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

Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

androidpolice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 497 posts

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#251

Post by laurent92 »

emptyparadise wrote: post #223
aden1ne wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, it seems computer literacy is actually dropping over time. I taught an entry-level scripting course aimed at medical graduate students for several years, and each year the number of students who did not comprehend even the concept of files and folders was higher than the previous year.

That's entirely our industry's fault. After all, there are no files anymore, just cloud documents on remote websites.

And we didn’t reproduce the hierarchical nature of files in the cloud, rather we have flat lists, tags, sort-by-recently-opened, etc.

However, flat structures are harder to use, and people tend to use Google Docs less than the shared network folders when Word existed.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#252

Post by rsanek »

switch11 wrote: post #210
khaledh wrote: post #12

IMO this is the real reason why they're pushing hard towards this: However, it's also worth considering that making the web address less important, as this feature does, benefits Google as a company. Google's goal with Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) and similar technologies is to keep users on Google-hosted content as much as possible, and Chrome for Android already modifies the address bar on AMP pages to hide that…

agreed 100% Google revenue is slowly going down Only option for Google is to pretend Internet doesn't exist Anyone who is using Adwords or doing Search Engine Optimization look at what results look like It's 50% to 70% traffic being routed to Google remaining being routed mostly to people who pay a lot to Adwords * It's almost purely Pay to Play now in most of the lucrative areas

> Google revenue is slowly going down

Perhaps you mean their revenue growth is slowing? Because they're actually seeing pretty healthy year-over-year revenue increases: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266206/googles-annual-gl...

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#254

Post by saagarjha »

UncleMeat wrote: post #204
dwheeler wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not just inconvenient, hiding or modifying URLs is a lie and is a security problem. Hiding part of the URL means that you don't really see what's going on, and that is the first step towards a security problem, not away from it.

All of the TLS handshake configurations are hidden from your UI. It is hard to see "what's going on". You aren't shown a cert signature each time you request a page. Yet the lock icon doesn't get hate. The non-domain information in a URL is useless for making security decisions for virtually 100% of users. If anything, it has negative utility since you can make URLs nearly arbitrarily confusing as part of a phishing…

I don’t understand, the lock icon gives you exactly the information you could want from that though? It tells you immediately if the site you are on is HTTPS, you don’t have to hover or anything. And if you want even more details (which is not something anyone does while they browse the internet, FWIW) you can also get that information too. This change hides the information that people actually expect that UI to have–that’s why there’s an option to in-hide it!

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#255

Post by rsanek »

gravitas wrote: post #245
scott_s wrote: post #107

Something I haven't seen anyone here bring up yet: many URLs are meaningless to humans past the domain. For an example, look at the top of this page. The only semantic meaning in the URL for this post is `news.ycombinator.com`. The rest, `item?id=24156986`, is meaningless to a human. (But, of course, meaningful to HN's backend.) A lot of (most?) of the URLs on the web are not semantic . They're naked application look…

> For an example, look at the top of this page. The only semantic meaning in the URL for this post is `news.ycombinator.com`. The rest, `item?id=24156986`, is meaningless to a human. I agree, but I'm going to say the unpopular thing: HN has problems and is an archaic design from the past, and this issue is due to the proliferation of changing the titles of posts (thereby breaking a vanity URL) or changing the URL tha…

It easily could, even with title changes -- just keep a history of them and redirect to the latest title. Dropbox Paper does this pretty well.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#256

Post by thethethethe »

maest wrote: post #124
mrmcd wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The degree to which HN is obsessed with AMP is hilarious at times. You'd think every single one of the 100k engineers that work there do nothing but dream up ways to trick people into using AMP for some secret illuminati end goal. If you don't like AMP, that's fine. If you don't like this UX change that's fine too (and I suspect will be easily fixed with an extension). But maybe consider for a moment that not every s…

I'm all for balanced debate, but strawmanning doesn't help anyone.

How this this a straw man? Parent is just agreeing with gp that a lot of HN users are obsessed with AMP and it’s supposed evils

Disclaimer: googler opinions are my own

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#257

Post by parliament32 »

khaledh wrote: post #12

IMO this is the real reason why they're pushing hard towards this: However, it's also worth considering that making the web address less important, as this feature does, benefits Google as a company. Google's goal with Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) and similar technologies is to keep users on Google-hosted content as much as possible, and Chrome for Android already modifies the address bar on AMP pages to hide that…

>AMP

Tangentially related: on mobile, I've been having a good time with Firefox with this plugin: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/amp2html/

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#258

Post by wwwwwwwww »

Switched to Vivaldi.

One click, and Vivaldi shows the entire URL, as it should be, including scheme and everything.

(Vivaldi browser was founded by employees of Opera, when Opera was sold to a Chinese company. Vivaldi is owned entirely by it's employees)

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#259

Post by staticassertion »

I don't believe this is an attack. It hides the full address, but you can hover over it to see the whole thing, or even enable full addresses easily.

I believe this is legitimately done to improve UX for users who may be phished. Tying this to AMP is a mistake.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#260

Post by brundolf »

dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #169
bitexploder wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are going back to AOL days. That didn’t work out so well for AOL in the long run. It’s kind of crazy to me you can’t do marketing now without at least discussing Google and Facebook these days. Edit: at least you knew you were the customer with AOL and paid them with clear terms for access.

The only difference is that Google has endlessly more clout and depth than AOL and my fear is that where AOL failed, Google may succeed. With Firefox succumbing this week, this is pretty horrible. I’m not a Richard Stallman type, but I think it’s come to the point where if you have even the slightest pretense of being a “free web” person, using Chrome or a Chromium-based browser has become unconscionable. This compan…

I've been using Firefox/Safari on my personal devices for a couple years now, but as a web developer I unfortunately can't not use Chrome at work because of its dev tools. I try to test on other browsers when I have time - I've always made a point to push for supporting at least Firefox, as an organization - but when I'm iterating I really just need the Chrome tools. Firefox's tools always remained one or two steps behind, and now that they fired their dev tools team I assume they won't even be doing that, soon.

The same goes for Google Search/DuckDuckGo. I use the latter on my personal devices, but when I'm tracking down a problem at work I just need the thing that's going to work the best.

Post reply on HN