Scripting News podcast

<p><i>I asked Claude.ai to do the show notes -- something I really don't enjoy or have time for. So if this doesn't adequately describe the podcast, blame the AI. ;-)</i></p><p>There's tired frustration among web developers who remember Firefox's heyday. This podcast is for those who experienced Firefox's rise and understand its impact on the web.</p><p>The browser wars started with Mosaic and Netscape in the early days of the web. The Netscape IPO changed everything in tech - shifting company valuations from profit-based to potential-based metrics, marking the beginning of the tech boom.</p><p>Microsoft dominated the PC market when the web emerged as an existential threat. Bill Gates had promised years earlier to learn from minicomputer companies' mistakes - to be scrappy when disruption came for Microsoft. This led to their aggressive entry into the browser market with Internet Explorer.</p><p>Microsoft's browser strategy was smart. They created a quality browser, especially for Mac, understood the value of developer community, built developer tools and platforms like Visual Basic and ActiveX, and ultimately won the browser war against Netscape through platform integration.</p><p>Firefox emerged as a lightweight alternative to the bloated Internet Explorer, built by a small team focused on core browser functionality. It succeeded where Netscape had failed, much like Chrome would later challenge Firefox itself.</p><p>My personal history with Firefox and Mozilla involves my work on RSS development. When invited to give an RSS seminar at Mozilla, I was met with hostility. The Mozilla developers were dismissive of independent developers, asking who I was and why I was involved. This personal animus eventually led me to switch to Chrome.</p><p>Firefox faces a current crisis - dependent on Google payments for default search, with a shrinking user base leading to layoffs. The silver lining is that employees who resisted developer community engagement are gone, creating an opportunity to refocus without internal resistance.</p><p>Firefox's AI strategy is failing. They're trying to compete with AI features, but browsers should remain pure web platforms. AI doesn't belong in browsers, and Firefox can't compete with larger companies on AI integration anyway.</p><p>The solution is for Firefox to become a developer platform. Forget AI features and focus on being a fantastic platform for web app developers. Let developers grow the platform.</p><p>Firefox should create a storage service - sell accounts directly to users for $5/month, provide APIs for developers to access user files with permission, use standard file formats, and stay in the distribution and banking business rather than trying to be product visionaries.</p><p>This approach works because it solves developers' storage reselling problem, enables independent developers to focus on development, creates an ecosystem where developers convince users to buy services, and aligns with Firefox's original mission.</p><p>The only way to save Firefox is to ask 'What would Firefox do?' and then do exactly that. Return to roots as a lightweight, developer-friendly platform. Stop trying to compete where bigger companies have advantages. Focus on the unique position as an independent browser with developer focus.</p>

<p>I recorded this 23 minute podcast on October 31. </p><p>I didn't publish it then, but I figured at some point I would. </p><p>It's the story of how a product like Frontier comes into existence.</p><p>I had done this before, in 2020, in an <a href="http://scripting.com/2020/06/01.html#a204659">oral history</a> I did for a book a friend was writing. This podcast is how I remember it in 2025. :-) </p><p>If you want to hear how a complicated project comes together when you're developing as you're designing, which I always do -- this is for you. It takes a while to get started, and then I talk fast, and use technical terms without explaining them. Sorry for all that.</p><p>I want this kind of story told, because the folklore about how software is built or even that software is built at all, by humans, is usually wrong. It's not about invention, it's about building a new machine out of mostly pre-existing parts. Note that in the story there are zero components in the mix that we had not already perfected and commercialized. Some of them came from other developers, but most of them were remixes of themes that had appeared in earlier stories, or maybe ones that had been considered for inclusion but ended up on the cutting room floor, as in a movie editing process.</p><p>The thing about Frontier is that it made it easy for us to iterate over blogging tools when the time came to work on those. Frontier was the ideal platform for that kind of work, it's why were able to move so quickly and try out lots of approaches. But our runtime was no competition for PHP or Python with SQL. Our database wasn't written to work at that scale, unfortunately -- or a lot more of the world we use today would still be running in our environment. But the ideas persist. </p><p>Interesting sidebar not mentioned in the podcast, when we did MORE which was a really popular product on the Mac platform of the mid-late 80s, we took everything we had and put it into the product. We didn't leave a single thing out. This was because we had a devteam that could do it, and we were fairly desperate as an ongoing business just before we shipped it (1986). Apple had to loan us $400K to get to shipping! Anyway -- it worked. And that's why we called it MORE, we had no idea which if any of the features would pull people in. Turned out it was the presentations. </p><p>Anyway -- glad to finally get this out there. </p><p>Happy Thanksgiving! :-)</p>

<p>A short podcast about <a href="https://substack.com/@sarahkendzior/note/c-176537092">Sarah Kendzior being banned</a> from Bluesky, and why this shouldn't be like any other such event. </p><p>We should learn, that systems like Bluesky depend on moderation, and they don't have a clear business model, and they've grown very large, and they can't afford to hire moderators who understand the difference between a line from a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeZRYhLDLeU">powerful song</a>, and a threat. </p><p>If we want a literate web, and I desperately want that myself, it has to be made in a different way. </p><p>That's what this short podcast is about. </p><p>And to Sarah, if you hear this, I love your work. You've done here what you usually do so well, you've shown us the truth. Keep on truckin! Dave Winer</p>

<p>If I could grab you by the shoulders I would urge you to pay attention. </p><p>Here's a way to push news around the net that's as fast as you can imagine it being, and <i>even simpler</i> than RSS. </p><p>It's all about <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebSocket">WebSockets</a>, <a href="http://home.rsscloud.co/">rssCloud</a> and <a href="https://wordpress.com/blog/2009/09/07/rss-in-the-clouds/">WordPress</a>. </p><p>Would you spend a few minutes thinking about that? </p><p>Then here's a podcast for you.</p><p>Here's the <a href="http://scripting.com/2025/11/03.html#a132606">blog post</a> I wrote this morning with all the links you need to explore the sockets tech in FeedLand. </p>

<p>I'm in the homestretch on the next release of WordLand. This version has approximately twice as many features as the last one. Because, like Radio UserLand from long ago, it does both reading and writing. But the UI is different. It's patterned after all the twitter-like products. It answers the question -- could you do a nice social network with nothing more than RSS and WordPress. And the answer is an emphatic yes.</p><p>And of course there is no center to the RSS universe, it might have benefited from one (ask me about it) but it didn't have one. Maybe for a while it looked like Google Reader would become that, but we know what happened there. </p><p>Anyway, I explain that WordLand solves a big problem for bloggers in the 2020's. We scatter our words all over creation. And we feel bad because we feel like everything should be on our blog. But forget it, that is never going to happen. Our billionaire overlords would never allow it. But if you flip the problem around and ask -- how about if I can see all the stuff I've written on all the blogs in a timeline, where all the different sources are mixed in, most-recent first. I tried a lot of approaches out, but this is the one I kept. It works, but -- it has one flaw, my linkblog. </p><p>I explain in the podcast that sometimes the linkblog overwhelms the other stuff, linkblog items are very quick so I can do a lot of them. So in the first three days I had it I lived with this, until I had to do something about it. Here's the big idea: I made it so you can temporarily turn off any of the feeds with a simple checkbox. One click and the linkblog items are gone, another click, they're back.</p><p>Anyway I want to start talking about this, I'm warming up for October. If you have questions, let me know and maybe I can answer them. I really appreciate interest in this work, this kind of stuff is a performing art. I want to empower creative people. That's why I do this. And I need to hear how that's working from smart users who care. </p><p>A couple of notes. I was thinking about putting a screen shot in here, but on more thought, it's not ready to show yet, even as a work in progress. And sorry for the rough editing job at the end. I rambled off on another topic that I want to try again. </p><p><b>Links from this podcast.</b></p><p><a href="https://bsky.app/profile/art.feediverse.org">Great Art on Bluesky</a>. </p><p>Daveverse blog <a href="https://daveverse.org/">traditional view</a>, and the <a href="https://mastodon.social/@[email protected]/">Mastodon view</a>. It's an amazing world of interop coming online. Lovin it. </p><p><a href="http://scripting.com/futureNews.html">Checkbox News</a>. A design I've been wanting to use since 2007.</p><p><a href="http://scripting.com/?tab=links">Links panel</a> on Scripting News. A place to read the linkblog items.</p>