ttj - Tom Jones

To register a device for wifi on Princess ship, connect to wifi MedallionNet, and point. a browser at login.com. Background:  tardtards decided that wifi connection couldn't be done via wifi protocols, it had to be via a web page.  So were born "captive portal"s.  When web was plain-text, network provider's stack could easily man-in-the-middle user's web requests (assumption: user goes straight to web), and redirect to their captive schmortal page, and make them fill forms. Then the web went mostly-https, (SSL / TLS), meaning encrypted, so MITM shouldn't be possible, and the captive schmortal MITM attempts result in certificate errors.  User may choose "abandon ssl certificates", "do anyway" kind of things in browser.  But the client is now told, I think by a DHCP item, what URL to go to to do the captive schmortal.  This is somehow passed from the client's OS to the client's browser.  Sometimes a new browser window is launched, on ...

At the risk of bending a term, one wants transactions over the web to be "as atomic as possible".  You know what I mean. Say for something like a payment:  Client and server line everything up, then "wam commit with tiny data", "bam commit worked with tiny data b", and with proper feedback to user at each stage. What actually happens is that devtards create a sprawling, heavy mess with all sorts of back-and-forth.  It pulls in garbage from all directions.  When it's on a perfect internet connection, such as the devtard's dev box, it just about works, most of the time.  That's the level they get it to.  If there is the slightest connection glitch, packet loss, slowness, it just sort of fizzles out in undefined ways.  Maybe the thinger spins round for ever, or something just remains greyed out or doesn't load.  Occasionally some sort of error message will be produced. A payment or other online transaction should work with a 9600 bps connectio...

One of the most basic aspects of user-programmability in real-world computing is being able to say "open this file type with that application". In Windows 95, in the file manager application, which I think was called Windows Explorer, this was easy.  There was "open", and "open with".  "open" used the default application for the file type, and was also the action performed by just clicking or double-clicking on the file.  Other applications, capable of opening that file type, were under "open with".  The right applications tended to end up in the list.  I'm pretty sure there was a way to choose a different one, anyway.  The default application for the type could be changed easily enough; I don't remember the details. Fast forward three decades, and change OS to GNOME/Lunix. Well, "Videos" (bad name for application) just failed to open it, giving a big error message about codecs.  I know mplayer is installed, so I'l...

Here is a screenshot: Since it's a still, it doesn't show quite how distracting it is to have a field of vision that keeps violently changing, while one is trying to do something.  I was trying to do this thing, but I'm now busy trying to un-hypnotise myself from fade transitions, and give my attention to the actual form again.  Why do websitetards do this? My screenshot above does catch it mid-fade, which gives you some idea. Now, what was I doing? Trying to set the From: field, which is an airport.  I type LGW, which is gatwick, and it gives me a drop-down with a single item, which I select.  But it fails.  Nothing happens.  Confusingly, the light gray example text is "e.g. London Gatwick", but that isn't its value; it still has no value. Since I've done battle with this form before, I can remember what the geektard-induced fault with their web site is: the victim is not allowed to set the From: field to the same value as the To: field, and the To: field...

Unspecified "protocols", which are not really protocols, tend to require both ends to have the same implementation, often at a similar version.  Real protocols require both ends to speak the same specified protocol.  In real life there are often grey areas, but things like TCP, HTTP, and sort of SSH fit into this category.   It can be surprising how widely-used unspecified non-protocols are.  Three examples for today: rsync, openvpn, and bitcoin.  By their nature, then, all ripe for replacement with something specified. Re VPN protocols, the ipv6 stuff is specified but rubbish, and the WireGuard thing recently added to the linux kernel appears to be unspecified, tho it's probably less coupled to the whims of openssl than openvpn is.   And I managed to get a 500 internal server error out of google's main search page in the process: "This should never happen".