Comment by fastball

> I love the web that actual dynamic logic on the frontend has allowed.

I think you missed my point, I also truly love that 1% of useful stuff that JS brings and wouldn't want to lose the functionality. But I absolutely hate the other 99% which I have no control over or I have to jump through uMatrix hoops to control.

Let's put it another way. You probably love that electricians and plumbers exist to fix your stuff. But if once you let them in they could invisibly camp in any room of your house without you even knowing where they are and what they're doing, would you still open the door for them?

These APIs can either give you a relatively broad "Allow on this site" option, or they can flood you with granular choices. The first opens the door for them camping in bed with you. The second is like someone triggering your alarm every 5 seconds until you disable it. Accept all. Then they can camp in bed with you.

Doesn't your experience tell you the same?

> If you don't think native apps are tracking your behavior, you are sorely mistaken

You see, this is exactly what I meant. "Those guys are screwing you over so it's OK if these ones do too". This is how the "screw the user over" arms race happens where everybody tries to outdo the others with even more invasive techniques, and users take it because each is just a slight escalation from before. When native apps were adding these "features" someone loved them for one reason or another. Frog in hot water.

P.S. Example of how the innocent battery API access can be sold as "to save battery" and then repurposed to screw you over:

https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/27/uber-charge-battery-lower-107...

Unequal progress of privacy improvements on the web and app fronts does not make it okay to walk back progress on the web front just to provide API parity.