There's a whole trend with websites not uploading anything to their servers due to privacy and whatnot, where do you suppose the data is being saved for repeat visits...

What your'e describing I would expect to be measured in kilobytes, not tens of gigabytes.

There is no reason for any person to think that a website needs to store data sized in the "full Ubuntu install" range to facilitate repeat visits.

You make a reasonable point, while kilobytes might be too little it probably shouldn't be 30gb. 5gb might be ok. In the settings it should be possible for the user to set their own limit. I am not familiar with browser storage but there is hopefully a mechanism to inform the user that their limit might not be enough.

> There is no reason for any person to think that a website needs to store data sized in the "full Ubuntu install" range to facilitate repeat visits.

Do you think people expect that for apps they've installed? Should those also be limited to a few MB?

I think that when I install an app, typically it will tell me up front how much disk space is required. For example, in the Mac App Store, the size of the app is at the top of the page.

> Should those also be limited to a few MB?

I also want to highlight that many/most websites that think of themselves as apps are at odds with their users in that perception. As an engineer, I know full well that e.g. the URL https://homedepot.com is powered by a sophisticated set of apps. But most users think it's a website.

This is important because people do & should have a different relationship with software they have chosen to install on their machines and websites. Yes, I know e.g. Figma.com does complex client-side stuff. Every Figma user would click a dialog to grant permission for it to do what it needs to do.

The problem is the current state of the art is that literally any website can spam up your disk and you don't even know. If I visit the website for a local radio station, or an e-commerce site, or university, or a site that will tell me what time it is now in a different time zone...I do not expect that it will download tons of data and store it on my disk in case I come back. That some engineers think that is reasonable is why the browser sandboxes need reinforcement.

> But most users think it's a website.

I'd be willing to bet most (younger?) users don't know what the difference between an app and a website is. Can't really blame them when the line between them has been blurring more and more over time. I think a growing number of users wouldn't even mention installing as a differentiator because you install PWAs (except on iOS).

Anyway, I think an important bit of information that was lost here is that browsers automatically purge data so that your disk doesn't fill up. If you're running low on space it will clean it up for you to make room.

> I do not expect that it will download tons of data and store it on my disk in case I come back. That some engineers think that is reasonable is why the browser sandboxes need reinforcement.

It's a reasonable thing to do for an app, so why not a website/PWA? Video games are a pretty good example where some stream assets while you are playing so that you don't have long install/update times. Getting in game faster is more important.

> most (younger?) users don't know what the difference between an app and a website is

Yeah, I doubt this because younger users overlap most heavily with "had to ask a parent for permission to install an app."

> It's a reasonable thing to do for an app, so why not a website/PWA?

Again, I chose to install an app and it has transparent install requirements. A website does not clear either of those bars.