3 ms·
What do you propose then? The author points to something that we're going to loose (or perhaps that we already lost). Now, ads are the only nasty thing that br
by nakkiel 15y ago
What do you propose then?
The author points to something that we're going to loose (or perhaps that we already lost). Now, ads are the only nasty thing that break the guaranty of side-effect-free GET requests. And this is the only thing that matters for geeks and non geeks.
A human-oriented rant would say: "When you visit a page, you don't have to worry about other parties knowing it because it's guaranteed that way. This is about to change. Act now." As far as I'm concerned, it means the same thing. This is HN, not TechCrunch..
- brown9-2 15y ago"When you visit a page, you don't have to worry about other parties knowing it because it's guaranteed that way. This is about to change. Act now." I'm not sure if you only mean "your friends" when you say "other parties", but there are plenty of people that already know when you visit a site (ad-tracking). Besides, "it violates http get" is still a horrible argument.