41–50 of 62 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All those pitiful ignoramuses, who have no idea how to walk three times around the block to avoid the Staasi - they need to be protected from the secret police, pshaw!
I can't figure out how you intend this comment to be understood. It seems like you're insulting the victims, but you're also proposing a very reasonable (IMHO) law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Case study: I help run a site that has resources for trans and LGBT people. With a question as sensitive and personal as “am I transgender or not and how would I know,” it’s deeply important to me that visiting my website won’t accidentally get my users into trouble, even indirectly through tracking or federated cohort ad targeting. - The only JavaScript is that which is necessary to run the site; - The site only lis…
> The only JavaScript is that which is necessary to run the site No JS is required to 'run' a site. I can and do use Hackernews without ever requiring JS to be enabled. Everything works via POST, it's quick and simple. Yes. A Non-JS world is painful, and there are many difficulties, but ensuring your site works with noscript would do the world a huge favor.
My post above was concerned most of all with privacy, and the only scripts are for page rendering, they’re hosted from my domain, and they make no network calls. Bytecode in, DOM nodes out, all on the user’s device.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The only JavaScript is that which is necessary to run the site No JS is required to 'run' a site. I can and do use Hackernews without ever requiring JS to be enabled. Everything works via POST, it's quick and simple. Yes. A Non-JS world is painful, and there are many difficulties, but ensuring your site works with noscript would do the world a huge favor.
If it's something like a resource locator or questionnaire, then doing the processing locally in JS is in fact better for privacy than sending personal data over the network. It's nice when websites work without JS but you are a deeply unserious engineer if you think that there are no tradeoffs involved.
But yeah, that’s certainly a bit of a novelty.
The only way to stop this from happening in the long term is to educate users that companies are spying on them, and tell them about the tools to prevent it. Depending on site owners and spyware companies, like Facebook, to solve the problem is super naive, and will never solve it. They directly benefit from these "leaks," and so they have no motivation to prevent them.
The only way to stop this from happening in the long term is to educate users that companies are spying on them, and tell them about the tools to prevent it. Depending on site owners and spyware companies, like Facebook, to solve the problem is super naive, and will never solve it. They directly benefit from these "leaks," and so they have no motivation to prevent them.
The only way to stop this from happening in the long term is to educate users that companies are spying on them, and tell them about the tools to prevent it. Depending on site owners and spyware companies, like Facebook, to solve the problem is super naive, and will never solve it. They directly benefit from these "leaks," and so they have no motivation to prevent them.
Is it realistic or sensible to expect every internet user to become a security maven?
The only way to stop this from happening in the long term is to educate users that companies are spying on them, and tell them about the tools to prevent it. Depending on site owners and spyware companies, like Facebook, to solve the problem is super naive, and will never solve it. They directly benefit from these "leaks," and so they have no motivation to prevent them.
Legislation is used to protect vulnerable groups and health data. Strong reasonable legislation is hard to write, and expensive to enforce, but effective enforcement will cause changes to internet sites. Think GDPR.
It is hard to manage cross-jurisdictional issues on the internet. In this case, Sweden could probably design good restrictions since it is a site local to Sweden?
Trying to get everyone to become security professionals is highly unrealistic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The only JavaScript is that which is necessary to run the site No JS is required to 'run' a site. I can and do use Hackernews without ever requiring JS to be enabled. Everything works via POST, it's quick and simple. Yes. A Non-JS world is painful, and there are many difficulties, but ensuring your site works with noscript would do the world a huge favor.
If it's something like a resource locator or questionnaire, then doing the processing locally in JS is in fact better for privacy than sending personal data over the network. It's nice when websites work without JS but you are a deeply unserious engineer if you think that there are no tradeoffs involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's something like a resource locator or questionnaire, then doing the processing locally in JS is in fact better for privacy than sending personal data over the network. It's nice when websites work without JS but you are a deeply unserious engineer if you think that there are no tradeoffs involved.
I could see the idea of building a quiz or something with CSS and named anchors (links within the document). No JavaScript, everything all on one .html, and it would work on elinks! But yeah, that’s certainly a bit of a novelty.
But I think "this site doesn't use JS so it must be safe" is...a really bad assumption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The only JavaScript is that which is necessary to run the site No JS is required to 'run' a site. I can and do use Hackernews without ever requiring JS to be enabled. Everything works via POST, it's quick and simple. Yes. A Non-JS world is painful, and there are many difficulties, but ensuring your site works with noscript would do the world a huge favor.
You have no idea what site is it. Perhaps it's an interactive game or a questionnaire. POSTing that data to a server is much worse than running some clientside code. Your post is not productive at all.