5 ms·

Interesting. Maybe browsers shouldn't have access to system fonts except a specific set. Websites can't assume fancy fonts are installed anyway, I don't think

• roel_v 12y ago
  Yeah, all we'd have to do is convince every manufacturer of operating systems and/or browsers to agree on a common set of fonts, work out licensing/font rendering technology issues etc., then convince all web developers across the world (or at least a sizable portion) to redevelop their websites to work with this list, then enforce the font restriction, and then convince users that this is somehow a good idea because invariably a bunch of the websites they use are going to break. We also need to do it within a few years, otherwise it's too late, and our main argument is going to be 'but maybe websites can use fonts as part of a fingerprint to track what websites we are visiting'.
  • michaelvillar 12y ago
    You couldn't be more wrong about this. - You need to convince only one browser. People that care about privacy will use that browser. - You don't need licensing, they still use the OS fonts. They just limit the fonts available. - You don't need to convince web developers because they already use these fonts and only these fonts. Who's using Papyrus? - 1997 websites are going to break. Again, new websites use only a set of system fonts or fancy web fonts.
    • tankenmate 12y ago
      You're both wrong; most people at the point of browsing don't care that much for privacy. Most users would hand out their passwords for a chocolate bar! [0] How much less would they care about their privacy let alone understand how one browser is better than another. [0] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3639679.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3639679.stm