Posts by Netzwerg

    There was an attempt made to simplify this during WCF 2.0 development, namely via language servers.The remnants of that are still in WCF 2.x, but it was never finished.


    I absolutely agree with you, having to fetch dozens of files just to get all language variables is tedious at least.

    As far as I can tell, with Latch you are dependent on an opaque 3rd party service which might stop working at any time. And you seem to get no idea about how they actually protect your account. So I'm not sure one should trust this ervice for relly sensitive information.


    TOTP based 2 factor authentication on the other hand is completely independent from 3rd party services. All you need as an app, a hardware token or other software that can create an TOTP pass phrase according to RFC 6238 (see https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6238.txt), without a 3rd party in between. The google authenticator is a prominent example for such an app, but it's not the only one that could be used. For increased security, you could also use a hardware item (for example, something like the Battle.Net Authenticator by Blizzard).


    The Latch website is very uninformative about how exactly this thing is supposed to work (except for that it presumably "locks" and "unlocks" things), which should be a huge red flag. Why should you trust a service if you don't know what exactly it does?

    I think it should be rewritten or reevaluated

    It already get's rewritten for WCF 2.2, you can see the - quite extensive - changes already on GitHub. So chances are that emoji support can be added for 2.2, both in the backend (MySQL still has some quirks with them) and in the front end (Redactor).

    Your country seems to lack anonymity and thus fails to understand that value or respect of why having a private website can be important and valuable.

    Our privacy laws are the best and most protective in the world. Yet sometimes we understand that transparency and displaying who is responsible for what is more important. Privacy should not be used as an excuse to hide behind anything.


    Whistleblowing being a good example.

    No whistleblower who is worth his salt would EVER register a site himself, not even when he can do so "anonymously".

    And with the laws in America, you're crazy (insane) not to incorporate.

    That seems to be a problem of your jurisdiction then, not with the new ICANN rules. Maybe you should concentrate your efforts on that front and file a petition to your own politicians in order to change that?

    And even if you haven't experienced the same, do you really want to open yourself up to that possibility?

    As I already said, according to german law I need a legal notice ("Impressum") which states my personal information and is publicly available. This means my home adress, phone number and one way of electronic communication (mostly email). So yeah, I do not "open myself up to that possibility", I already have. By choosing to host a site I knew what I was getting into.


    Quote

    don't think you should be forced to make yourself vulnerable , just so you can have a website / forum.

    If you decide to host your own website, you made the decision to stand up for it with your name. Don't like it, don#t do it, you have the choise. A already referred to how print media is handled. Why do you think you should be allowed to publish anonymously on the web, when we have rules for decades IRL that prevent us from publishing anything printed without giving proper credit / stating contact info? I don't understand. When you want to publish a news paper, a magazine or hand out flyers in the shopping mall you need to state your contact info. Hell, even for letters to the editor you need that. Why do you think you should be able to do so on the net without stating your contact info? I simply don't understand that need. it should always be publicly visible who owns the site, who is responsible for the content on it. Besides, if you have a business, and your business owns the domain, your personal details are not stated in the WHOIS. If the domain is onwed by your business, your businesses adress is exposed in the WHOIS. This is only a problem if you own the domain privately but use it for your business.


    As I already said, in german you need a legal notice once you provide a "service". This pretty much means that you need an impressum just when having a hobby forum. And I'm very fine with that, because it is about responsibiity and taking responsibilty for what you do on the net. Privacy should never be used to hide, that only weakens the argument for when real privacy concerns are at stake. We are currently fighting over the so called "Vorratsdatenspeicherung" in germany. That is real trouble for privacy, and that is a real concern. Standing with your name for content you provide is not.


    This is ofc just my take on things. I can understand that this new regulation gives you a headache when you have been accustomed to it being different. This is a big change. I understand your concerns regarding the abuse of such information. But in germany, we are already living with that, and we manage to do that well. Then again, we have laws against the abuse of information that is provided in the legal notice that offer some protection. A good spam filter on the email address that you provide there is also needed ;) But it works. And I have yet to hear from a case where someone stood on someone elses door because he got that information from the legal notice. if that is your concern, a postal address somewhere else does wonders.

    And your website may not be conducting any business at all (nothing for sale).

    You do not need to sell something to conduct business. Having for example ads on your website means you have the clear goal to generate income - which is a clear indication of a business.


    I have never been afriend of all this hiding nonsense. If you want to have a web site and publish something, stay for it with your name. That is how print media works for centuries. You can not sell a news paper, give out brochures and flyers or else without stating who you are, clearly visible on the print medium. In germany, a "letter to the editor" is not publsihed in a news paper unless you provide your full contact information, and your name will be published along with it. Those rules exist for a reason. If never understood why we should throw that over board when it comes to the internet. At least as far as your own website concerns, where you are the publisher. It's different for forum post and comments etc. ofc, but for your own website? Add your name and contact info to it. Transparency is as important as privacy, and in the case of a website, i'm all for transparency, at least in terms of who owns it / contact info.

    This is actually a good change.


    German sites have to have a legal notice (called "impressum") stating contact information - yes, this means your real address. I have never understood why other jurisdictions allow you to have commercial websites without the need to provide the information who stands behind it (in fact, it made me angry quite some time that I could not tell who was behind certain websites that have paid servies...).


    This is good for transparency. Privacy is good, but not if you just use it to hide behind it. Conducting business without providing your real contact info is just bad business. No commercial website should be without that information.

    @Aslan
    There is nothing wrong with being wrong. Everyone is wrong from time to time, it's human.


    In this case, it is you that is wrong, because everyone else has proof - in form of the code and it's history as shown on GitHub, and you dont. So maybe you just admit to yourself that you assumed something that wasn't the case or misremember something and move on. because frankly this is going nowhere.

    You should note that you created an anonymous module in the first example. In your last example you load the named module TimWolla/MyModule. From my understanding, this is only possible if you define this module as a named module, e.g. like this:


    JavaScript
    define('TimWolla/MyModule', ['TimWolla/Library', 'dtdesign/Library'], function (TimWolla, Dtdesign) {
    //
    }

    Chrome on Windows seems to use more resources, even without any extensions added (though I do add a few). It seems if I have a few tabs open and if I leave my browser open for an extended period of time... For example if I was on the phone... Chrome seems to slow down other running processes and will degrade some of my online experience. Firefox doesn't have that problem on Windows.

    Strange. For me it seems exactly the opposite. FF is slower and more ressurce-hunry from the start and gets much worse if run for hours, whilst chrome doesn't need much and stays quite the same even after many hours. This has always been the case for me (XP/ WIn 7 / WIn 8 / WIn 8.1).

    create an own blog isn't correct. Create a blog or create your own blog.

    While I would change it to either Create Blog or Create own Blog for consitency and simply because it is more concise, the phrase "Create an own Blog" ist correct. If you would say "Create your own Blog" this would imply that there is only one blog that is yours. "Create an Own Blog" implies that you can create a Blog - as in one of multiple - and that this blog will be one of yours.