one of the most fundamental tenants
Tenets. Please. Thank you.
Peter-Paul Koch, author of The Mobile Web Handbook, published a piece this summer entitled "Stop Pushing the Web Forward". Koch argued that the relentless pace of new features on the web isn't helping it and that we – developers, along with browser makers – would do well to put on the brakes for a few months. It's not that …
Errr... am I the only one finding this "most useful of all APIs" creepy? What business is it of a website where I am? I can tell them where I am searching if I need to.
I would much rather install the Uber app and allow it location access on its lonesome. Along with my nav apps who need it.
The geolocation API does ask for permission, and does it on a per site basis, so in that regard, it's not really any different from allowing an app to access your position, as far as I can see.
And sometimes, it is just simpler to let the site work out where you are, especially if it's somewhere unfamiliar, or just to save time.
On one of my sites, we have a 'Visiting' option so people can update their profiles when travelling. You can enter city and country, or just choose 'Geolocation' and we'll work it out for you. As far as I know, there's no way a site can grab your details without a pop-up the first time you visit.
I have specifically avoided it in "find nearest store" pages because it's annoying and creepy. GeoIP has enough accuracy, without major privacy concerns. The geoloc API needs a sane default (fake/approx location) and to get rid of the nagging; just let the user click the address bar icon if they really want to give an accurate location.
Google in particular is doing a piss-poor job with location privacy these days... given their browser market share, I'm not holding my breath for this -or any- HTML5 flaws to get fixed.
Chrome : ctrl+shift+n
IE : ctrl+shift+p
Also create shortcuts to start automatically in private mode:
IE add the "-private" switch to a shortcut
Chrome add the "-incognito" switch to a shortcut
Et voila, that should probably be the solution to the future "Spy in the Sky" APIs... Don't quote me on that though
If the internet is going to go full blast towards the horizon, then at least give those of us with reservations, the ability to put the brakes on.
Yes. I know some excellent tools are available, like NoScript, but for most of us, the learning curve starts off a little steep and pulling apart some sites to decide which of the forty scripts are needed to get the most utility at the least risk, is a little daunting.
I would like to see NoScript and others, who have worked so hard to bring security to our computers, being given corporate donations to continue and hopefully enhance their software to ultimately allow noobs an easy in, on the world of belt and braces internet security.
Perhaps, a fully comprehensive and regularly updated list of scripts, held centrally and qualified on a scale of 1 to 11 regarding their intrusiveness and or maliciousness, therefore allowing users to set their browsing on a paranoia scale of 0 to 10.
"I would like to see NoScript and others, who have worked so hard to bring security to our computers, being given corporate donations to continue and hopefully enhance their software to ultimately allow noobs an easy in, on the world of belt and braces internet security."
The trouble is, any corporate interest with the money to spare ALSO by necessity wants the stuff NoScript blocks (if they don't, the competition will and will use it to undercut and eventually ruin or subsume them), so NoScript is stuck in a no-man's land where it's fighting the folks with all the money.
Isn't ICANN embarrassingly rich at the moment and looking at "agreeable" ways to divest itself of said fortune?
I see a parallel with the real world in that, we all contribute to maintaining civil order, when truly we would prefer the criminals to stump up the cost of policing the streets.
Why can't all those who thrive on the net put a little something in the direction of those who help keep the peace? After all else is said and done, if the net gets any more untrustworthy, it'll be those who make a living out of it who suffer the most.
Well said, Rol.
Also, why do we need 20 different types of development software? From what I've seen, SGML had almost everything covered in the first place.
Sure I understand the need for custom solutions, but it seems as if every website now uses umpteen different development software languages as their main page creators, SIMULTANEOUSLY, when they they should be used sparingly with good old HTML being the basic framework, not just some header used to contain everything else.
AS for trackers and beacons and other such fucking garbage, that shit should be outlawed. Cookies are bad enough.
Indeed it is not so much that the web is moving too fast, but that there has been seemingly no effort whatsoever to fix things that have long been broken
fixing stuff that's broken is basically a defensive effort,-- something we only do to stop loss
as there is no product liability for software there is no loss for defective work . until that issue is addressed no one will give up the glitter of the new announcement for the drudgery of fix and repair .
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019