3 ms·
> One edge case, while unfortunate, is not a very strong argument for why everyone sitting in Starbucks or McDonalds deserves to have their internet activity sp
by rlpb 11y ago
> One edge case, while unfortunate, is not a very strong argument for why everyone sitting in Starbucks or McDonalds deserves to have their internet activity spied upon by anyone with a copy of Wireshark.
Who argued for that? Nobody has asked for SSL to be banned, or for SSL to not be available, or even that SSL shouldn't be the default.
- Someone1234 11y agoSo... What are they arguing for exactly? Nothing?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- FooNull 11y agoI think they're just trying to point out an instance where the overhead of SSL connections is a burden. It's interesting. It's something that many developers wouldn't think about, but it has a real world consequence for this user in this instance. Yes, we aren't going to throw away SSL because they had a bad experience, but it IS interesting to note, and it may even lead a few developers to think about how their tools could impact the users in non-optimal conditions. It doesn't have to be an argument to be interesting...
- lisper 11y agoYes, exactly this. HN, for example, is ONLY available on HTTPS. That means that most of the time I can't access it. (Right now the situation is better -- only 750ms ping :-)