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

Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

bugs.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 919 posts

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#731

Post by hdkrgr »

vbezhenar wrote: post #586
jrowley wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many users never use the url bar. They just 'Google' for websites they want to access and follow the results.

I'm occasionally doing that and especially suggest non-technical users to do exactly this thing. I can mistype URL. Google will correct me, if site is well-known. Otherwise I'm risking to go to phishing website.

I just finished helping out a friend who did exactly this thing, clicked on an ad at the results page thinking it was Google's top result and was redirected to an ESTA scam site where they lost a bunch of money.

What's easier to tell apart for nontechnical users? URL bar from Google search field or ads from Google results?

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#732

Post by zaarn »

Nadya wrote: post #300
trocadero wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> http://pool.ntp.org/ takes me to an "It works!" default Apache 2 page for an Ubuntu installation. As the comment in the issue describes, http://pool.ntp.org/ takes you to a random ntp server. Either way, the ask was for a difference in www.example.com vs example.com. Not a difference in www.pool.example.com vs pool.example.com. In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK). >Even if you u…

>In the latter case, the different subdomains will still be shown (AFAIK). http://www.pool.example.com displays as http://pool.example.com Here's a gif: https://vgy.me/61I0DA.gif For fun I'm going to set up a www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www record. http://www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.example.com shows as example.com E: I'll add it to my certs later but I did it: https://www.www.www.www.www.www.www.www.…

That is absolutely insane and someone should be fired and shamed for this. I didn't like just trimming a pure www. but trimming any www. in the hostname is just dumb behaviour.

How would I differentiate between loadbalancer1.www.intranet and loadbalancer1.intranet? THOSE ARE NOT THE SAME.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#735

Post by Yokohiii »

crazygringo wrote: post #356

Safari already hides "www.". In fact it hides everything except the root-level domain, e.g. " https://www.google.com/about/" shows just "[lock] google.com". Firefox and Opera show the full domain but gray out everything in the entire URL except the root-level domain, so "www." is gray. Just saying, de-emphasizing and hiding parts of the URL is clearly a trend. This isn't just a Google thing.

There is quite a bit confusion how it actually works, nobody seems to had a look at it. Chrome simply hides the subdomain if the url bar is not in edit mode, these parts are still accessible/editable and the http host behaves (and is recovered from history) as before. Copying the url works as expected.

It is still confusing for tech people, because we often need awareness where we are.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#736

Post by nielsole »

saintPirelli wrote: post #724
rckclmbr wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched to firefox a year ago. Its a little slower, but im a lot happier. Ive been trying to degoogle as much as reasonable. I moved to fastmail as well. Still using an android, but would switch if a reasonable alternative that wasnt iphone came up. Im not paranoid or a privacy nut, just think google is too involved in my life.

Same here. Have you found any viable alternative to the Google Calendar? I'm at the point where I'm thinking about hosting a calendar project from GitHub myself.

The calendar of Fastmail works. It's not great, but it does the job

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#737

Post by eecc »

pvorb wrote: post #615
masswerk wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I mistook "that is rendered from the domain" for "rendered from a resource from the domain". However, teach users to read domain names! If users do not grasp the general concept, e.g., if the supposed identity is just "example" (possibly with some decoration considered insignificant) and not "example.com", how are they supposed to survive? Domains have been around for more than a quarter of a century, the Inte…

Yes, it would be nice if every child would learn these basics in school.

Yes, learning to be good consumers is way more important than basic skills such as maths, reading, writing and general critical thinking /s

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#738

Post by amygdyl »

pvorb wrote: post #615
masswerk wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I mistook "that is rendered from the domain" for "rendered from a resource from the domain". However, teach users to read domain names! If users do not grasp the general concept, e.g., if the supposed identity is just "example" (possibly with some decoration considered insignificant) and not "example.com", how are they supposed to survive? Domains have been around for more than a quarter of a century, the Inte…

Yes, it would be nice if every child would learn these basics in school.

I am expanding the idea that I posited above, to use the USPTO, for one canonical answer for every query concerning the identity of business services on the Internet...

This involves providing both clear identity confirmation and the Favicon, to the browser, from USPTO managed servers, to visually green light to the user, the correct online correspondent.

Schools are a excellent arbiter of the quality and integrity of known correspondents online.

Nota bene, I say known correspondents, I am limiting this idea to whitelist sites and services only.

Color borders surrounding each Favicon, can briefly flash.

I want as a parent, to need only glance at the top left corner of the browser that my son is using. Kids don't want my criticism of what they find a engaging experience. My colleagues don't want my analytical views of their Economist newspaper reading, for that matter...But I think it would be great to see really one look response to a parent's concern. This animation can be enlivened by a cursor across the toolbar or similar gesture. "No worries, dad" is a great positive action to encourage. Because it's not about censorship, it's about learning what authenticity is.

I imagine a nice modern pulsating heartbeat that's restful, for a positive identification of a trusted correspondent, and a fluttering and increasingly flashy, insistent nagging for a warning.

I will add to my wishlist, the ability to sign a local whitelist sites database, complete with ticketing system, to which the kids are able to submit the arguments for, for example, sites and blogs that are not within the penumbral enclave of this identity umbrella.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#739

Post by gumby »

masswerk wrote: post #717
gumby wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are also legal concerns with catch-all domains in some countries. Wow, really? Could you expand a little? I tried to search but all I got was catch-all mail addresses and no legal issues. Thanks!

Here in Austria, we had a rather problematic court ruling regarding this. Following to this and to common recommendations catch-all domains were mostly disabled, at least, you run them at your own risk. What it was about: Say, there was a review or best-price-search site (here, "service.at"), using catch-all and mapping subdomain requests to product searches. So "acme.service.at" would be remapped to, say, "service.a…

Wow, that's particularly deranged if "service.at/search?q=acme" is considered acceptable (and if that's not, how could any search work?).

Thanks for the explanation. I honestly would not have imagined anything like that.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#740

Post by [deleted] »

lvs wrote: post #238
crispyporkbites wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a shoddy implementation on Citibank's part. Google are just fucking the web over so we all have to fit their structure. This is standard incumbent behaviour, they are drawing up the moat bridge, inch by inch.

I think the downvotes here are uncalled-for. This is correct. Google is leveraging a dominant market position to make seemingly frivolous changes that will ultimately benefit them commercially. Come on, you know where this is going: They are going to hide amp subdomain, so you don't know if you're looking at AMP or the actual destination. And then suddenly the whole world funnels through AMP.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN