3 ms·

So much misinformation and FUD in this article. It's immediately suspect that the author had to lookup what websockets even WERE. No mention of the permissions

So much misinformation and FUD in this article. It's immediately suspect that the author had to lookup what websockets even WERE. No mention of the permissions system? This is a super low-quality article to make it to the front page.

tasteTheAnus 6y ago
Okay, but you're the one that's wrong. The truth is, we lost control of our own devices that are supposed to work for us, and instead they're used against us. I can't take the battery out of my phone, and it's design is such that it won't work directly from a power cord plugged into a wall socket. This incentivizes the user toward keeping the battery charged at all times, and thus maintaining a device state, such that one can never truly know if the radio, camera and microphone are engaged or not. And whose fault is that? It's a dark pattern, and device manufacturers know it. So too with all of the web* technology that the author highlights. The party line is "You asked for it, you do it to yourself, and you really DO like it, but you just don't know it yet, sam-i-am. Just try the green eggs and ham, friend. It's blisssssssss..." It's not wrong to take exception to this prevailing dismal wind.
kccqzy 6y ago
Yeah. Not to mention that WebSockets designers gave considerable thought to its security. Things like adding a mask to client messages look like puzzling inefficiencies, but are actually well designed security measures.
usr1106 6y ago
Right, and he didn't try out all sockets to find out what is the blacklist. Did he notice that Firefox is open source and reading the source might give good hints? (On my phone now and not starting to do it myself. But I have run Firefox under gdb before to check how Google Streetview uses WebGL. It's not difficult under Linux at least, even if you like myself know absolutely nothing about the somewhat intimidating code base of Firefox.)

tasteTheAnus 6y ago

Okay, but you're the one that's wrong. The truth is, we lost control of our own devices that are supposed to work for us, and instead they're used against us. I can't take the battery out of my phone, and it's design is such that it won't work directly from a power cord plugged into a wall socket. This incentivizes the user toward keeping the battery charged at all times, and thus maintaining a device state, such that one can never truly know if the radio, camera and microphone are engaged or not. And whose fault is that? It's a dark pattern, and device manufacturers know it. So too with all of the web* technology that the author highlights. The party line is "You asked for it, you do it to yourself, and you really DO like it, but you just don't know it yet, sam-i-am. Just try the green eggs and ham, friend. It's blisssssssss..." It's not wrong to take exception to this prevailing dismal wind.

kccqzy 6y ago

Yeah. Not to mention that WebSockets designers gave considerable thought to its security. Things like adding a mask to client messages look like puzzling inefficiencies, but are actually well designed security measures.

usr1106 6y ago

Right, and he didn't try out all sockets to find out what is the blacklist. Did he notice that Firefox is open source and reading the source might give good hints? (On my phone now and not starting to do it myself. But I have run Firefox under gdb before to check how Google Streetview uses WebGL. It's not difficult under Linux at least, even if you like myself know absolutely nothing about the somewhat intimidating code base of Firefox.)