The despair.com poster has it right:

CONSULTING
"If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem."

Seems like an opportune time - google wants it gone, Netflix wants something to do 'cloud gaming.'

Agreed, which really just makes it bad writing due to semantics.

I'm a bit confused, if it's truly peer-to-peer, why are there servers involved that have seen their traffic rise "100,000%?"

Maybe this is real, maybe it's just trash writing by a non-technical writer (as it is on Vice after all).

I find it somewhat disappointing that someone from McKinsey, a firm known for grinding people into dust because of absolutely no respect for any time not dedicated to McKinsey is going to somehow bring any kind of positive morale to the company. Time to pivot to worse.com.

I remember when this was the response to anything that didn't toe the party line that M$ was evil.

Better. Almost all certificate renewals from a modern CA can be automated, old certificates get cycled out, new ones get cycled in. Apple's not actually the bad guy in this fight, in my opinion.

Also from my point of view, there's lower impact to the overall chain if an intermediate or root certificate is invalidated or worse, compromised, because while the number of issued certificates are higher, the process is more frequent.

I'd guess (but don't know) much of the pushback is from the older CAs that have not kept up with the times and are already losing ground to Let's Encrypt and the certificate managers run by cloud providers like AWS' Certificate Manager and Azure's App Service Certificates. It was the older CA's that originally pushed for a differential in the display of "extended verification" certificates, but nobody has really noticed that the "EV" portion has basically dropped out of the public view - which is fine, EV always seemed like a money grab to me by the CAs anyway.

Nah. They're going on the magazine 'forgot to cancel' model. The price point is irrelevant, the vulture behavior is the bigger deal.

It's like the American Ninja Warrior of critiques.

They're defending us from Space Nazis

It's just like the internet is the new bible.

RHEL's lag times are fine by me. While I don't work with a giant-multinational corporation, enterprise stability is still of utmost priority to my staff and I. We like that while RHEL stays on top of security issues, they do not make frequent jumps to newer application releases without significant warning.

As far as RHN, if you don't like paying for support, use CentOS. We do for our development and testing environment, and can be assure that it will stay in sync, once the base platform port occurs.

For desktops, our devs use whatever makes them happy. I'm running Fedora 14 right now, and several others are using various debian-sourced releases.

I think the real detriment, as mentioned earlier, was the growing lack of diversity in the distribution sphere.

I clicked on the link to the Web O' Wonder in Firefox 4 beta 12 on fedora 14... it crashed immediately.

Are they attempting to say that Firefox 4 hearkens back to memories of windows 98?

The Grammy was actually won for Best Instrumental Arrangement Accompanying Vocalist(s), but hey, when has accuracy in reporting been /.'s game?

Why do you assume it has to be manually distributed? CRL and Certificates could be distributed through any enterprise desktop management system, such as SCCM or remediation managers such as Hercules.