Sorry, off-topic, but as a fan it really bugs me that graphic halfway down appears taken without attribution from Hyperbole and a Half. http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/
[deleted]
Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
91–100 of 136 posts
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Missed that one. Too busy reading Hacker N -- I mean, writing code. And the meme-ification only makes me feel slightly better about it. I mean, what's it cost Jeff to give a little credit?
There is a good chance Jeff doesn't know about the source, and generated using one of the meme generator sites.
[deleted]
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently, yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark#Trademark_er...
IANAL, but since the content in question is not a trademark, I do not think that genericization applies. Since Hyperbole and a Half is Creative Commons licensed (CC-NC-ND), it looks like its licensing requirements would be satisfied by attributing the original source ( "Proper credit includes a prominent, easily visible link to the source of the material you want to use..." )[1]. I think making sure that images in yo…
[deleted]
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#94Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#95I use the EFF's Firefox addon called "HTTPS Everywhere". It has a list of websites that have HTTPS enabled, and whenever your browser is directed to the plain-HTTP version, it will go to the HTTPS version instead. https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere A useful (but tbh kinda annoying) companion addon is the HTTPS Finder. It checks to see if the website you're currently browsing also has an HTTPS version, and will add…
Thanks for mentioning this. I've been using HTTPS Everywhere for a while now, but it's been almost entirely a vanilla install since I got it. The only exception so far has been HN itself, and only because someone put the new rule in a comment. I then had to use Google to find out how to actually install the rule, as it was pretty non-obvious to me.
It seems I've been downvoted, and I think I know why. I can't edit my original comment so a reply will have to do.
My comment was meant to be a sincere thanks for mentioning the HTTPS Finder extension. Reading my comment now, without that clarification, I can understand how it could read as a criticism of the HTTPS Everywhere extension instead. That was not my intention. I merely wanted to express my thanks for making me aware of a complimentary extension which adds useful functionality to an extension I already use.
If the downvote was for another reason, please let me know what was the reason for it so I can try to avoid committing the same error in the future.
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#96One item that this (excellent) blog post does not adress is what to do about referer information which is generally not passed along when clicking on links on sites being browsed over SSL. In order to "get credit" for all of the traffic that they send everywhere twitter had to develop a fairly elaborate system of redirections (built into t.co) to make sure that clicks from twitter.com ended up being sent out to the r…
If HTTP referrers never existed, the web would still be huge and would still be full of amazing content.
Why should we care about retaining referrers? I think the only reason that people dislike the idea of losing them, is because they've got used to them being there.
I don't particularly like the fact that sites which I click through to can see where I'm coming from, or what I was searching for, so I've installed a Firefox addon called RefControl to get around it. The majority of people don't know anything about referrers though.
I'm sure that brick and mortar shops would also love to know how I was referred to them when I walk through their door. They don't get this information unless I consciously decide to give it to them though. And even though they don't get this information, they still manage to sell products.
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
The taboo against "theft" is a cultural norm, and now there's a new cultural norm.
[deleted]
I think you mean "tribal" norm.
There's no other norm.
Your tribe endorses theft.
Or it just doesn't consider an act that doesn't deprive someone of anything they had to be theft.
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
The taboo against "theft" is a cultural norm, and now there's a new cultural norm.
[deleted]
Even the very definitions of words are tribally defined, and carry implicit values. Some (not me) could make a case that wage slavery is also morally indefensible, or that private property is a form of theft from the poor. The fact that you see no distinction between copyright and theft is a perfect example of this morality-through-definition.
To use a straw-man example: Donald Trump owns the trademark to the phrase "You're fired." Am I stealing if I repeat this phrase? Now how about Amazon's 1-click, or humming "Happy Birthday"?
A hundred years ago, you could own the copyright to a book, but not claim ownership of a phrase or obvious idea. A thousand years ago, you could not effectively claim ownership of a book. Ten thousand years ago, you (probably) could not have claimed ownership of land, at least in any form we're familiar with. These are all things we made up, for better or worse.
Regardless of any person's or tribe's specific opinions on economic issues, private property, or ownership of ideas, I think it should be implicitly obvious that breaking society's copyright rules is a different act than stealing, just as manslaughter is different from first-degree murder. It doesn't justify it, it simply acknowledges that it is a different act.
Also, this particular case is laughably mild. The creator has only benefitted by sharing this free art snippet and is now internet-famous as a result. I guarantee that Jeff would remove it if asked, and also that the creator would never think to do so, given that this image is strewn across thousands of websites.
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#99Scumbag CodingHorror Says encrypt all the things... isn't encrypted.
Did you notice that he was referring specifically to sites with accounts? There's little point in encrypting public data, especially if tracking cookies aren't involved.
Re: Should All Web Traffic Be Encrypted?
#100One item that this (excellent) blog post does not adress is what to do about referer information which is generally not passed along when clicking on links on sites being browsed over SSL. In order to "get credit" for all of the traffic that they send everywhere twitter had to develop a fairly elaborate system of redirections (built into t.co) to make sure that clicks from twitter.com ended up being sent out to the r…
If HTTP referrers never existed, the web would still be huge and would still be full of amazing content. Why should we care about retaining referrers? I think the only reason that people dislike the idea of losing them, is because they've got used to them being there. I don't particularly like the fact that sites which I click through to can see where I'm coming from, or what I was searching for, so I've installed a…
Inertia shouldn't stop us doing something. Where a visitor comes from is very valuable (not just monetarily), and I don't think it really infringes on privacy.