3 ms·
I updated the title. Let me know if you think it's more accurate. It did appear as down for me though.
by widdakay 5mo ago
I updated the title. Let me know if you think it's more accurate. It did appear as down for me though.
- jaas 5mo agoYeah, thanks
- widdakay 5mo agoI did not intend this to hit the top of the front page lol. I just posted it and then came back 15 minutes later to it having exploded.
- jaas 5mo agoNo worries
- taspeotis 5mo agoThanks for securing the web
- sam_lowry_ 5mo agoThank them for making the web depend on a single US-based shady org, as if DNS was not enough.
- cpach 5mo agoFeel free to launch your own CA.
- sam_lowry_ 5mo agoNo-no, I would rather go back to the good old HTTP/1.1. P.S. JS injection into TCP packets and other meddling with passthrough data should be banned legally, not technically via encryption.
- soco 5mo agoI wish you good luck in court trying to get compensation for the damage you've got through a JS injection attack. Because people prefer to lock their valuables instead of constantly having to identify and sue thieves.
- sam_lowry_ 5mo agoNot court, regulation. Wanna be a carrier? Then don't meddle with traffic. Otherwise, you are liable for all the child porn and drug trade that happen to cross your boundary.
- soco 5mo agoRight, we actually agree on this. And where is regulation enforced? In courts. Who says the provider is liable? A court. This was my point: not locking your house means a lot of processing to get back to the place where you have been before - if it can ever happen. And I'd very much not go through a whole trial...
- sam_lowry_ 5mo agoRegulation is enforced in courts only in the US, heh.
- Natfan 5mo agoam i a carrier when i host my own wifi network?