« first day (2264 days earlier)      last day (2791 days later) » 
00:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

10:03 PM
@murgatroid99 Okay then, what are the costs of delaying vs implementing immediately? You can't accurately calculate the costs of delaying because those costs are directly associated with the whims of the public. If you lose half your audience in the future because you didn't have encryption at some key point in time, then how do you calculate your costs?
You can estimate those costs, but you have no idea how accurate those estimates are.
 
srsly... is overwatch ranked really so much worse and skillless than the normal plays?
 
0
Q: How to go Against a Bad Team Setup

ServerfrogAs stated, what should some do if the own team just refuse to play in a normal team setup in ranked. As Normal i mean: at least one Tank at least one Healer not 3 Snipers at least one Offensiv What should someone do if there at least 2 of the above stated things are missing? I am currently...

 
@MBraedley You could say that about anything. There are any number of unknown hypothetical scenarios that may lose your audience. What if you have encryption, and then some zero-day exploit appears in the established, trusted encryption library that you use, and people stop trusting your site?
 
What about that sweet, sweet Google juice?
 
@murgatroid99 In that case, you won't be the only site affected. Everyone will take an equal hit.
 
10:07 PM
What if a large fraction of your audience suddenly decides that websites without Facebook login are not worth visiting? I don't know what the cost of that would be, but that doesn't immediately imply that we should implement Facebook login on every website
My point is that you can justify anything based on the potential unknown costs of hypothetical scenarios
 
Chrome will start putting that "OMG insecure!" icon on non-HTTPS sites come 2017 anyway, so I'd rather be ahead of that trend in any case
 
@TimStone Only if certain kinds of information like passwords are sent over plaintext
 
@murgatroid99 And then pretty much every single site after that.
 
@murgatroid99 No, that's the current behaviour
In January 2017 it turns on for all non-HTTPS sites
 
Oh, you're right. I mis-remembered that announcement
> Beginning in January 2017 (Chrome 56), we’ll mark HTTP pages that collect passwords or credit cards as non-secure, as part of a long-term plan to mark all HTTP sites as non-secure.
Not yet
 
10:13 PM
Ah, you're right
I misread
 
> In following releases, we will continue to extend HTTP warnings, for example, by labelling HTTP pages as “not secure” in Incognito mode, where users may have higher expectations of privacy. Eventually, we plan to label all HTTP pages as non-secure, and change the HTTP security indicator to the red triangle that we use for broken HTTPS.
So, "eventually"
 
And to talk about Google page rank, it's pretty easy to calculate how many page views you loose by dropping X spots in the search rankings, and it wouldn't be hard to see how many spots you'll drop by not having encryption.
 
0
Q: Which requirements are present when moving my family in skyrim?

Joaquin TeniI just read some q/a and found out that I need to build a storage device for my kids to move in but I did that before and it wouldn't let me... later I completely finished the children's room and the West Wing (the last unbuilt wing) but I don't know which one was needed first - can someone help ...

 
So yeah, you can pretty easily see how much money you're loosing out on by not having encryption, based solely on traffic from google.
 
@MBraedley The only information I can find says that it's a very small effect
And it may be outweighed by the minor page speed hit
 
10:21 PM
Pretty sure that encryption is weighted more heavily than speed, and the speed cost is so small that it's practically lost in the noise.
 
@MBraedley and is very depressing to see that a Software Company(which throw me out) seems not to care xD
 
@MBraedley All of the information I can find says basically the opposite
 
tl;dr as long as your page loads in under 5 seconds, you're fine
 
@Chippies That's talking about 3G, where the load time is more likely to be dominated by page size
 
10:25 PM
@Chippies That makes no mention of the impact encryption has on speed. Which, as I've said, is pretty small.
 
@Chippies And I don't know if "fine" is quite the right word
> 53% of visits are abandoned if a mobile site takes more than 3 seconds to load
 
@MBraedley that's fair enough, I'm just pointing out that speed matters more than encryption above certain load times
@murgatroid99 due to not remembering the exact numbers/text in article, I went with the slightly more generous 5 seconds (that were mentioned in the article too), rather than 3
 
@Chippies And it's also important to note that the speed aspect is heavier for mobile than desktop.
 
is there any data on encryption impact on speed for mobile?
 
Minimal at best
 
10:28 PM
It's probably relatively small
> The average mobile web page is 2.5MB in size. This means the data alone takes 13 seconds to download on a fast 3G connection.
 
10:54 PM
 
I'm not sure what that is but it looks horrible
 
as if it wasn't punishment enough to watch people play overwatch /cc @Unionhawk
 
@badp Oh man I forgot they added that.
 
user15026
11:11 PM
@badp what the heck is that.?
 
@Ash I don't know if it takes 25 bits per message, or you just have to have 25 bits in the bank to talk
oh. oh no. it says "to Cheer", not "to talk"
so that's the minimum donation of twitch's implementation of bullshit arbitrary internet coins
 
Yes, bits are a twitch in-house way to donate to a streamer, and I guess people can put a minimum to avoid someone spamming 25 1 bit messages
 
11:29 PM
Oh hahaha that's right he's disproving elo hell
That account started bronze 1-9, and is now diamond
 
11:44 PM
oh right, I finished my goodreads challenge last night!
Already got my next book picked out too. IT was easy to pick this one.
Not sure what I'll read next. either Paladin of Souls (chalion #2) or something completely different.
 
user15026
@Wipqozn Congrats!
 
@Ash thanks
I think I'll make my challenge for next year 20 books as well. Seems like a nice comfortable number. Forces me to keep up my reading, but doesn't force me to read if I don't want to.
Plus a couple of the books I read this year were just novellas. Hoping I'll finish a few more non-novellas before the year is out, though.
 
@Unionhawk Maybe it's the circles I run in, but I see more meta-complaints about elo hell than actual complaints about elo hell.
 
user15026
@Wipqozn I read a bunch of novellas too, and like 120 page romances, so I feel my count is skewed some but everyone says they count as books
 
@Yuuki probably
 
00:00 - 22:0022:00 - 00:00

« first day (2264 days earlier)      last day (2791 days later) »