this presentation, we will talk about how we found multiple vulnerabilities in XSLT implementations across all major web browsers. We will showcase vulnerabilities that remained undiscovered for 20+ years, difficult to fix bug classes with many variants as well as instances of less well-known bug classes that break memory safety in unexpected ways. We will show a working exploit against at least one web browser using these bugs.

https://www.offensivecon.org/speakers/2025/ivan-fratric.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1kc7fcF5Ao


AFAIK browsers rely on an old version of xslt libraries and haven’t upgraded to newer versions

They also seem to be putting pressure on the library maintainer resulting in them saying they’re not going to embargo security bugs


What do you think their real reason for wanting to remove XSLT is, if not what they claim?


They don't want to support it (because of their perceived cost-benefit ratio for what they're interested in developing/maintaining), and hence if it is removed from the browser standards then they aren't required to support it (as opposed to driving people to other browsers)? One could ask why do WebUSB and similar "standards" given those would seem (to me) to be a much greater security issue?


Why side with the megacorps on every thread, even when it doesn't relate to the big hotness of large language models?


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44450812#44451491 - "Google's AI overviews is the single worst AI-driven experience in widespread use today"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44778764#44778850 - "Meta AI gave people a "share" option with several levels of click though required to share a post and it was a fiasco"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44752546#44755224 - "Claude Opus 4 is 5x the price of Claude Sonnet 4. I don't think it's 5x as good."


> Why side with the megacorps

Reflexively siding with the tech majors is about as dogmatic as reflexively siding against them.


To increase the depth of their moat. XSLT would allow anybody with a minimum of effort to extract semantic information from the web.


XSLT is a terrible tool for that job. RDF combined with something like SPARQL is much closer to that, and makes for one of the greatest knowledge processing tools nobody ever uses.

XSLT is designed to work on XML while HTML documents are almost always SGML-based. The semantics don't work the same and applying XML engines on HTML often breaks things in weird and unexpected ways. basic HTML parsing rules like "a <head> tag doesn't need to be closed and can simply be auto-closed by a <body>" will seriously confuse XML engines. To effectively use XSLT to extract information from the web, you'd first need to turn HTML into XML.


Hey, it works great on the dozens of XHTML websites lying around. Dozens!


XSLT is designed to work on the XML Infoset, which is basically just an abstract tree of elements with attributes. Which is why XSLT has e.g. HTML output method, even though you use XML snippets to generate it. If you already have logic to parse HTML into a tree, it's trivial to run XSLT on it. Indeed, most recent version of XSLT uses the same trick to process JSON even.


I think it's the other way round, it's XML -> HTML not HTML -> XML.


> XSLT would allow anybody with a minimum of effort to extract semantic information from the web.

XSLT has been around for decades so why are you speaking in hypotheticals, as if it’s an up-and-coming technology that hasn’t been given a fair chance yet? If it hasn’t achieved that by now, it never will.


> a minimum of effort

That is not a combination of words that should be mentioned in the same sentence as the word XML or, even worse, XSLT.

XML has its value in enterprise and reliable application development because the tooling is very old, very mature and very reliable. But it's not something taught in university any more, it's certainly not taught in "coding bootcamps", simply because it's orders of magnitude more complex than JSON to wrap your head around.

Of course, JSON has jsonschema, but in practice most real-world usages of JSON just don't give a flying fuck.


I feel like this is overly conspiratorial. Likely they want to remove it because it's a pain to support, and used by an ever shrinking proportion of the internet. I don't even necessarily think removing support is a terrible thing, if you want to turn XML into HTML or whatever with XSLT you're still very welcome to do so, you just might have to do it server side rather than expecting every web browser to it for you.


There are other implementations of XSLT available besides libxslt, some even in Javascript. Security is something that could be overcome and they wouldn't need to break styling on RSS feeds or anything, it could be something like how FF has a js for dealing with PDFs.

It doesn't need to be some big conspiracy: they see the web as an application runtime instead of being about documents and information, don't give a fuck about XML technologies, don't use them internally and don't feel anyone else needs to.


Abandoning XML is and continues to be the webs biggest mistake.

Client side templating, custom elements, validation against schemas, native databinding for forms, we could have had it all and threw it away; instead preferring to rebuild it over and over again in React until the end of time.


It was actually a hypertext format as opposed to JSON. So HATEOS actually made sense. The fact that we went backwards in terms of no longer using a hyptertext format for almost all web requests is one of the dumbest moves in web development. I get the incentives that influenced it, but yuck.


If the web was being built today it would be nothing but Javascript and Canvas, the idea of something like HTML would have you laughed out of the room. Documents? You have PDF for that.


Abject nonsense.

Crypto has no purpose outside the wild west. Any attempts at applying a sheen of respectability over it all is just trying to find new bagholders.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: