Aaron1011

> And tape is very secure, with built-in, on-the-fly encryption

What exactly is this referring to?

I thought that the issue with /dev/urandom was that it wouldn't block when read shortly after startup (when the entropy pool wasn't yet initialized).

> That's enough to turn a dollar into 16 billion in 5 years.

I think it's actually 1.6 trillion

> It doesn't matter in practice if the content is still accessible when the browser tells people that accessing it is dangerous.

It certainly does matter. There's a fundamental different between people being discouraged from accessing a website, and said website being completely inaccessible.

Displaying a warning to users doesn't make sites "inaccessible".

I was referring specifically to the author's claim that deprecating HTTP and displaying a warning to users is the equivalent of "rendering large parts of the web inaccessible" and "massive book burning".

> Also, if Google succeeds, it will make a lot of the web's history inaccessible.

> It's like a massive book burning, at a much bigger scale than ever done before.

How on earth did the author reach these conclusions?

> I'll ignore the irrelevant marxist talking point

Which part of the parent comment was a "marxist talking point"?

A government can imprison people for horrible reasons, but still not have the worst radio.

> As of now, text rendering methods are missing and for security reasons you cannot read back pixels from the canvas.

Does anyone have an idea as to what those reasons might be? I've heard of JavaScript access to certain CSS features being limited (e.g. getComputedStyle()), but I'm not sure what the benefit is here. Is there any way that user information could be leaked through a paint worklet context?

That's to be expected.

The idea behind my script is that the URL is encoding the unix time of the first visit to that URL. By starting at the current time and working backwards, the first HTTP 200 you come across should be the current page.