How does that work if you're rear ended and the plate is mashed between two cars?
I know right, because there's no space anywhere else in a car for electronics and we don't have any cables or anything to connect the plate to anything else.
Sorry but I don't see a single use case for any of your points. Let's go through them:
- It was not simple to have HTTP everywhere. It was not. It is now. We are talking about a change that is happening in 2018. - HTTP needs more memory. - We'll ignore the fact you can run a HTTP server on an ESP8622 with it's whole 80KB of RAM for the moment. Instead let's focus on the fact that this is talking about FTP delivered within HTTP so there is no saving to be had, if you want to save RAM dump the superfluous FTP server and just server up HTTP content like a normal website. - Poorly written mod_php? Why are you doing anything with mod_php? I thought you were out of RAM? - Sub point: If you need php for anything than an FTP server simply isn't going to cut it. - The load on FTP will be worse than for HTTP. There's nothing complicated in HTTP unless you want to make it complicated. There's no benefit to offloading onto FTP instead of another HTTP server, and if you have another HTTP server your best bet would likely be load balancing or shadow proxying. It sure as hell isn't shoehorning a horribly inefficient protocol into your website to serve up subcontent. - We are most definitely going through the normal fuff because it is the browser making the request and the browser is a normal standards compliant FTP client.
You're trying to make this something it isn't. Load issues that are solved in a better way, a (as far as I can tell) brainfade that you didn't realise that whatever you do in this scenario you cannot eliminate the HTTP server, and edge scenarios that are not physically possible.
if you mean Vorbis (2000) it was extremely late to the party compared to MP3 (1993)
AV1 is late to the party compared to x264. Both produced similar gains over the other. Both had similar level of importance for bandwidth at their times (god I don't miss my internet speeds from back then)
Is there a concern that the government now knows where your car is at all times?
No, only in America. In the rest of the world we let the government track our vehicles in real time because we don't get constantly oppressed and we enjoy the services that result from the tracking (better management of traffic, servicing, environmental zoning, etc).
May go further than a few but let the numbers speak. Hardware H265 encoders are common. The algorithm is not the reason that encoders aren't in the mobile space.
If humans can't even decide what is "hate speech", what makes anyone believe that an AI system can?
Humans are single subjective. AI is trained on multiple humans. The point here is that an AI won't create a definition that will agree with everyone, it's that it will create a definition by majority i.e. a socially acceptable one if it is trained well enough.
AI isn't subjective, it analyses based on rules it defines based on the input it is given. That's the problem with the current model, two people will nearly always disagree.
Yet the warranty is still valid against manufacture defect.
Just against a defect. Water ingress however would be no such defect as you replaced a component that prevented water ingress yourself. Now if the manufacturer provided you the o-ring, and you proceeded to get it pressure tested to the manufacturer's specifications after and THEN the watch flooded while you're on a dive, you would have a case for a warranty claim.
You don't need to turn anything off. Links to FTP not only will continue to work but they are actively improving FTP functionality within Firefox.
What is being blocked is just somet stupid idea that the occasional web designer who can't spell their own name thought may be a good idea when creating a page. Although really I prefer functionality that instead of blocking this, uses Facebook's data trove to identify them, and then call the men in white coats to put that developer in a room with pillows for walls because quite frankly if serving HTTP content via FTP isn't a sign of a serious mental conditions I don't know what is.
What loss in functionality? You do realise Firefox will continue to support FTP right, and if you post a link to an FTP site it will work just fine right? The only "fuctionali", and I use that term very losely, that is lost is the ability to embed an FTP based resource in a webpage, which is a horrible frigging idea. What do you think is faster:
GET this image. 200 OK here is this image.
Or
Hello Hi, I'm your FTP server. Hi I'm anonymous. Hi anonymous do you have a password for me? No I'm anonymous. Ok my bad, what can I do for you? By the way you will need to switch to binary mode. Well we're talking using this outdated piece of shit that didn't take into account that most people are behind NAT, so let's talk passively. 227 Passive mode is okay by me. Please connect to me again on port 2990 when you transfer data to me. GET this image. 200 OK Wait one sec: Connecting to port 2990. here is the image. quit 221 Goodbye
Anybody web designer who considers this "functionality" for serving mid page content should have all their fingers broken so they feel some proper pain when they type.
I dunno - to me an investment is something that will bring or is designed to bring me financial profit. Stock Market, banking, Munis.
That is a financial investment.
A capital investment is buying something that will not gain in value in order to enable the making of money. e.g. If you're a web designer then a computer is a capital investment. You buy it, it loses value, but the existance of it enables you to make money. In those cases you can also depreciate it's value as a tax writeoff in most countries.
I agree with you the distinction has to be made, but they do have clear and separate definitions, and when you buy something as the cost of doing business which ends up with you owning something that has value, even if that value depreciates, that's pretty much the definition of a capital investment. e.g. A storage shed out the back of my company to house my product. It does not increase in value, but....
Actually I just notice you used the term wealth. Owning something as a cost of doing business by nature exists to increase wealth. I suggest we forget you used that word in that context and I give you the following distinctions:
- Something you buy for the purpose of increasing wealth through the long term increase in value: financial investment e.g. shares. - Something you buy for the purpose of enabling incresaing wealth while depreciating in value: capital investment e.g. car, office supplies, building. - Something which you buy which doesn't increase wealth in any way: expense.
And some things can be both depending on how they are used. My wrist watch is an expense. I own it because I like it and wear it daily. I know someone with the same wrist watch where it's a financial investment. He bought it and left it in its case 20 years ago and it has actually already increased in value. My girlfriend's wristwatch (far cheaper I may add) is a capital investment. She needs it for timekeeping when she's coaching, and she expensed it as a tax deduction as a result.
My friend's car is an expense. She doesn't use it to get to work or live her life. It's just convenient to have when she goes on trips. My mother is a realestate agent. Her car is not only a capital investment, but it is reinvested in every 2 years as not only does having the car enable her wealth to increase, but the appearence of a new car does so even more.
You say average, I say minimum. The terminal gate price of gasoline and diesel varies greatly, and I don't know of any oil company that has a policy of selling fuel at below cost. I knew one of our competitors (a super market chain) tried to do it, but fortunatley that happened in a country with strict monopoly laws so they got slapped down for that practice.
You are right, the situation is grim in general for many individual operators, just as it is for franchisees of actual retail chains. We hear about all the profits from the likes of Starbucks, but the individual restaurants are barely breaking even.
But there are no service stations in the general case that stay afloat as a result of their retail business and use petrol to bring in customers. Though you may find the odd-ball out west back country somewhere where the service station is also the local pharmacy and also the local grocer etc. Those people obviously are not included in this discussion since they aren't primarily a service station.
You're painting a grim picture from you 1c example but let me paint you a grimmer picture: 1 in 30 people buy something from a service station in countries where smoking rates are low. Add countries which are stupid crazy dependent on cigaretts and you get to about 1 in 10, and cigaretts are quite a low margin product because in those countries they are available everywhere which eliminates the convience factor. And while I said the shop exists as free as in beer, that only takes into account the space. In addition you need to manage a shop, stocktake, repurchase, and my own personal favourite: spoilage. One of our stores proudly announced that they broke records for the amount of milk they sold in one week, only to have that profit completely eliminated by throwing away 3 bottles (2 went off, one broke while stacking the shelf).
So let me be clear as I work in the industry I see this first hand, if a shop can't surivive on selling fuel it gets either shutdown, or defranchised depending on how it is setup. The exception for that is the aforementioned country general purpose stores, and they are not run by oil companies but rather the bowser and petrol is a product sold like any other on the shelf (which is also why the entire shop isn't plastered with the company logo).
And that is precisely the point. The HTTP standard says nothing about using FTP to fetch content mid page. That entire functionality is the curious quirk that started with a browser becoming an FTP client so that it could download files that were presented as links rather than having to open a separate app. It is not and was never meant to be in any way shape or form a way of delivery content within a page.
The standards don't allow for it. The standards don't forbid it. That doesn't mean we should just blindly do it because it makes no fucking sense, breaks attempts at preventing cross-site scripting, data injection and protocol downgrades, and above all it's the most laggy and inefficient way to fetch and display content. It doesn't break a standard, but it prevents standards from being implemented properly.
HSTS means everything *specifically* to HTTP when there's no S. That's the fundamental point of HSTS to prevent protocol downgrade away from secure, and something that by nature does not work with FTP because there's no equivalent.
And before you dismiss this just remember that half of the attacks on encrypted connections via the internet in the past several years have been due to downgrade attacks, and every single protocol change and advancement has specifically attempted to mitigate this.
FTP wasn't mitigated.
FTP in this scenario also serves zero purpose what so ever.
No one is sad about this change. Your FTP server will continue to work just fine when you're using FTP, something that fundamentally should never serve content within a HTTP page anyway.
Seriously...why do these people think it's their business to control the form of content displayed in their browsers?
Because the use of the protocol is inefficient, a stupid idea from the onset, and breaks compatibility with many security processes introduced in browsers over the past few years.
Even if it wasn't a security issue it shouldn't be allowed because it would be a stupid fucking idea like embedding the remainder of this post within a magnet link or some crap like that.
The use of FTP to serve content inside HTML pages however is a horribly frigging broken concept that should have been aborted at birth. It deserves to be "fixed" in that regard.
Nothing isn't being broken that wasn't a broken idea in the first place.
Seriously, why not move to block HTTP traffic? It's not secure, it can serve malicious pages, and spoof real sites...
Security is only a very small part of it. The point is also that there's a fundamentally different protocol, a woefully chatty and inefficient one at that serving content within pages. Note FTP isn't being blocked, just FTP content within HTTP.
Honestly whoever thought this was a good idea in the first place should have been taken out behind the shed and shown some 2nd amendment rights in action.
Slashdot Mirror
How does that work if you're rear ended and the plate is mashed between two cars?
I know right, because there's no space anywhere else in a car for electronics and we don't have any cables or anything to connect the plate to anything else.
Sorry but I don't see a single use case for any of your points. Let's go through them:
- It was not simple to have HTTP everywhere. It was not. It is now. We are talking about a change that is happening in 2018.
- HTTP needs more memory. - We'll ignore the fact you can run a HTTP server on an ESP8622 with it's whole 80KB of RAM for the moment. Instead let's focus on the fact that this is talking about FTP delivered within HTTP so there is no saving to be had, if you want to save RAM dump the superfluous FTP server and just server up HTTP content like a normal website.
- Poorly written mod_php? Why are you doing anything with mod_php? I thought you were out of RAM?
- Sub point: If you need php for anything than an FTP server simply isn't going to cut it.
- The load on FTP will be worse than for HTTP. There's nothing complicated in HTTP unless you want to make it complicated. There's no benefit to offloading onto FTP instead of another HTTP server, and if you have another HTTP server your best bet would likely be load balancing or shadow proxying. It sure as hell isn't shoehorning a horribly inefficient protocol into your website to serve up subcontent.
- We are most definitely going through the normal fuff because it is the browser making the request and the browser is a normal standards compliant FTP client.
You're trying to make this something it isn't. Load issues that are solved in a better way, a (as far as I can tell) brainfade that you didn't realise that whatever you do in this scenario you cannot eliminate the HTTP server, and edge scenarios that are not physically possible.
if you mean Vorbis (2000) it was extremely late to the party compared to MP3 (1993)
AV1 is late to the party compared to x264. Both produced similar gains over the other. Both had similar level of importance for bandwidth at their times (god I don't miss my internet speeds from back then)
Ogg and Matroska are contrainers not codecs. AV1 is a codec.
Thanks Mr pedant. "ogg" is also the typically shortened form of saying "Ogg Vorbis" the latter part of which IS a codec, and the comment still stands.
Does it have hardware decoding on mainstream CPUs/GPUs?
How many CPUs and GPUs went through a complete design / test / ship to market phase in the past 9 days? AV1 literally just got it's specification out.
If they did then they are idiots. There was a documented and official way to achieve the same thing.
Is there a concern that the government now knows where your car is at all times?
No, only in America. In the rest of the world we let the government track our vehicles in real time because we don't get constantly oppressed and we enjoy the services that result from the tracking (better management of traffic, servicing, environmental zoning, etc).
May go further than a few but let the numbers speak. Hardware H265 encoders are common. The algorithm is not the reason that encoders aren't in the mobile space.
The mixture seems to keep indefinitely, once thawed
So not even bacteria dare to touch it?
on top of the usual exit wounds
Today you fancy yourself a fire breathing dragon!
Tomorrow the Rocket Maaaaaaaaannnnnnnn!
If humans can't even decide what is "hate speech", what makes anyone believe that an AI system can?
Humans are single subjective. AI is trained on multiple humans. The point here is that an AI won't create a definition that will agree with everyone, it's that it will create a definition by majority i.e. a socially acceptable one if it is trained well enough.
AI isn't subjective, it analyses based on rules it defines based on the input it is given. That's the problem with the current model, two people will nearly always disagree.
You do realise that Apple was the 3rd to market with a notch right, the other two being Android phones?
What do they need the remaining ones for? Would you buy a blood test from these people?
Someone has to file legal paperwork.
they're certainly not covering the mess now, when they clearly got it so wrong.
Is this the media that isn't covering it?:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...
https://nypost.com/2018/04/10/...
http://fortune.com/2018/04/10/...
https://www.foxbusiness.com/ma...
I skipped the tech sites which are all covering it too and just quoted sites that actually are more general purpose.
Yet the warranty is still valid against manufacture defect.
Just against a defect. Water ingress however would be no such defect as you replaced a component that prevented water ingress yourself. Now if the manufacturer provided you the o-ring, and you proceeded to get it pressure tested to the manufacturer's specifications after and THEN the watch flooded while you're on a dive, you would have a case for a warranty claim.
You don't need to turn anything off. Links to FTP not only will continue to work but they are actively improving FTP functionality within Firefox.
What is being blocked is just somet stupid idea that the occasional web designer who can't spell their own name thought may be a good idea when creating a page. Although really I prefer functionality that instead of blocking this, uses Facebook's data trove to identify them, and then call the men in white coats to put that developer in a room with pillows for walls because quite frankly if serving HTTP content via FTP isn't a sign of a serious mental conditions I don't know what is.
The loss of functionality
What loss in functionality? You do realise Firefox will continue to support FTP right, and if you post a link to an FTP site it will work just fine right? The only "fuctionali", and I use that term very losely, that is lost is the ability to embed an FTP based resource in a webpage, which is a horrible frigging idea. What do you think is faster:
GET this image.
200 OK here is this image.
Or
Hello
Hi, I'm your FTP server.
Hi I'm anonymous.
Hi anonymous do you have a password for me?
No I'm anonymous.
Ok my bad, what can I do for you? By the way you will need to switch to binary mode.
Well we're talking using this outdated piece of shit that didn't take into account that most people are behind NAT, so let's talk passively.
227 Passive mode is okay by me. Please connect to me again on port 2990 when you transfer data to me.
GET this image.
200 OK
Wait one sec: Connecting to port 2990.
here is the image.
quit
221 Goodbye
Anybody web designer who considers this "functionality" for serving mid page content should have all their fingers broken so they feel some proper pain when they type.
I dunno - to me an investment is something that will bring or is designed to bring me financial profit. Stock Market, banking, Munis.
That is a financial investment.
A capital investment is buying something that will not gain in value in order to enable the making of money. e.g. If you're a web designer then a computer is a capital investment. You buy it, it loses value, but the existance of it enables you to make money. In those cases you can also depreciate it's value as a tax writeoff in most countries.
I agree with you the distinction has to be made, but they do have clear and separate definitions, and when you buy something as the cost of doing business which ends up with you owning something that has value, even if that value depreciates, that's pretty much the definition of a capital investment. e.g. A storage shed out the back of my company to house my product. It does not increase in value, but ....
Actually I just notice you used the term wealth. Owning something as a cost of doing business by nature exists to increase wealth. I suggest we forget you used that word in that context and I give you the following distinctions:
- Something you buy for the purpose of increasing wealth through the long term increase in value: financial investment e.g. shares.
- Something you buy for the purpose of enabling incresaing wealth while depreciating in value: capital investment e.g. car, office supplies, building.
- Something which you buy which doesn't increase wealth in any way: expense.
And some things can be both depending on how they are used. My wrist watch is an expense. I own it because I like it and wear it daily. I know someone with the same wrist watch where it's a financial investment. He bought it and left it in its case 20 years ago and it has actually already increased in value. My girlfriend's wristwatch (far cheaper I may add) is a capital investment. She needs it for timekeeping when she's coaching, and she expensed it as a tax deduction as a result.
My friend's car is an expense. She doesn't use it to get to work or live her life. It's just convenient to have when she goes on trips. My mother is a realestate agent. Her car is not only a capital investment, but it is reinvested in every 2 years as not only does having the car enable her wealth to increase, but the appearence of a new car does so even more.
You say average, I say minimum. The terminal gate price of gasoline and diesel varies greatly, and I don't know of any oil company that has a policy of selling fuel at below cost. I knew one of our competitors (a super market chain) tried to do it, but fortunatley that happened in a country with strict monopoly laws so they got slapped down for that practice.
You are right, the situation is grim in general for many individual operators, just as it is for franchisees of actual retail chains. We hear about all the profits from the likes of Starbucks, but the individual restaurants are barely breaking even.
But there are no service stations in the general case that stay afloat as a result of their retail business and use petrol to bring in customers. Though you may find the odd-ball out west back country somewhere where the service station is also the local pharmacy and also the local grocer etc. Those people obviously are not included in this discussion since they aren't primarily a service station.
You're painting a grim picture from you 1c example but let me paint you a grimmer picture: 1 in 30 people buy something from a service station in countries where smoking rates are low. Add countries which are stupid crazy dependent on cigaretts and you get to about 1 in 10, and cigaretts are quite a low margin product because in those countries they are available everywhere which eliminates the convience factor. And while I said the shop exists as free as in beer, that only takes into account the space. In addition you need to manage a shop, stocktake, repurchase, and my own personal favourite: spoilage. One of our stores proudly announced that they broke records for the amount of milk they sold in one week, only to have that profit completely eliminated by throwing away 3 bottles (2 went off, one broke while stacking the shelf).
So let me be clear as I work in the industry I see this first hand, if a shop can't surivive on selling fuel it gets either shutdown, or defranchised depending on how it is setup. The exception for that is the aforementioned country general purpose stores, and they are not run by oil companies but rather the bowser and petrol is a product sold like any other on the shelf (which is also why the entire shop isn't plastered with the company logo).
And that is precisely the point. The HTTP standard says nothing about using FTP to fetch content mid page. That entire functionality is the curious quirk that started with a browser becoming an FTP client so that it could download files that were presented as links rather than having to open a separate app. It is not and was never meant to be in any way shape or form a way of delivery content within a page.
The standards don't allow for it.
The standards don't forbid it.
That doesn't mean we should just blindly do it because it makes no fucking sense, breaks attempts at preventing cross-site scripting, data injection and protocol downgrades, and above all it's the most laggy and inefficient way to fetch and display content. It doesn't break a standard, but it prevents standards from being implemented properly.
HSTS means nothing to http (no s)
HSTS means everything *specifically* to HTTP when there's no S. That's the fundamental point of HSTS to prevent protocol downgrade away from secure, and something that by nature does not work with FTP because there's no equivalent.
And before you dismiss this just remember that half of the attacks on encrypted connections via the internet in the past several years have been due to downgrade attacks, and every single protocol change and advancement has specifically attempted to mitigate this.
FTP wasn't mitigated.
FTP in this scenario also serves zero purpose what so ever.
No one is sad about this change. Your FTP server will continue to work just fine when you're using FTP, something that fundamentally should never serve content within a HTTP page anyway.
Seriously...why do these people think it's their business to control the form of content displayed in their browsers?
Because the use of the protocol is inefficient, a stupid idea from the onset, and breaks compatibility with many security processes introduced in browsers over the past few years.
Even if it wasn't a security issue it shouldn't be allowed because it would be a stupid fucking idea like embedding the remainder of this post within a magnet link or some crap like that.
FTP isn't being fixed.
The use of FTP to serve content inside HTML pages however is a horribly frigging broken concept that should have been aborted at birth. It deserves to be "fixed" in that regard.
Nothing isn't being broken that wasn't a broken idea in the first place.
You can start with the three acronyms in the summary. None of them work with FTP.
Seriously, why not move to block HTTP traffic? It's not secure, it can serve malicious pages, and spoof real sites...
Security is only a very small part of it. The point is also that there's a fundamentally different protocol, a woefully chatty and inefficient one at that serving content within pages. Note FTP isn't being blocked, just FTP content within HTTP.
Honestly whoever thought this was a good idea in the first place should have been taken out behind the shed and shown some 2nd amendment rights in action.