It's not, though... WebAssembly doesn't really have all that much to do with js, any more than Flash or Java plugins would if they ended up being standardized instead. Every time there's a wasm thread it gets posted, but it misses the point of the talk to suggest that wasm is the prediction bearing fruit.
The talk is great, but I'd suggest that's the reason for the downvotes.
> it misses the point of the talk to suggest that wasm is the prediction bearing fruit
Does it? It seems that the talk has two main points:
1. Javascript succeeded because it was (at least initially) just good enough not to be completely unbearable, but bad enough that people ended up using it primarily as a target for other languages.
2. Ring 0 JIT can be 4% faster that normal binaries.
WASM is primarily a target for other languages, and qualifies as a language that can theoretically be JITted 4% faster than native code can be run.
Right, but that's my point. Wasm is tenuously connected with JavaScript because both are web technologies, so people link the talk.
But they couldn't be more different technically, and if wasm does indeed become the lingua franca of future computing it will be much more boring than the craziness of js doing the same.
The talk was great because it was about an insane yet plausible future. We now have a boring and probable future.
