If you’re saying that there’s no other way to create a mod API with clear security boundaries, I disagree.

The mod API should not have to do this anyway. The OS should do this. It is beyond belief that most operating systems just allow programs to do anything they want simply because they’re being executed.

And if the OS can’t do this, you run in a VM which nvidia disallow you to do in a performant way.

While I agree that it's not the best situation, (and I'm wholly against nvidia in this case.) And yeah this isn't about the mod-game api boundary, this is more about the mod-os boundary since that is harder to control against. WASM from my research so far doesn't allow any of that by default and it has to be passed through by the runtime. In this case it would be passed through to the retargeting compiler. This can give additional benefits like allowing mods on consoles in a more secure way and allowing for targeting the game to future cpu architectures without requiring all mods to recompile their code (not that I think the latter is a reason microsoft cares about.) But the idea of recompiling code when launching a game is already kind of standard on the gpu side of things.