> But then HN would still riot, because you would need to require all apps to be approved by a central authority (no unauthorized browsers) OR you need to lock down browser engines to those that respect the list somehow (maybe by killing JIT, limiting network connections).

The owner of a device could prevent the installation of third-party apps or app stores. That does not require having central approval.

> But then HN would still riot, because you would need to require all apps to be approved by a central authority (no unauthorized browsers) OR you need to lock down browser engines to those that respect the list somehow (maybe by killing JIT, limiting network connections).

I don't think you need to do that. You can pass a law without creating a technical mechanism that automatically enforces the law. The law doesn't even need to be perfect.

So what if you can still patch a browser yourself. Kids can steal cigarettes but laws against selling cigarettes to kids are still broadly effective.

So what if its technically possible for a vendor to ship a violating browser. Go after violaters with the legal system, not with the OS.

So what if there's a foreign vendor with a violating browser out of the reach of the law. You'd still have made the ecosystem vastly better even if there's gaps and loopholes.

Funny that you understand what the problem would be, then you still insist that the authoritarian approach is the correct one. I’m sure people like you would gladly goose step into a 100% locked down surveillance hellscape, but the rest of us will keep working to ensure that this future never happens.