661–670 of 919 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We might even call it "favicon", for the fun of it… :-)
Not sure if serious, but no. Anyone can copy a favicon; the point of an identicon is that it's generated from the domain name, so subverting it would require an attacker to find a hash collision with a visually similar domain.
URLs may be weird but they are not so complex that we need these games.
I hope people start moving from chrome to firefox. The standards they pushing are harming the web in ways.
i use Firefox @ work and @home for serious stuff. The only reason i don't use Firefox 100% is due to the Android app which is a lag fest. Mozilla needs to put more resources on Android.
Looks like this is intentional. To change it back go to chrome://flags/#omnibox-ui-hide-steady-state-url-scheme-and-subdomains and disable the setting.
Additionally, if this flag ever goes away, the "kFormatUrlOmitTrivialSubdomains" is the internal flag for this, it seems[1], though its description says it's "Not in kFormatUrlOmitDefaults"[2]. Back when they removed the "http:" off of URLs, I used to use a hex editor to turn the kFormatUrlOmitHTTP bit flag off every time I got a new build, so I'd get the URL formatting I wanted, but eventually lost the mental wherew…
That's when you automate it as part of your "set up my environment exactly the way I like it" scripts ;-)
Looks like this is intentional. To change it back go to chrome://flags/#omnibox-ui-hide-steady-state-url-scheme-and-subdomains and disable the setting.
Additionally, if this flag ever goes away, the "kFormatUrlOmitTrivialSubdomains" is the internal flag for this, it seems[1], though its description says it's "Not in kFormatUrlOmitDefaults"[2]. Back when they removed the "http:" off of URLs, I used to use a hex editor to turn the kFormatUrlOmitHTTP bit flag off every time I got a new build, so I'd get the URL formatting I wanted, but eventually lost the mental wherew…
Incidentally I want to figure out how to do this on Linux.
I presume I need debug symbol files, which I can download easily.
How would I do this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm in the opposite boat from you. Firefox on Android is nice, especially thanks to being able to install an ad blocker. Firefox on my desktop literally brings my entire machine to its knees, and destroys performance in all other apps that are open. Pulling that off while not even getting close to maxing out the CPU is rather impressive. :/
Same here. FB chokes FF every other time I open it. My CPU and RAM consumption spikes. I have to close FF and reopen. Sometimes that doesn't work either. It's annoying and frustrating.
Considering a subdomain "trivial" is ridiculous... there's a difference between "www.example.com" and "example.com". Not only can they serve different sites, they can even have different DNS records! It seems that "m." is also considered a trivial subdomain. So when a user clicks a link to a "m.facebook.com" uri, they'll be confused why FB looks different when the browser reports it's on "facebook.com". I sincerely h…
Oh come on. "www." was used as a way of delineating what was a web address. Hence the fashion of putting that there so people knew you had to do it in the browser. Before then people used to also put the " http://" on there, and the combination of the two on vehicles/signs was ridiculous. We're now in a web world. People know what a URL is. "domain.com" isn't ambiguous, it's obvious to man, beast or child that you ty…
But that's because it's .com. Now, there are too many gTLDs, and companies will build their brand around their use of .io, .me, .cs, .es, etc. Just the other day I saw a link that caught my eye to studio.zeldman, and I had to take a moment to hover over the link to see if that was some new branded gTLD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you care about usability this is clearly an improvement. The cost/benefit doesn't work out. It's a usability improvement, but it comes with a huge cost, where many, many sites have the fundamental function of a URL -- that of an address/specifier across the internet -- basically broken. The person who implemented this change either didn't work out the cost, or decided they didn't care. Everyone is hyperventilating…
> How would you feel if your phone started to change the telephone number it dialed? If they replaced the country code with a flag, that would be an improvement. If they replaced the carrier number with the logo of the company that's also not bad. These are UI changes and the one you proposed about the phone numbers are great :)
If I were to propose a change, it would be 1-to-1. What happened in Chrome 69 isn't one to one. It's a surjection, which broke lots of URLs. That's the difference between a great UI change and an inconsiderate, idiotic one.
I would wager the twelve character prefix "https://www."would make no sense to 99.9% of the users and should be the default for over 99.9% of requests they would be making any given day.
I am guessing Google has evidence that this is the case.