On 15-10-2014 17:56, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> The address bar is one of the only things you can trust when browsing a
> web page
Provided your dns isn't spoofed. And you're are not being targeted with
a mitm attack. And perhaps a few other things. But yeah, the address bar
can normally be trusted.
>
On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 05:11:30 +0300
Matti Karnaattu wrote:
> Like removing that stupid "web browser"
> idiom that where is addressbar and back/forward buttons.
The address bar is one of the only things you can trust when browsing a
web page to the point that some mal-sites or mal-ads actually try t
>You are on the wrong list.
Ok. I will unscribe myself for.. eternity. Because
I obviously have hurt feelings. Especially yours, Theo.
I did not intentionally do that. And I have _never_ bashed
you. And I actually never got what makes you so upset.
I'm enthusiast to tech without religion. Agnosti
> >but at the same time using the conversation to hurt people trying to
> >build something simpler.
>
> It is not meant to hurt anyone.
"I didn't mean to kill that guy when I was doing 250km"
> It is just that sometimes happens event called "disruptive innovation".
You tried to break chmod. Pl
>but at the same time using the conversation to hurt people trying to
>build something simpler.
It is not meant to hurt anyone.
Optimal complexity is when there is nothing you like to add and nothing
you like to remove.
It is just that sometimes happens event called "disruptive innovation".
Whe
>If any of these end up being better than JS,
>I don't see any reason not to use them.
I think everyone of these are better if you don't care about portability.
>I prefer to use a desktop application for those instead
>of running them from my browser. Just saying.
There isn't much new desktop ap
Great conversation...
Somehow you guys spend all your time whining about complicated deep
technologies like Java / Javascript -- condemning them for their nasty
complexity -- but at the same time using the conversation to hurt people
trying to build something simpler.
Who do you work for? Govern
On 06-10-2014 17:48, Matti Karnaattu wrote:
> Node.js
I've used it, and there is too much hype about it. It has it's uses, but
can be replaced with other non javascript technologies, at least from
the server side.
> And this is current status. Apple, Canonical, Google and Microsoft
> pushing their
> But none of them require javascript to function.
Node.js
>What is not a good thing is to have just one standard. That's never
>good.
And this is current status. Apple, Canonical, Google and Microsoft
pushing their own competing front end ecosystems. And there is still
HTML/JS which is portable
>however it *is* realistic and reasonable to *limit*
>the cross-site JS code that is only there for the use of other third
>parties.
I agree. I filter too crap away. Javascript itself is not problem.
On 06-10-2014 14:20, Matti Karnaattu wrote:
> I strongly disagree.
>
> In server side there is vast amount of different software stacks build
> top of C library and they are incompatible. Running PHP code top of
> Java stack just doesn't work.
But none of them *require* javascript to function.
>
>
On Mon, 6 Oct 2014, Matti Karnaattu wrote:
> Disabling Javascript is like disabling ability to run modern application
> software. It is same if I just turn off computer. It is then secured.
>
Sorry, that is totally bogus! The **FIRST** thing one should do when
sitting down at a new browser is inst
>Except it doesn't, server side code is more universal.
I strongly disagree.
In server side there is vast amount of different software stacks build
top of C library and they are incompatible. Running PHP code top of
Java stack just doesn't work.
In client side, there has ongoing for several year
People wrote:
> There are two things which irritates me in computing:
>
> 1. Need of security updates
> 2. Two pieces of technology which are not compatible with each other.
>
> I'm GLAD that finally we have Javascript. At last, we have language and
> platform that WORKS universally.
Except it
On 4 Oct 2014 at 1:41, Matti Karnaattu wrote:
...
> I don't think that is pragmatic to expect people to use computers
> without applications. Or expect users of some software doesn't want to
> use applications.
>
why not be the ultimate pragmatist you preach and go run Windows?
(Isn't that wha
>and navigation of a site should not require javascript as
>per w3c guidelines.
The thing is that web is more than "web sites". It is also full of
applications and these are totally mixed.
>However considering OpenBSD users are security savvy and should
>understand the potential risks of random s
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 13:26:11 -0400 (EDT)
david...@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote:
> >
> > Keeping Javascript disabled is like disabling programmability from
> > shell. What is the idea?
>
> You're making a joke, maybe?
>
> *I* choose what programs my shell executes. But when I visit a
> webpage on
17 matches
Mail list logo
