222 karma · joined October 7, 2012
But seriously: Yes, of course you would. They have to be pasted in clear text. There is no other way to do this.
But that's not the point. The point is that you do not get to use CTRL+ENTER in the first place! Unless, of course, you type in the master password, which Opera will forget after x minutes (zero if you want it to be forgotten instantly). So you have a windows of x minutes after I've used the password manager for the last time to do your "DOM hack".
If you mean an extra password, the answer is that most people don't want to type in a password when they open their browser. Think it through and try to see the issue.
I don't see your "issue", as using a master password does not "defeat the whole purpose of password saving" at all. Many people have different login credentials for different websites (not only passwords, also login name or email) which are hard to remember which one you used where. Having access to them with a single master password is convenience.I like the way this is handled in Opera, where your passwords can never be accessed/viewed in plain text at any time. Once your login data are stored, you can simply use them via CTRL+ENTER on the login form and the data is pasted into it. If you want to you can use a master password to restrict access to that data. And you can even set a time after which the the browser will forget that password and then asks for it again after e.g. 15 minutes.
The passwords are stored in an easily obtainable format.
So, why not change THAT and store them encrypted with a master key? If you are leaving your laptop around untrusted people, you're going to have problems.
True. But why make it even easier for someone unauthorized to retrieve your passwords?Why is it only the browser developers who come up with that arguement? I've never read such a statement from any other team. And why aren't other software systems do it that way if it is so insecure and "falce-security" so encrypt user passwords in a local db? Couldn't even an OS use that argument and say "hey, you got physical access to the system, here are all the passwords in plain text, have fun!".
Is there such thing? I doubt it, unless you're interviewed by someone you already know well.
What if the hardware or OS did do it actually, but the user failed to recognize it as for what it is or meant?
[...] the value of types is super super important. [...] Everything that is syntacticly legal, that the compiler will accept, will eventually wind up in your code base and that's why I think that static typing is so valuable because it cuts down on what can kinda make it pass down there. I'm only getting stronger in my stands on static typing, static analysis.[...] - John Carmack, qcon keynote 2013
1. Swap the burden of proof: couldn't much of these issues with software(!) patents be avoided just by forcing the "inventors" to check for prior arts themselves and prove (somehow) that they actually did do that?
2. Make them pay: What about a (huge) fine when the patent does not get approved eventually or when prior art was found during the approval process?
Riding a bike with speed and on terrain that outrun your riding skills
and Being hit by a car driven by someone not paying enough attention
Period. There are far more software project starts than good names out there.
I doubt that. Define 'good name'. Also, for open source software it does not matter that much what it is named. Who would care if Python was named e.g. Snake or Juice or Foo? As long as it is somewhat unique and catchy it should be fine, shouldn't it? You don't know which category your project will end up in when you start it.
Exactly, you do not know it. If your product is successful you want it to be unique. Just imagine the number of wrong tags on SE. And if you product is not successful it is even worse to add unnecessary confusion. Because JS is popular
Surprisingly and unfortunately, yes. But other technologies have had their time as well, e.g. I can't remember any ambiguous naming in Java. Anyone? There are also a lot of half-baked libraries out there that will waste your time. So many developers end up making their own.
Ok, why not just name it jQuery then? Hardly an excuse for poor naming choice.Why would you start such a confusion? Why would you want to fight with that software for page ranking? Why does this mostly happen to JS technologies?
None of these are 'selling points'. There is better software available for Email, RSS and IRC. If you don't want many tools, ok, you might like Opera more, but they are no reason to choose Opera over any other browser.
The reasons I choose Opera for my daily work are:
- awesome UI (yes, it actually *is* better than Chrome or FF)
- feature-rich
- fast
- smart caching
- best incognito mode integration
- superior integrated download manager
- pages actually do scroll smoothly
- stable with dozens of tabs, see http://i.imgur.com/Z55rPDh.png
Also, Opera has always brought innovation with it, e.g. tab-sessions, Speeddial, Tabgroups, Opera Link, Opera Unite, reloading tabs on startup, etc ...At the end of the day a browser is a tool and you have to pick the right one for your task. For browsing, Opera clearly wins - at least it does for me. See also my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5176327
@Topic: Opera Next is currently just another Chrome skin. Lets hope they don't forget to implement what makes them special.