5 ms·

I don’t think people remember the days when ISPs/free wifi hotspots would inject their own ads into the content of pages served over http, or replace urls on Yo

by LammyL 3y ago

I don’t think people remember the days when ISPs/free wifi hotspots would inject their own ads into the content of pages served over http, or replace urls on YouTube content to show lower resolution copies of videos.

tlarkworthy 3y ago
Still do in Germany
- Semaphor 3y ago
  Who and where? How even, with the lack of http sites?
  - tlarkworthy 3y ago
    This German webhost does not include SSL in it's bare bones package without surcharge. Thus my kita had no SSL certificate, and thus I could detect my ISP or some hacked router injecting ads (Berlin) when I used that site. There are plenty of local http sites due to German's (reasonable) distrust of US companies and a propensity to roll their own https://m.all-inkl.com/webhosting/privat/#&ui-state=dialog https://m.all-inkl.com/webhosting/privat/#&ui-state=dialog
    - Semaphor 3y ago
      > thus I could detect my ISP or some hacked router injecting ads The later sounds far more plausible than an ISP trying to get sued to the ground.
einr 3y ago
This is not an argument in favour of a search engine/browser penalizing HTTP servers.
- ddalex 3y ago
  I mean it's a free world, let's all use browsers and search engines that don't penalize HTTP
  - bmacho 3y ago
    Why not start with realizing and saying out loud that https enforcing is bad?
    - pixl97 3y ago
      Turns out the browser model of executing Javascript is worse when it comes to things being injected in the http stream.
    - IntelMiner 3y ago
      "This thing is bad" "Then don't do the thing you disagree with? It's a free and open web" "Why don't you start with agreeing with my position first?"
      - bmacho 3y ago
        "This things is bad" "Yeah, whatever, feel free to die fighting against it" I think advocating against somethig, generating a discussion, moving the Overton window is a valid, almost necessary thing. (I admit sometimes they threaten the things I like (or me), but most of the time, it's OK.) Perhaps "agreeing" was a bad choice of word, instead discussing, debating, or just letting me know your opinion about the matter.
- amf12 3y ago
  It may be in the browser's interest when the majority of their userbase is non-tech. I'd rather my mom use such a browser than one which does not enforce it.
- woodruffw 3y ago
  > This is not an argument in favour of a search engine/browser penalizing HTTP servers. Why isn't it? By navigating to a domain (or searching for it), the user is arguably making an intent statement ("I want content on $domain"). Ensuring that the user doesn't get spam, malware, etc. instead seems well within the scope of the browser.
galkk 3y ago
> replace urls on YouTube content to show lower resolution copies of videos. Tell that to mobile providers who can downscale my twitch and youtube videos and require premium to have higher resolution...

by LammyL 3y ago

tlarkworthy 3y ago

Still do in Germany

Semaphor 3y ago
Who and where? How even, with the lack of http sites?
- tlarkworthy 3y ago
  This German webhost does not include SSL in it's bare bones package without surcharge. Thus my kita had no SSL certificate, and thus I could detect my ISP or some hacked router injecting ads (Berlin) when I used that site. There are plenty of local http sites due to German's (reasonable) distrust of US companies and a propensity to roll their own https://m.all-inkl.com/webhosting/privat/#&ui-state=dialog https://m.all-inkl.com/webhosting/privat/#&ui-state=dialog
  - Semaphor 3y ago
    > thus I could detect my ISP or some hacked router injecting ads The later sounds far more plausible than an ISP trying to get sued to the ground.

einr 3y ago

This is not an argument in favour of a search engine/browser penalizing HTTP servers.

ddalex 3y ago
I mean it's a free world, let's all use browsers and search engines that don't penalize HTTP
- bmacho 3y ago
  Why not start with realizing and saying out loud that https enforcing is bad?
  - pixl97 3y ago
    Turns out the browser model of executing Javascript is worse when it comes to things being injected in the http stream.
  - IntelMiner 3y ago
    "This thing is bad" "Then don't do the thing you disagree with? It's a free and open web" "Why don't you start with agreeing with my position first?"
    - bmacho 3y ago
      "This things is bad" "Yeah, whatever, feel free to die fighting against it" I think advocating against somethig, generating a discussion, moving the Overton window is a valid, almost necessary thing. (I admit sometimes they threaten the things I like (or me), but most of the time, it's OK.) Perhaps "agreeing" was a bad choice of word, instead discussing, debating, or just letting me know your opinion about the matter.
amf12 3y ago
It may be in the browser's interest when the majority of their userbase is non-tech. I'd rather my mom use such a browser than one which does not enforce it.
woodruffw 3y ago
> This is not an argument in favour of a search engine/browser penalizing HTTP servers. Why isn't it? By navigating to a domain (or searching for it), the user is arguably making an intent statement ("I want content on $domain"). Ensuring that the user doesn't get spam, malware, etc. instead seems well within the scope of the browser.

galkk 3y ago

> replace urls on YouTube content to show lower resolution copies of videos. Tell that to mobile providers who can downscale my twitch and youtube videos and require premium to have higher resolution...