4 ms·

Always-on gzip encoding is also technically broken, it's just far more likely to be supported out of the box by other HTTP clients. > What does matter is that

Always-on gzip encoding is also technically broken, it's just far more likely to be supported out of the box by other HTTP clients. > What does matter is that my website only supports the HTTPS protocol No, that has literally no bearing on this discussion about your use of Brotli encoding. You're weirdly fixated with this, but it's completely irrelevant. > This is nothing more than pure trolling. Do you normally go out of your way to insult people who are trying to have a discussion with you? Because that's what calling someone a troll is. > All major web browsers support Brotli over HTTPS Why doesn't Safari count in your eyes as a major browser? Or perhaps more interestingly, why doesn't iOS Safari count? Are you really ok with your site not working for 100% of iOS users? > In addition, as the web is moving to being HTTPS-exclusive, it's about time that you start getting used to it. You're wasting your time. Why do I have to keep repeating this? HTTPS has literally nothing to do with this discussion. You keep bringing it up over and over again as if it's somehow meaningful, but all it tells me is that you literally have no idea what you're talking about.

mmstick 9y ago
> No, that has literally no bearing on this discussion about your use of Brotli encoding. You're weirdly fixated with this, but it's completely irrelevant. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink-dev/JufzX024oy0/WEOGbN43AwAJ https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink-d... > > Important note: Brotli availability is restricted to HTTPS connections. You Cannot Use Brotli Without HTTPS. Chrome does not support this, and Firefox does not support this. The same goes for Edge. One of the major reasons for me moving my website to HTTPS is so that I could use Brotli compression. Otherwise, Firefox and Chrome will merely get a content encoding error page because br is an unknown encoding format when using HTTP! HTTPS is required, and Google engineers are telling you this themselves. You're wrong, and Google engineers are right. End of story. > Why doesn't Safari count in your eyes as a major browser? Or perhaps more interestingly, why doesn't iOS Safari count? Are you really ok with your site not working for 100% of iOS users? I do not care if iOS users using Safari are unable to access my website. In the same way that iOS app developers do not care that Android users cannot use their apps, I do not care if iOS users using Safari are unable to access my personal blog. My target audience is not iOS users. My target audience consists of Linux users using either Chrome or Firefox. So basically, you have tunnel vision and are just here to bicker and argue senselessly about things you don't understand or are unwilling to accept. I'm not sure why you're so upset that I have decided to not support your access to my personal blog. No matter how many times I explain things to you, you never seem to get it through your head. This is my website, not yours. I will not support gzip, and I will not support uncompressed content, nor will I support tools that only work with HTTP.
- eridius 9y ago
  I already explained this in another comment almost an hour ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14346188 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14346188). Brotli works perfectly fine over HTTP. The only difference between HTTP and HTTPS here is Chrome does not include "br" in the Accept-Encoding header for HTTP. But it will still handle a Content-Encoding of "br" just fine over HTTP. > One of the major reasons for me moving my website to HTTPS is so that I could use Brotli compression. Why do you care so much about this particular compression format? > Otherwise, Firefox and Chrome will merely get a content encoding error page because br is an unknown encoding format when using HTTP! You clearly did not test this, because Chrome interprets Brotli responses just fine over HTTP. I wager Firefox does too, but I'm not about to install Firefox just to test. > You're wrong, and Google engineers are right. End of story. Google engineers are right, but you are not right. You don't understand what the Google engineers are saying. The link you provided specifically has to do with the Accept-Encoding header and not Brotli support as a whole. > My target audience consists of Linux users using either Chrome or Firefox. I still don't understand why you're intentionally breaking the open web. It makes no sense. > No matter how many times I explain things to you, you never seem to get it through your head. You should try actually listening. You keep explaining things that are factually wrong or completely irrelevant. You seem to not actually understand HTTP, HTTPS, Content-Encodings, or even the idea of the open web in general. And you're going out of your way to break 99% of tools out there for no discernible reason. Why do you love Brotli so much that you're willing to break HTTP just to use it?
  - mmstick 9y ago
    Brotli does not work over HTTP. Period. It doesn't work, and you have yet to prove that it works. I am not the only person who can provide proof that it will not work. It clearly states it on the Google URLs that I sent you that it does not work without HTTPS, along with some reasons as to why that decision was made. You are, instead, trying to argue in face of reality. That is foolish. > You clearly did not test this, because Chrome interprets Brotli responses just fine over HTTP. I wager Firefox does too, but I'm not about to install Firefox just to test. This is just willful ignorance on your part. I have already tested this, and it is partially why I moved towards implementing HTTPS. The web is full of resources to back this up: https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Brotli%20requires%20HTTPS https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Brotli%20require... > Google engineers are right, but you are not right. You don't understand what the Google engineers are saying. The link you provided specifically has to do with the Accept-Encoding header and not Brotli support as a whole. You don't seem to understand what you think you understand. Accept-Encoding means that it will not publicly state that it supports Brotli. I wonder why that is..... because Brotli is disabled for HTTP connections. End of story again! Stop beating the dead horse! You are wrong. > I still don't understand why you're intentionally breaking the open web. It makes no sense. I don't understand why you think I am. If anything, you are merely trolling and wasting your time. > You should try actually listening I've listened and listened, but you aren't speaking anything worth listening to. You yourself refuse to listen to my point of view and explanations, so why should I bother listening to your BS? > You keep explaining things that are factually wrong or completely irrelevant. I have done nothing of the sort. You, however, are stating that Brotli works over HTTP. This is factually incorrect. It is not allowed. http://www.omgchrome.com/brotli-http-compression-coming-to-chrome/ http://www.omgchrome.com/brotli-http-compression-coming-to-c... > Be aware that while the compression algorithm is designed for HTTP content encoding it currently only works over HTTPS. https://samsaffron.com/archive/2016/06/15/the-current-state-of-brotli-compression https://samsaffron.com/archive/2016/06/15/the-current-state-... > Brotli is HTTPS only > > If you visit a site over HTTP your browser will not accept the br encoding. The reasoning for this is documented at the end of the chromium issue. https://ayesh.me/apache-brotli https://ayesh.me/apache-brotli > 'm not sure if there is a technical reason behind this, but all the browsers I tested with require HTTPS in order to enable Brotli support. I have written a small post about more reasons to switch to HTTPS as well. You are basically calling Google and each of these authors that I've linked as liars as we all have tested Brotli over HTTP and HTTPS and can concur precisely what Google and Mozilla engineers stated: Brotli is only supported with HTTPS! > And you're going out of your way to break 99% of tools out there for no discernible reason. First you said it was 40%, and now you are saying it's 99%? Both statistics are bogus given that around 80% of users are using either Chrome or Firefox, and versions that support Brotli! And going out of my way? I already explained to you how I did not go out of my way. I am not targeting anyone. It was only a few lines of code to change my content cache from being Gzip-backed to Brotli-backed. You just have a persecution complex. I actually had to go out of my way earlier in order to implement a quick error message page for each of my routes because you cried so much about it. But that's all I'm going to give you, an error message. Here's my advice to you: stop being childish. No matter how many times you are told that you are wrong, with evidence to back it up, you simply ignore it. That's called ignorance. I've repeatedly told you that you're wasting your time with this ignorance. And no matter how many times you demand someone to do something, you can't make them do something they aren't going to do.

mmstick 9y ago

> No, that has literally no bearing on this discussion about your use of Brotli encoding. You're weirdly fixated with this, but it's completely irrelevant. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink-dev/JufzX024oy0/WEOGbN43AwAJ https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink-d... > > Important note: Brotli availability is restricted to HTTPS connections. You Cannot Use Brotli Without HTTPS. Chrome does not support this, and Firefox does not support this. The same goes for Edge. One of the major reasons for me moving my website to HTTPS is so that I could use Brotli compression. Otherwise, Firefox and Chrome will merely get a content encoding error page because br is an unknown encoding format when using HTTP! HTTPS is required, and Google engineers are telling you this themselves. You're wrong, and Google engineers are right. End of story. > Why doesn't Safari count in your eyes as a major browser? Or perhaps more interestingly, why doesn't iOS Safari count? Are you really ok with your site not working for 100% of iOS users? I do not care if iOS users using Safari are unable to access my website. In the same way that iOS app developers do not care that Android users cannot use their apps, I do not care if iOS users using Safari are unable to access my personal blog. My target audience is not iOS users. My target audience consists of Linux users using either Chrome or Firefox. So basically, you have tunnel vision and are just here to bicker and argue senselessly about things you don't understand or are unwilling to accept. I'm not sure why you're so upset that I have decided to not support your access to my personal blog. No matter how many times I explain things to you, you never seem to get it through your head. This is my website, not yours. I will not support gzip, and I will not support uncompressed content, nor will I support tools that only work with HTTP.

eridius 9y ago
I already explained this in another comment almost an hour ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14346188 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14346188). Brotli works perfectly fine over HTTP. The only difference between HTTP and HTTPS here is Chrome does not include "br" in the Accept-Encoding header for HTTP. But it will still handle a Content-Encoding of "br" just fine over HTTP. > One of the major reasons for me moving my website to HTTPS is so that I could use Brotli compression. Why do you care so much about this particular compression format? > Otherwise, Firefox and Chrome will merely get a content encoding error page because br is an unknown encoding format when using HTTP! You clearly did not test this, because Chrome interprets Brotli responses just fine over HTTP. I wager Firefox does too, but I'm not about to install Firefox just to test. > You're wrong, and Google engineers are right. End of story. Google engineers are right, but you are not right. You don't understand what the Google engineers are saying. The link you provided specifically has to do with the Accept-Encoding header and not Brotli support as a whole. > My target audience consists of Linux users using either Chrome or Firefox. I still don't understand why you're intentionally breaking the open web. It makes no sense. > No matter how many times I explain things to you, you never seem to get it through your head. You should try actually listening. You keep explaining things that are factually wrong or completely irrelevant. You seem to not actually understand HTTP, HTTPS, Content-Encodings, or even the idea of the open web in general. And you're going out of your way to break 99% of tools out there for no discernible reason. Why do you love Brotli so much that you're willing to break HTTP just to use it?
- mmstick 9y ago
  Brotli does not work over HTTP. Period. It doesn't work, and you have yet to prove that it works. I am not the only person who can provide proof that it will not work. It clearly states it on the Google URLs that I sent you that it does not work without HTTPS, along with some reasons as to why that decision was made. You are, instead, trying to argue in face of reality. That is foolish. > You clearly did not test this, because Chrome interprets Brotli responses just fine over HTTP. I wager Firefox does too, but I'm not about to install Firefox just to test. This is just willful ignorance on your part. I have already tested this, and it is partially why I moved towards implementing HTTPS. The web is full of resources to back this up: https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Brotli%20requires%20HTTPS https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Brotli%20require... > Google engineers are right, but you are not right. You don't understand what the Google engineers are saying. The link you provided specifically has to do with the Accept-Encoding header and not Brotli support as a whole. You don't seem to understand what you think you understand. Accept-Encoding means that it will not publicly state that it supports Brotli. I wonder why that is..... because Brotli is disabled for HTTP connections. End of story again! Stop beating the dead horse! You are wrong. > I still don't understand why you're intentionally breaking the open web. It makes no sense. I don't understand why you think I am. If anything, you are merely trolling and wasting your time. > You should try actually listening I've listened and listened, but you aren't speaking anything worth listening to. You yourself refuse to listen to my point of view and explanations, so why should I bother listening to your BS? > You keep explaining things that are factually wrong or completely irrelevant. I have done nothing of the sort. You, however, are stating that Brotli works over HTTP. This is factually incorrect. It is not allowed. http://www.omgchrome.com/brotli-http-compression-coming-to-chrome/ http://www.omgchrome.com/brotli-http-compression-coming-to-c... > Be aware that while the compression algorithm is designed for HTTP content encoding it currently only works over HTTPS. https://samsaffron.com/archive/2016/06/15/the-current-state-of-brotli-compression https://samsaffron.com/archive/2016/06/15/the-current-state-... > Brotli is HTTPS only > > If you visit a site over HTTP your browser will not accept the br encoding. The reasoning for this is documented at the end of the chromium issue. https://ayesh.me/apache-brotli https://ayesh.me/apache-brotli > 'm not sure if there is a technical reason behind this, but all the browsers I tested with require HTTPS in order to enable Brotli support. I have written a small post about more reasons to switch to HTTPS as well. You are basically calling Google and each of these authors that I've linked as liars as we all have tested Brotli over HTTP and HTTPS and can concur precisely what Google and Mozilla engineers stated: Brotli is only supported with HTTPS! > And you're going out of your way to break 99% of tools out there for no discernible reason. First you said it was 40%, and now you are saying it's 99%? Both statistics are bogus given that around 80% of users are using either Chrome or Firefox, and versions that support Brotli! And going out of my way? I already explained to you how I did not go out of my way. I am not targeting anyone. It was only a few lines of code to change my content cache from being Gzip-backed to Brotli-backed. You just have a persecution complex. I actually had to go out of my way earlier in order to implement a quick error message page for each of my routes because you cried so much about it. But that's all I'm going to give you, an error message. Here's my advice to you: stop being childish. No matter how many times you are told that you are wrong, with evidence to back it up, you simply ignore it. That's called ignorance. I've repeatedly told you that you're wasting your time with this ignorance. And no matter how many times you demand someone to do something, you can't make them do something they aren't going to do.