[fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] WebAssembly Target

[noreply at z505.com]

On 2017-03-16 05:46, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 2017-03-11 23:23, Daniel Gaspary wrote:
>> WebAssembly
>> <https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/software/mozilla-releases-firefox-52-the-first-browser-to-support-webassembly/>")
> 
> I love how they say multiple times in the video:
> 
>    "... and completely secure."
> 
> 
> Umm, didn't they say the exact same thing about Java Applets, Flash,
> Silverlight etc. :)  I guess time will tell, but if history is anything
> to go buy, security issues *will* pop up.
> 
> Saying all that, I really respect Mozilla for what they have done
> regarding the web. Firefox is the only browser I ever use.

There is no such thing as completely secure.

Most security these days is held together by a single 8-12 character 
string of text. That's not security.

And, those obsessed with security (OpenBSD types) are the biggest 
hypocrites of all, claiming to value privacy and security, while 
completely ignoring security and privacy of people - stalking them and 
harassing them.

Security is a joke.  Let's hold together all our data by a 8-12 
character string! Yippee! That's security!
Security always has been a joke and always will be.  You could create a 
system where it requires 3562 passwords to log in, in sequence, but then 
it would take too long to log in.

Website security is to use static html files and a static site 
generator. Which renders your website basically utterly castrated and 
un-interactive for the users. Think: no web forum, as there are no 
logins.. just a static site with static html content. That's security 
for you: rendering computers utterly useless and boring. Basically 
describes the openbsd operating by default: a castrated OS that does 
nothing useful, until you install something unsecure (or worse, 
"insecure") from "ports" or some website.

I'm not saying the attempts at trying to solve security weren't (or 
aren't) worthwhile - anyone who heads down this road of security is a 
brave soul. It's just that time after time again, security has been and 
will always be a bad joke.

Then you've got the whole quantum computer issue. First guy to get ahold 
of a quantum computer may be able to crack passwords in a few 
milliseconds which a classic computer would take thousands of years to 
do, if the quantum computer hype holds up and we actually understand 
quantum mechanics the way we think we do. And then, what happens to 
bitcoin if someone cracks it and starts hording up millions of bitcoins 
across several accounts.