[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       novalug
Subject:    Re: [novalug] Signing on to AOL from Linux
From:       Chris Sanner <hitch () propheteer ! org>
Date:       2005-02-25 23:19:27
Message-ID: 421FB27F.3020902 () propheteer ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

| I read your "technical reason" as "AOL requires users to accept
| cookies because AOL elected to program its authorization demon
| to set a cookie".  I get a bit dizzy when I read such tightly
| circular logic.  You "don't necessarily like it" but it is within
| your (AOL's) power to correct it -- unless you have a classic
| pointy hair boss who is as clueless and capricious as Dilbert's.

well, aside from the fact that the question was a) can you sign into
aol's site with linux and not "is signing into aol a good idea", and b)
why do I need to use cookies, not "is there a good reason AOL sets
cookies", I think we've answered the question nicely.

Do I have a pointy haired boss?  no.  Actually, my boss (And his boss -
and HIS boss) are actively fighting to rectify the mistakes AOL has made
in the past.  Are those changes going to happen overnight?  if you think
the answer is yes, I want some of what you've been smoking.

| The real question is "Why does AOL freely choose to deny to the
| user the user's FREE CHOICE to either
|   (1) accept the security penalty of cookies to gain a modicum of
|       convenience to not be prompted for her/his password again
|       for that session ...
| or alternatively
|   (2) refuse the cookie and suffer the minor inconvenience of
|       keying in his/her user id and password at each change of
|       AOL branded website."
|
| We love open source and tout it to all who would hear us because
| it gives us freedom -- "as in free speech" -- freedom to choose
| for ourself among the many alternatives open to us in the open
| source domain.  Aren't we being a bit less than consistent when
| we justify ramming AOL's arbitrary choice down AOL's members
| collective throats, and to hell with whatever choice any AOL
| member may seriously prefer?

I'm just going to toss my hat into Pryzby's comments on this one.  Don't
like it, don't use it.  It's far from the only game in town and, to be
quite frank, is something I don't use at all except for work purposes.
Heck, in ops its rare to find someone who uses their aol.com address at
all, let along logs into the client for something other than doing work.
~ And even that's declining as we move away from the client-centric
approach.  FREE CHOICE, as you put it, is the ability to use your
computer without using AOL.  And guess what?  you've got it.
no hard feelings from us.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQh+yfzgLDqYPF2/AAQJONAP/cWCnlWDBa2U6bo3FnaQAfcJvS5K0dLRi
Qr+5o8nfDdZMHPQRgQ04jbYDnwKTzFF7iXVqpvXh9RS8OstlKskZ/FKhe+vqJuLD
hTp/3T18sDhipCDFDe9nDpHDxElrIi+q8etDG6zNms+4CPU/rHUd6zAv7ARPALCh
Gzvbg9WG1kA=
=oxrh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
novalug mailing list
novalug@tux.org
http://www.tux.org/mailman/listinfo/novalug
for subscribe/unsubscribe see web page
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]