• 7 Posts
  • 400 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle


  • I actually agree. For the majority of sites and/or use cases, it probably is sufficient.

    Explaining properly why LE is generally problematic, takes considerable depth of information, that I’m just not able to relay easily right now. But consider this:

    LE is mostly a convenience. They save an operator $1 per month per certificate. For everyone with hosting costs beyond $1000, this is laughable savings. People who take TLS seriously often have more demands than “padlock in the browser UI”. If a free service decides they no longer want to use OCSP, that’s an annoying disruption that was entirely not worth the $1 https://www.abetterinternet.org/post/replacing-ocsp-with-crls/

    LE has no SLA. You have no guarantee to be able to ever renew your certificate again. A risk not anyone should take.

    Who is paying for LE? If you’re not paying, how can you rely on the service to exist tomorrow?

    It’s not too long ago that people said “only some sites need HTTPS, HTTP is fine for most”. It never was, and people should not build anything relevant on “free” security today either.



  • gencha@lemm.eetoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldPaid SSL vs Letsencrypt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    People who have actually relevant use cases with the need for a reliable partner would never use LE. It’s a gimmick for hobbyists and people who suck at their job.

    If you have never revoked a certificate, you don’t really know what you’re doing. If you have never run into rate-limiting issues with LE that block a rollout, you don’t know what you’re doing.

    LE works until it doesn’t, and then it’s like every other free service on the internet: no guarantees If your setup relies on the goodwill of a single entity handing out shit for free, it’s not a robust setup. If you rely on that entity to keep an OCSP responder alive for free so all your consumers can verify the validity of your certificate, that’s not great. And people do this to save their company $1 a month for the real thing? Even running the shitty certbot in compute has a larger cost. People are so blindly in love with this “free” garbage. The fanboys will never die off








  • Nicht irgendwelche Leute. Das ist verboten. Aber jeder Bürger hat das Recht sich gegen Feinde der Verfassung zu wehren. Und Nazis wollen diese Verfassung abschaffen.

    Du genießt in dem Land in dem du geboren bist üblicherweise umfangreiche Rechte die Ausländer erstmal nicht bekommen. Das ist für dich ein Vorteil.

    Viele Ausländer, besonders Flüchtlinge, wären mit Sicherheit lieber in ihrer Heimat, wenn es dort einigermaßen sicher wäre. Ich habe nichts gegen Menschen die bei uns Zuflucht suchen. Ich erkenne deren Herausforderungen an, und möchte mir diese nicht zumuten weil ein paar Hurensöhne bei uns den dicken Max machen.

    Wo sich da bei mir wirklich die Grenze zwischen Flucht und Bürgerkrieg befindet, bleibt aber hoffentlich für immer offen.


  • gencha@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEarbuds
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Valid. I’ve been thinking though. What’s the problem with making a waterproof audio jack, if we have the USB C for charging?

    I don’t want to hate on wireless by any means. I often prefer wireless. But it’s really fucking nice to have a power source connected and audio as well. It’s very convenient. Especially if you have a dock and headset.

    It just feels like such a redundant transformation that achieved nothing for the user.


  • gencha@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEarbuds
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I know they can still use the chip even if you don’t want BT. I know they can still use it regardless of your desire to disable it. If there was no reasonable user demand for it, then it would be pretty hard to sell a useless piece of metal that only eats up energy and space in the phone.

    You know, like an audio jack.

    No other type of audio device saw the need to have the jack removed. The BT-only headphones were introduced by the same companies who removed the audio jack from the phones.

    Nobody is “tricking” anyone. This is just as regular a shady business practice as false advertising. The companies doing this just weigh their options to maximize profits. This is a laughably easy sell, apparently, so it’s reasonable they would be doing it. The complaints about this subject were loud from day one. Removing the jack is artificially limiting the features of the device for literally no plausible reason. Point to their material that explains it in more words than “we decided it’s time”.

    We had the entire oil and tobacco industry lie to us for decades, but this is far fetched?



  • gencha@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEarbuds
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    I don’t get what people are doing who need waterproof phones, but I will accept that some people need this. To me it sounds far more like an edge case than people wanting wired headphones though, especially at the time they started removing jacks.


  • gencha@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEarbuds
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Every single signal your Android phone sends, like looking up the address of a website with Google DNS, or just synchronizing your time with Google time servers, which are defaults in most Android phones, goes right into at least a shadow profile.

    Android exists to create highly detailed profiles of individuals, using your own device usage, and detecting other devices around you. Like WiFi hotspots to offer more detailed position information.

    Every single time any of this happens, you leave a data point in a Google database. Collecting all BT devices every time you see them as data points is so dramatically valuable if this is your core business. Google is an advertisement platform.


  • gencha@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEarbuds
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s no conspiracy. It’s just a valid strategy to expand your business. It’s not unheard of that companies form cartels. Car companies manipulate millions of vehicles to trick lab tests. Companies like Apple and Google don’t have your best interest at heart. Don’t ever assume their decisions are driven by popular demand. They actively lobby to steer demand.

    Removing a few cents worth of metal to cut costs? Because not enough users need it? That sounds more convincing than one of these companies trying to expand their proprietary BT global network features? Not to me at this time.



  • gencha@lemm.eetoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldEarbuds
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    5 days ago

    These jacks are still in every other audio device. They were removed from phones to force BT usage, which Google needs for their profiling telemetry network and Apple for their Find my Device thing. God forbid someone turns BT off or even decides they would prefer a phone without BT entirely. There is no other reason and how people prefer to listen to music has nothing to do with the subject.