It's Google doing this. You just have do it Google's way because someone at Google arbitrarily decided it was the best thing to do for Google, regardless of existing standards, other environments or systems, or indeed the rest of the world breaking as a result.
Look at Gmail's implementation of addressing. Dots in the user portion of the address were significant in 1982 (RFC 822 / STD 11), but not for Google, who cannot differentiate Bob.Dole@ from BobDole@. Still. In twenty-freaking-sixteen.
Look. To Apple (and it seems most of the ICT industry, yay Cloud etc etc) everyone has dual-path failure-resilient 1Gbps wireless Internet with unlimited quotas. They literally fail to comprehend that there could be people who only have 1.2Mbps/200Kbps DSL, only have 10GB of quota a month, or who work disconnected (e.g. away from 3G and 4G networks too). "Ubiquitous wireless" means no RJ45 (without dongles). "Ubiquitous high speed uploads/downloads" means the cloud performs OK (ignore the arguments about ownership, my files on someone else's computer and how much they do or don't care), so everyone backs up to the cloud always. There are no software bugs ("You're doing it wrong") and even if there are, meh, "not my problem, tough luck, your 5TB of backup is gone but our liability is 1 month's service at $5, you won't be billed next month if you argue enough".
Yeah yeah the future is coming and we'll all have 20Gbps mobile broadband. It'll cover every inch of the earth with no need to make allowances for remote areas, and we will achieve near zero latency everywhere (ask a SF or Redmond developer about latency to their clouds from the other side of the planet on a satellite connection and see how many guess less than 200ms (Hah! Closer to the 800+ms mark)). Maybe in this Utopian future it will make sense to assume what Apple and others assume today.
It's my GOMS* talking I am certain, but the current generation of go-getter developers hasn't lived through enough history to understand the times when they push the envelope too far. Just like my generation didn't 20 years ago, and the previous one 20 years before that. We're going to have to deal with this crap for another ten years or so till it levels off; then we should hopefully have ten years of sanity. Don't hold your breath.
*: Grumpy Old Man Syndrome, I'm over 40 now
There's no legal difference that I can see, but there's a significant functional difference.
Want to install that game from floppies on an old machine you built? Go for it. You have the software, you have the media, go go gadget disks!
Want to install that copy of $Game from $DeadPublisher, you have the license but the download server for the "installer" is offline and the publisher's new owner doesn't want you to play the old game, buy the new one this year instead? Tough!
*How does semi-blind grandma aged 90 use Applepay? Should your 4 yr old be given an iPhone to store her pocket money? Should the government give free broadband and laptops to the unemployed just so they can shop for essentials?
If you're Apple - yes, frankly, everyone should have an iPhone. Even the four year old who needs to learn about money by spending a 10c piece at the grocery store for a paper bag of cheap lollies. She definitely needs a $700 phone.
If you're Apple.
For the rest of us it is just a mindless statement by an out of touch rich white guy stroking himself (stroking his ego, get your mind out of the gutter) on stage for applause.
As i recall, still ads were shown from the auditorium opened, usually 20-30 minutes before the movie. At 5 minutes before the movie, the lights dimmed, and motion ads started. Anyone arriving then were considered late, and were shown to their seat by an attendant with a torch. At the set time for the movie, the doors closed, and the lights went all the way out including the exit lights, the volume turned up, and then the feature started. At the end of the feature, the exit lights would come on, then ambient lights would slowly increase during the end credits, and afterwards, an admonition to remember to not leave anything behind, and to leave the theater orderly, letting those sitting close to the exit leave first. Followed by more still ads.
Interesting - my recollection is slightly different (AU theatres, so
Everyone leaves, theatre is cleaned. There might be a static screen showing, but more than likely curtains are closed. People start to file in.
At the start time for the movie, the lights dim halfway and the ads start playing (static ads). Anyone arriving can still see, no flashlight needed - but at least we had batteries rather than flames.
At ten minutes in, the lights dim and video ads started. At this point the kids behind you start kicking the seats.
At fifteen minutes in, the previews started and the kids are running around the theatre bored out of their minds.
At anywhere from twenty to thirty minutes in, the film is cued.
Of course by that time, the crowd is completely pissed off and Homer's "Start The Movie" chant is live.
And that's why I can't stand going to the movies.
Well, since the figures I've seen bandied around are that protection from this level of attack would be about USD100-200K per annum, this effectively means that unless you have a lot of money or a company willing and able to pay what amounts to protection money, you potentially won't be permitted to speak - doing so with an uncomfortable topic for someone gets you knocked offline. Pay the wrong mob and you get to pay again, and again, and again.
One potential outcome may be that truly personal sites will become impossible to support and host; especially if you have any content that could be seen as controversial. You will have to pay someone to host it for you. If they agree, and it doesn't cost THEM too much, and it's not controversial - fine. Want to promote a social cause? Sorry, you can't afford to. Get back into the bit mines, peon. And this fits nicely into the whole cloud thing too, where you don't need anything in your own datacentre, host it on someone else's computer.
I'm waiting for the first wave of destruction to hit the major cloud providers - if this network supposedly of DVRs can deliver 1-1.5Tbps, and you factor in another dozen of similar size, you're talking 15-20Tbps directed at a target. I doubt even Google and the CDNs can withstand that for very long without service impacts, and that's not even factoring in attacks that actually have a little brainpower behind them.
Ah yes because
i = i + 1;
is so much better.
ProTip: This is sarcasm.
- If you run a webserver, go get yourself letsencrypt, use cloudflare or namecheap has cheap ssl.
- Enable http2 on nginx (if you are using it, use it well)
- Enjoy faster loading time.
- The argument against https is pointless.
Let me rephrase that:
- If you run a webserver, install this software, just trust us it's fine; redelegate your DNS to this company with-whom-I'm-totally-not-involved so they proxy all your connections and know who's visiting your site (and can sell or hand it over to whatever TLA you like); or pay money to another organisation for a set of we-promise-they're-unique-and-secure-numbers and we would totally never be compromised or behave unethically [cough] Symantec [cough] DigiNotar [cough] Verisign [hack] [cough];
- Do it my way because spinach and everything supports enforced HTTPS, and the peons can do without
- Don't worry that your data usage just doubled for HTTPS, it's only $50 a month extra for the upgraded plan and everyone can get gigabit fiber anyway.
You'rE unwelcome here.
- The argument against https is my-way-or-the-highway so screw you.
There, I think I covered it all.
I suggest that's months. As a friend pointed out, these stories come from people who were desert nomads. Time passing in the desert is measured by phases of the moon, often, AIUI. So did he perhaps live to be 80 years old? Not impossible, and at that age in those times he would be incredibly old.
Only if your issue fits in a small number of categories and you live in the right country. Issues like "I live on a street that has been there for five years, but you still think it's non-existent" apparently don't qualify as needing correction.
Because everyone has perfect sight, wants the same size browser window as the developer, browses at 100% zoom level, with the same fonts, on the same screen resolution, with the same sub-pixel rendering, right? Sure, we're all machines.
Those silly users with their 4K screens should just set them all to 1366x768 like the crappiest notebook LCDs! Jaggies forever! Screw mobile users, damn hipsters can get stuffed.
You're right. Fuck screen readers, accessibility, personalization and anyone with even the slightest disability (colourblind? Sure, we've got burnt umber on light green for you!). Because the designer's view of perfection is what everyone should see, dammit, even if they can't read a word. Design over function.
Of course, if you're being sarcastic, then sure. But you might want to make it more obvious.
"I'm a mean green mother from outer space" -- Audrey II, The Little Shop of Horrors