Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | fuzzzerd's commentslogin

This term needs to catch on, this is the first I've seen it, bit it explains why so many prodict decisions are made and those who know better/different are just too small a minority to get any say.

We're dragged into this kicking and screaming and yet normies think we're the crazy ones.


I hate that future so much, but I don't know what to do to avoid it. My sole choice to bank on pc and use it as a pc will not be considered by the product people making the choice to go smart phone app only.

I'm essentially along for the ride because the masses will gobble it up.


re: hating the future

I grew up in a world where personal computers weren't strange things (the 1980s). I remember reading Levy's "Hackers" in my teens and not comprehending how people could think personal computers were such a big deal. The talk about "technical priesthoods" and mainframes, the inaccessibility of computers to "normal people", etc, didn't mean anything to me.

Now that I'm living through the twilight of the personal computer I understand.


You do realize you have the power to organize with other like minded individuals and exert political power right? You don't have to just sit around and "accept this fate." We still live in a democracy, you're allowed to have a say if you want to.

The concern about individual ownership of general purpose computing is of concern to a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percentage of people. In the USA, at least, even more basic issues that should matter to a large portion of the population don't because they're distracted by "culture wars" and "wedge issues".

Money is speech, and speech builds political power. Industry lobbies have vastly more money than the minuscule number of people to whom this matters.

On top of that, the market doesn't want general purpose computers. The market wants TikTok terminals and selfie cams. The market wants "content consumption", "AI slop", and "influencers".

If there's no market for what I want it doesn't matter if it's legislated out of existence or not. Nobody will build it if nobody will buy it.

Then there's the apologists for big tech who cry "But they're not computers, they're phones!" when the fact is brought up that we're all carrying general purpose supercomputers bristling with sensors and radios in our pockets but we're not allowed to own them or use them for what we want. (Cue sob stories about clearing malware from oldsters' computers in 3... 2... 1...)

Technologists (who I'd argue should want general purpose computing in the hands of the masses) can't make any money re-architecting the OS and application metaphors and paradigms that give rise to the malware-laden cesspools of end users PCs so they just direct their efforts to working at big tech building the walled-garden prisons that we're all going to be forced into.

It's hard not to feel like I have to accept this fate.


> The Play Integrity shenanigans is mostly on app developers.

I completely agree, but as a user I'm the victim of the developers choice.


This feature dated back to the .NET 1.1 days and was a " web site" project vs a "web app" project. It operated much like PBP, in the sense you could ftp raw code and it just worked, but it could also just blow up in your face because the whole site was never compiled in one go.


Docs, sure but excel is still excel.


I have done same thing with sitemap.xml.


> spectacular

Not exactly the word I'd use, since it really hasn't changed since VB4, but it's definitely reliable and stable.


WinForms came way after VB4 and it was a .Net only technology.


I remember even back in the early 2000s https for credit card forms was pretty common. Surprised a company like Pandora wasn't with it by thr 2010s.


There is likely zero chance the OP's recollection is remotely correct. Pandora went public in 2011 with 80 million users, the chances of a publicly listed company of this size taking payments over HTTP in 2012 are about as close to zero as can be. If nothing else, their payment processor would drop them as a customer.


I found this: https://textslashplain.com/2016/03/06/using-https-properly/ Seems like it at least partially corroborates OP's recollection!


Thanks, I stand corrected! Apologies to the OP.


move fast break things


It seems, based on the article in the sibling comment, that Pandora took a overly narrow view of the encryption requirements for working with credit card data. So they served the web pages over HTTP and only used HTTPS for the API calls that transferred the credit card information. This is obviously still insecure because a MITM attack could inject javascript onto the page to steal the data while it was being entered, but at least in the case where an attacker could just read the traffic they might not be able to capture the credit card information.

I can totally believe there were still companies in existence at this time who were still following such misguided interpretations.


It works both ways, "Folks mad at bank for leaving the vault open."


I think I also fit into this category. Minor to medium productivity boost and maybe some stylistic evolving, but largely no complaints because it's just another tool I use sometimes.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: