Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netscape ISP Homepage

isp.netscape.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 120 posts

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#91

Post by vidarh »

zorked wrote: post #76
akoster wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of Opera Mini [1] utilizing Opera’s compression servers (which really helped with capped mobile data plans a few years back) or Google Web Light [2] which I have heard might be similar [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Mini [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Web_Light

I used to be involved with an ISP-specific product which was basically a plain-old HTTP proxy that would ensure everything is compressed with gzip at max settings and which downscaled images. For dial up, it worked well. For everything else the added latency that came with re-enconding reduced subjective connection speed considerably unless you were lucky to hit the server's cache.

It's unfortunate how many of these things won't work so well with SSL everywhere.

At one point I toyed with the idea of a setup that'd rely on keeping a cache reasonably coherent between two sides of a slow link, but it'd be most effective if it was shared, but it's a non-starter unless it's only shared between people who'd be happy with MITM'ing their SSL connections for the sake of getting more of their connections.

Basically if both sides have a decent sized cache, on a cache miss you can re-request the resource from the origin but instead of returning the full page compare it to the cache entries you know the other side also has and produce a diff, and return just the compressed diff. It also overcomes bad cache settings etc., as long as the slow link between the caches is the primary performance limit of course.

(To guard against the caches going out of sync, you can of course return a hash, and let the cache on the "client side" force a refresh if it does)

If I ever find myself on a really slow connection again, maybe I'll test it with a VPN to a VPS.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#92

Post by the-dude »

bayindirh wrote: post #73
pmlnr wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That may violate the TOS of the original connection but probably wouldn’t come up. How? If that were true, WiFi range extenders would violate TOS as well.

> How? If that were true, WiFi range extenders would violate TOS as well. A WiFi extender just repeats the same network with same security, SSID and access password. It doesn't extend connection to third parties. Similarly, if I have a large property with a large land, I can spread the network to every part of the land with the equipment of my choosing and no one would say anything unless I allow third parties unfett…

Same password, yes. But you can alter the SSID, on WEP at least, last time I checked.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#93

Post by bayindirh »

the-dude wrote: post #92
bayindirh wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How? If that were true, WiFi range extenders would violate TOS as well. A WiFi extender just repeats the same network with same security, SSID and access password. It doesn't extend connection to third parties. Similarly, if I have a large property with a large land, I can spread the network to every part of the land with the equipment of my choosing and no one would say anything unless I allow third parties unfett…

Same password, yes. But you can alter the SSID, on WEP at least, last time I checked.

You can always alter the SSID & password and present it as a completely different network (even you can run a different DHCP to make it a subnet effectively). However, when you keep the SSID the same, your devices can roam much easier.

In fact, WiFi has a roaming standard and latest devices can utilize this for mesh-like handoff without a central controller.

Recent laptops and phones handle it relatively well, it seems.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#94

Post by the-dude »

bayindirh wrote: post #93
the-dude wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same password, yes. But you can alter the SSID, on WEP at least, last time I checked.

You can always alter the SSID & password and present it as a completely different network (even you can run a different DHCP to make it a subnet effectively). However, when you keep the SSID the same, your devices can roam much easier. In fact, WiFi has a roaming standard and latest devices can utilize this for mesh-like handoff without a central controller. Recent laptops and phones handle it relatively well, it see…

The WiFI extender I used could not change the passphrase.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#95

Post by bayindirh »

the-dude wrote: post #94
bayindirh wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can always alter the SSID & password and present it as a completely different network (even you can run a different DHCP to make it a subnet effectively). However, when you keep the SSID the same, your devices can roam much easier. In fact, WiFi has a roaming standard and latest devices can utilize this for mesh-like handoff without a central controller. Recent laptops and phones handle it relatively well, it see…

The WiFI extender I used could not change the passphrase.

Mine (a TP-Link RE-200) can do anything you want with it. If you add it to a OneMesh network, these settings are (sensibly) disabled and synced from the root node (the router).

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#96

Post by the-dude »

bayindirh wrote: post #95
the-dude wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WiFI extender I used could not change the passphrase.

Mine (a TP-Link RE-200) can do anything you want with it. If you add it to a OneMesh network, these settings are (sensibly) disabled and synced from the root node (the router).

Mine, TP-Link from 2013 could definetely not do this : I assume because it just retransmitted the packets and did not have the horsepower to do a decrypt+recrypt.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#97

Post by dspillett »

kiwijamo wrote: post #65
Tijdreiziger wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That loaded fast. After getting through the order-of-magnitude slower cookie consent page, yes.

What cookie consent page?

https://imgur.com/a/vb6h0IF - complete with the "legitimate interest" checks that basically say "we see you'd rather not be stalked, we'd like to stalk you anyway". Never click "reject all" if you actually want to opt out of all tracking, always go to the options screen or what-ever they call it because "reject all" usually means "reject all except for those that claim legitimate interest" (i.e. not even remotely rejecting all).

If you are not in the EU, you just get all the tracking without even being asked (instead of being asked but any negative response somehow worked around).

Each of those chevrons when clicked lists the hundreds of partners that you are potentially being followed around by. They make it painful to opt out (impossible to permenantly opt out but of course easy to permanently opt in, accidentally or otherwise) though this design is not as egregious as many I've seen as it gives an opt-out-all click for "legitimate interest". Some sites ("powered by Admiral" - I'm looking at you, well actually I'm not as you are collecting in the list of sites blocked at the network DNS level here) make you click a separate option off for every. single. one. of. the. many. many. many. many. many. 3rd parties.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#98

Post by bayindirh »

the-dude wrote: post #96
bayindirh wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine (a TP-Link RE-200) can do anything you want with it. If you add it to a OneMesh network, these settings are (sensibly) disabled and synced from the root node (the router).

Mine, TP-Link from 2013 could definetely not do this : I assume because it just retransmitted the packets and did not have the horsepower to do a decrypt+recrypt.

Probably. SoC based devices improved explosively in the last 5 years.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#99

Post by dmitryminkovsky »

jandrese wrote: post #19

Some people are going to call the design dated, but to me that kind of layout is timeless. Just the facts and it has good information density. But LOL that the "Maps" link goes to mapquest.com. In other news Mapquest still exist.

Very much agree and only disappointed to see it's not laid out with tables.

Re: Netscape ISP Homepage

#100

Post by athenot »

Seeing that Netscape logo is a blast from the past. Out of curiosity I stripped out the subdomain to see where netscape.com goes these days, and it redirected me to aol.com. Ouch, that hurts!

Not just for nostalgic reasons but also as a parallel with how the open web these days is being co-opted by Google / Facebook.

Post reply on HN