One of the things I wish browsers supported would be signed content... IE your CDN/distributed content doesn't need to be on HTTPS, just have a header with a payload signature against the HTTPS cert that the application host uses... I don't know why such a beast was never introduced into the browsers.
I also feel that it would be nice to see more p2p protocols especially regarding live chat, and other systems. I think having a self-discoverable alternative to IRC could be a pretty nice thing... of course eventually the bots would destroy it if it got popular.
That's actually been discussed quite a lot. However, it shares the "request privacy problem" that I talked about in the blog entry; the mere fact that you're requesting information -- even if it's public -- is sometimes sensitive information.
Keep in mind that the determination of its sensitivity is often highly contextual; e.g., something that's not a problem in your country may be illegal elsewhere, or someone in a different situation to you may feel differently about how their request stream should be treated.
Fair enough... my main point was pragmatic... It would be nice to be able to serve certain assets more decentralized and widely distributed than even, for example cdnjs.
jQuery, React, shims for browserify, etc, would all be nice to haves outside of the main payload, and loadable/cacheable on a widely distributed signed system from the browser directly.
So this should be a user choice: Do I run my request through my download public accellerator or do I only get it from the server.
That would be similar to always providing a torrent for every single file — just without needing a torrent server, because the clients can handle that themselves.
I also feel that it would be nice to see more p2p protocols especially regarding live chat, and other systems. I think having a self-discoverable alternative to IRC could be a pretty nice thing... of course eventually the bots would destroy it if it got popular.