[00:08] *** JesseW has joined #archiveteam-bs [00:22] *** mr-b has quit IRC (Read error: Operation timed out) [00:27] *** ris has quit IRC () [00:29] *** mr-b has joined #archiveteam-bs [00:58] *** BlueMaxim has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving) [00:59] What time zone does Wayback Machine go off of? It's only 8:58 over here and Wayback Machine seems to think it's July 1st [01:01] Hmm...guess it's UTC [01:02] *** j08nY has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving) [01:04] i'm at 733k items now [01:05] i'm up 4k from just 6 days ago [01:35] *** JesseW has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 370 seconds) [01:46] *** schbirid has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 258 seconds) [01:57] You know, I have a feeling that DeviantArt made an announcement of official closure, the window they would be given would be too small to crawl everything [02:00] *** schbirid has joined #archiveteam-bs [02:15] *** VADemon has quit IRC (left4dead) [02:22] DoomTay we have been chasing that robots.txt bug for a week now, sorry. We'll fix it eventually. [02:22] Huh [02:24] wumpus: on which note, I sent a robots.txt bug to info@, was that the most effective address to send it to? :P [02:25] vitzli I believe that yes, djvu is not expected to be the primary format for an uploaded item. My guess would be that converting to pdf before uploading is a good idea, and I'm not sure what you should do with the djvu, if it really is the primary document it should be uploaded... we aren't creating djvu anymore in derives, but to be safe(r) you might want to give it a different filename from the PDF. [02:25] and yes, Wayback is UTC. [02:25] joepie91 yes. Probably all that happened is that you're added to our list of testcases once we find the &#&$&@#@# bug [02:27] wumpus: anything I can do to help locate the bug? [02:28] joepie91 no, test cases are about all you can do. It's something dumb in our code. Remember, redis is not the service, the freaking service is the service. (One of our daemons is putting bogus info in redis and we can't figure out which one.) [02:30] wumpus: ah. well, I'll ask some people to forward testcases if they run into the bug, but aside from that, if you run into anything I can help with, let me know :P [02:30] (debugging is half of my day job, heh) [02:48] I need a clue. I need to know a site which is (1) currently dead (2) has a LOT of content (recipes, fan fic, whatever) that is (3) SFW (4) interesting that (5) would probably attract a lot of traffic if it was indexed by Google. The BBC food site would count if it was dead, but it is not dead. [02:48] This is for a wayback experiment. [02:50] Ooh, that's a good one [02:50] * joepie91 think [02:50] Would an older incarnation of a currently living site count? [02:50] DoomTay: then it'd compete in the google rankings, I'd imagine [02:51] Ooh, there was an art site that used to exist, but the name escapes me [02:51] (perhaps I'm guessing at the intent of the experiment a bit too much here :P) [02:52] joepie91 is guessing correctly [02:52] I don't want an angry site owner [02:53] wumpus: the problem I'm seeing is that Google rankings are still fairly heavily influenced by linkbacks, and so even for interesting/popular content, you'd have trouble getting ranked high enough to attract a lot of traffic if you don't own the original domain... unless the content in question is also relatively rare or unique to find [02:53] or unless the visitor is searching explicitly for that particular site [02:54] recipes are relatively unique so that'd still make BBC Food a good candidate if it weren't alive [02:54] joepie91 you can leave the SEO to me. [02:54] (read my linkedin profile.) [02:54] *** BlueMaxim has joined #archiveteam-bs [02:54] wumpus: I have no idea about what your non-IRC identity even is, realy :P [02:54] really* [02:55] CGHub.com? [02:56] DoomTay: what am I looking at [02:56] oh [02:56] hold on! [02:56] That's a stretch. It USED t obe a gallery site. Now it's used for conspiracy BS [02:56] wumpus: something that offers game content, like maps? [02:56] like, community-based game content sites [02:56] relatively unique, can attract a bunch of content, are dying by the dozens [02:56] er [02:56] a bunch of traffic* [02:57] text content is best [02:57] ah [02:57] wumpus: the only other thing I can think of then, off the top of my head, is Q&A sites [02:57] of the yahoo answers variety [02:57] or if the maps were well-described by the text on the pages, maybe that would work. The game would have to be current, tho. [02:57] (though with slightly less crazy, usually) [02:57] yahoo answers, uh, yeah. [02:57] that content is pretty timeless [02:58] "I'm pregnant, what's the most paracetamol can I take without killing my baby?" [02:58] yeah... :P [02:58] that seems like one of the more well-informed questions to be honest [02:58] for yahoo answers [02:58] it was the one we used in our pitch deck. there are worse ones, but that one seemed realistic [02:59] wumpus: so I went to the Yahoo Answers frontpage to see how alive it still was [02:59] one of the top questions: "Should I forgive my boyfriend for killing my dog?" [02:59] Okay, I'm pretty sure CGHub is the site I'm looking for in the first place. Just....don't go to the site as it is presently [02:59] not much has changed :P [02:59] what's the last good date for cghub? [03:00] 1st cghub capture of the frontpage now shows a soft 404 [03:00] wumpus: how about http://www.archiveteam.org/index.php?title=Formspring ? [03:01] Hm, that may do. Let me play with it. [03:01] Well, it closed April 13, 2014 [03:03] I'll try cutting it at 5/8/13 [03:04] fuck me it's affected by the robots.txt bug [03:08] hah [03:08] typical [03:10] This seems to be a different situation. robots there is live and it blocks everything [03:13] oh wait, I misread it. [03:14] I guess they deleted all of their content, so why let anyone crawl them other than adsense [03:14] <.< [03:15] Assholes [03:17] ah well, looks like a lot of content. [03:19] *** JesseW has joined #archiveteam-bs [03:39] *** wyatt8740 has joined #archiveteam-bs [03:41] sketchcow: web.archive.org claims my site has a robots.txt when a) there isn't one and b) there never has been one. http://wyatt8740.no-ip.org [03:41] (my site's down atm and I'm trying to view the archive) [03:41] https://web.archive.org/web/*/wyatt8740.no-ip.org [03:41] cc wumpus [03:42] ah wumpus is at archive.org too? [03:43] I think they're aware of that bug [03:43] wyatt8740: wumpus is currently trying to track down a robots.txt bug in the wayback, and needs more testcases, so maybe your issue relates to that as well [03:43] :P [03:43] Is it me or is your site currently dead? [03:43] uts dead [03:43] but I still have the subdomaim [03:43] Sounds a lot like the same situation I'm faced with [03:43] *subdomain [03:43] Hope Wayback doesn't delete stuff in this kind of situation [03:44] it doesnt [03:44] but sketchcow (or someone else, I forget) won't tell me the backdoor that apparently exists :p [03:46] wyatt8740: wayback has 4 versions of your (non-existant) robots.txt file [03:47] srsly? [03:47] what's it say according to wayback [03:48] https://web.archive.org/web/20150415000000*/http://wyatt8740.no-ip.org/robots.txt [03:48] they are all 404s [03:48] So wyatt8740's point still stands [03:49] yep [03:50] amusingly, the only *visible* difference appears to be the version of Apache you were running. [03:50] Was that from a manual scan or some diffing tool? [03:52] manual scan [03:52] as in when I scanned in atari service manuals? or triggered archivebot/ [03:53] I have a warc but it's extremely inconvenient since there's no C program to unpack it and I don't have maven to compile the java tools [03:55] no, I mean I visually looked at the differences in what it gave back [03:56] ohh [03:56] (I'm on an android phone with a C toolchain and nothing else) [03:58] *** RavetcoFX has joined #archiveteam-bs [03:59] *** BlueMaxim has quit IRC (Read error: Operation timed out) [03:59] RavetcoFX: yeah I do like the archiving scene though. I've always been one to try and preserve things that were in danger of disappearing, even long before I found Archive Team [03:59] Frogging: I've been archiving/hording a bit for last 4-5 years [04:00] not to the extent you guys do though [04:00] RavetcoFX: glad to hear it -- please dump copies of what you have on IA if you can [04:00] (and *make* copies of stuff on IA you think is neat, if you have the space, also) [04:00] here's my random garbage so far :o) https://archive.org/details/@ravetcofx [04:01] nice [04:02] Frogging: if I remember correctly, you were one of the only others from Canada right? [04:02] wyatt8740 not the usual platform for manipulating warcs. [04:03] RavetcoFX: The only others? [04:03] I am from Canada though yes [04:03] wumpus: I know. Still shocked there's no C program to do it yet [04:03] Frogging: in mint-dev [04:04] ah yeah [04:04] wyatt8740: I mean, they are just plain text -- you could *write* one. [04:04] Is binary encoded in base64 or something> [04:04] ? [04:04] or hack something together with shell scripting [04:04] code it in C, it's not hard [04:04] on his phone? :p [04:05] wyatt8740: ah, fair point -- no, binary data is not encoded as anything, it's just there directly [04:05] Again, are binaries in base64? also yeah I'd be writing a C program in GNU nano on my phone [04:05] do you have a physical keyboard at least :p [04:05] so if you wanted a particular payload, you just need to chop it out of the stream [04:05] wyatt8740: WARC is a HTTP-like format [04:06] * Frogging hugs his BlackBerry PRIV [04:06] wyatt8740: headers, double newline I believe, content length [04:06] everything up to end of that content length is the record payload [04:06] usually containing a HTTP request or response with its respective headers [04:06] or DNS requests, in the case of heritrix [04:06] I have absolutely no idea how HTTP works on the protocol level [04:06] there's an rfc ;-) [04:06] wyatt8740: okay, so basically [04:06] header\n [04:06] header\n [04:06] is it base64 for non-ascii? [04:06] header\n [04:06] \n [04:06] payload here [04:06] there's no base64 involved [04:06] Frogging: what are your teams stance on archiving hard to obtain copyright material? [04:06] it's literally just the payload itself [04:06] ascii is 7 bit though [04:06] content-length is used to determine where it starts and ends [04:06] RavetcoFX: archive first, ask questions later [04:06] you might see base64 in some headers but that's because they're arbitrary. [04:07] Frogging: cool [04:07] I put base64 in headers just so people can ask if base64 is used in HTTP headers [04:07] wyatt8740: honestly, just open a WARC in something like `less` and you'll see :P [04:07] WARC is a very trivial format to recreate a parser for, even without a spec [04:07] this WARC is 1gb [04:07] or zless if it is compressed :-) [04:07] sure, less will read selectively [04:07] I dont think nano will take that well [04:07] hence, less [04:07] not nano [04:07] nano doesn't take anything well [04:08] :P [04:08] haha [04:08] you'll have no issues less'ing a 1GB WARC on a memory-constrained device though [04:08] actually I got a bug fixed so it runs well on my IBM 3161 terminal [04:08] also yeah, the gz might be a problem [04:08] can always gzip -cd | head -n 1000 [04:08] or so [04:08] I have busybox [04:08] so yes [04:08] and then pipe to less [04:08] or zcat [04:09] right, something that lets you `head` [04:09] :P [04:09] zcat file.warc.gz |less [04:09] that will likely stream the entire file into RAM [04:09] selectively reading the file only works if you specify a path to less [04:09] not via stdin [04:09] anyone know of another domain without a robots.txt file, btw? [04:09] iirc [04:09] head -n 10;head -n 20; and so on. -_- [04:09] yeah that'll work [04:09] safe to say a thousand or so though [04:09] why are there 47 different python warc libraries?! [04:09] JesseW: pdf.yt, HTTPS-only [04:09] 47 python warc libraries and zero in C [04:10] it's depressing [04:10] wumpus: because, as we were just saying, it's really easy to write one :-) [04:10] (custom error page but it correctly sends 404) [04:10] so lots and lots of people have [04:10] joepie91: ok, will check [04:10] JesseW: mind, strict TLS settings [04:10] old Java crap and WinXP will likely fail [04:10] kids these days with their python and their JIT interpreted languages [04:10] also HSTS [04:10] :P [04:11] I bet they don't even know what a segfault looks like [04:11] HSTS is annoying [04:11] wyatt8740: oh trust me, Python devs know what segfaults look like [04:11] lol [04:11] and their object oriented language constructs spoiling them and confusing me :\ [04:11] Frogging: how so? [04:11] joepie91: if I want http:// then give it to me dammit! [04:11] :p [04:12] holy shit did I walk into #fsf by accident [04:12] frogging is a dinosaur. https is the way forward. [04:12] don't see why I would [04:12] there's a very good reason HSTS is a thing [04:12] hm, well pdf.yt isn't blocked on wayback, even though it gives a 404 for robots.txt [04:12] it probably isn't as good of a reason as you think it is [04:12] yipdw: do they share my dislike of high level programming and OOP? [04:12] Frogging: are you _sure_ you want to have this discussion? :) [04:12] i'm thinking I don't actually :p [04:13] JesseW: Are we still looking for the "currently dead" requirement? [04:13] they share a tendency for polarization yeah [04:13] I do worry of what could happen to the Internet Archive though :/ [04:13] yeah it's quite a SPOF RavetcoFX [04:13] (I should warn you I'm the type that uses goto to annoy teachers in programming assignments) [04:13] RavetcoFX: we have this though fwiw http://www.archiveteam.org/index.php?title=INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK [04:13] RavetcoFX: have you heard of http://archiveteam.org/index.php?title=INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK ? [04:13] lol [04:13] hence the decentralizedweb summit that we recently had, but I digress [04:14] * JesseW ah, ninja'ed [04:14] that actually sounds similar to something I came across recently. balrog helped me archive a site last year, now archive.org is claiming robots.txt issue. No server is currently answering the domain, though we own the domain still. Domain hosted by GoDaddy. :-/ [04:14] yes, the bug is related to sites which time out. [04:14] stiletto: join the club [04:14] joepie91: I use plaintext IRC because fuck the SSL police [04:14] hm, interesting [04:14] Frogging: fwiw, I'm not somebody who blindly shouts "everything must be TLS 100% of the time right now without exceptions": http://cryto.net/~joepie91/blog/2015/05/01/on-mozillas-forced-ssl/ [04:14] * Stiletto joins club [04:14] my server's dead but the domain's still in my control [04:14] Frogging: but essentially all of the anti-TLS arguments that don't pertain to the CA model are outright wrong [04:15] wumpus: have you looked at foxbox.tv? Another potential use case, I think [04:15] forcing SSL will kill people like me that can't pay people to "trust" then [04:15] them* [04:15] so I'm very, -very- skeptical of people demanding plaintext connections [04:15] wyatt8740: and that would be the CA model [04:15] and that's precisely the issue [04:15] and why it shouldn;t be enforced on a browser level (yet) [04:15] but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be enforced on a *server* level [04:15] I self sign [04:16] :\ [04:16] joepie91: because the wikipedia page I'm loading can be loaded by anyone and there is no reason to protect its content in transit [04:16] which is a separate discussion entirely [04:16] woah [04:16] wyatt8740: just use let's encrypt then? [04:16] just because you want bad data, frogging, doesn't mean anyone else should [04:16] Frogging: yeah, no, that's not even remotely correct and shows a complete misunderstanding of what TLS is *for* [04:16] Indo not know what "let's encrypt" is [04:16] wyatt8740: Why don't you use Let's Encrypt these days? It's definitely an improvement over self signing. [04:16] wyatt8740: hold on, I will explain in a bit [04:16] https://letsencrypt.org/ [04:16] this is not going to mix well with a discussion about what TLS is for [04:16] wumpus: I didn't say anyone else should [04:16] :p [04:17] * pikhq holds off on everything else [04:17] Frogging: the problem is that you didn't argue why you want HTTP. you argued why you don't think you need HTTPS. [04:17] that's an entirely different discussion [04:17] frogging: you will learn I am not a fan of 1-offs ;-) [04:17] wumpus: so the bug isn't triggered by the statuscode, but rather by a timeout when making the connection? [04:17] wyatt8740:) "free certificate that automatically renews itself" [04:17] joepie91: what's it for then, if not to um... encrypt things [04:17] jessew: yes. [04:17] Frogging: encrypting things is just the means, not the goal. [04:17] part of the means, in fact [04:17] authentication is another part of that [04:17] oh dear, what's the goal [04:17] does lets encrypt have backing from major browsers yet? [04:17] wyatt8740: yes [04:17] I use seamonkey so Mozilla'd probably have to adopt it [04:17] wumpus: and that fact isn't stored in the (public) parts of the cdx, right? [04:18] wyatt8740:) mozilla is founding member [04:18] jessew: this is a bug in a redis cache. [04:18] Frogging: the goal of TLS is two-fold: 1) preventing passive attackers 'on the wire' from seeing your traffic and deducing information from that about you, your habits, interests, position, relationships, and so on. 2) preventing active attackers from pretending to be the server and the client (MITM attack) and thus circumventing 1 [04:18] BTW: any work towards a facebook-dl equiv of youtube-dl that archivebot can use, or something? Getting ready to kill off a page and knowing that archive.org preserved the entire thing would be cool :) [04:18] Stiletto: no [04:18] Frogging: it's primarily about privacy, not secrecy [04:18] wyatt8740: All of 'em. Cross-signed by an already adopted CA, so it works in all browsers including fairly old versions of IE (IE 6 SP3, IIRC). [04:18] that said I bet seamonkey gets killed off when mozilla puts a machine gun to its foot and removes XUL [04:18] it's just that privacy helps with secrecy [04:19] Frogging: so the public availability of wikipedia is irrelevant, because that's a secrecy argument, not a privacy argument [04:19] the data you're protecting isn't the wikipedia content [04:19] @yipdw :( well i understand how it could be challenging [04:19] it's the fact that you're *looking* at it [04:19] I see [04:19] wyatt8740:) that's happening right now; they're moving away from XUL already. e10s requires it [04:19] Frogging: Additionally, it prevents any outside party from falsely *claiming* to be Wikipedia. [04:19] Frogging: this is also why the rationale of a lot of website operators - "I don't think my site is sensitive so it doesn't need TLS" is wrong - this is simply not a consideration that you can make for your users [04:19] wumpus: wow -- I wouldn't have expected that would have an effect like this. I'll be very curious to read whatever public or semi-public writeup gets made when the bug is figured out. [04:19] frogging: not only do I not want my ISP spying on me, I want them to not spy on my friends, too. [04:19] aranje: not for seamonley [04:19] seamonkey* [04:20] wyatt8740:) yes, I mean firefox, but I'm not aware that mozilla even works on seamonkey much anymore [04:20] also say goodbye to total customizability :\ [04:20] jessew: it's a garden-variety bug, we stupidly have multiple codebases talking to the same cache and one of them has a bug, we aren't sure which. [04:20] jessew: and the fix is DON'T DO THAT YOU FOOLS [04:20] It's mostly done by a small group of insane people like me that think chrome is the worst thing to ever happen to GUI design [04:20] Frogging: in the end, it comes down to what the *user* wants to keep private, and to that end, there must always be a possibility for encryption. further, to make this work on an internet-wide basis, it needs to be the *default*, because otherwise people will either fuck up or not care enough, often because they haven't really considered the consequences of not keeping this information private [04:20] when it's financially feasible one day, I'd love to help fund some kind of long term archival project, like burying a few hundred PB on the moon [04:21] wyatt8740:) heh [04:21] Frogging: unfortunately the CA model gets into the way of that "must always be a possibility", but it's slowly improving [04:21] wumpus: lol [04:21] Frogging: I will note, of course, that it actually prevents anyone who's not a CA or in cahoots with a CA from doing that, not prevents it entirely. [04:21] in the way* [04:21] Buuut that's at least a limitation. [04:21] or even shooting an archive out of the solar system [04:21] jessew: redis is not a service. the service is the service. [04:21] ravetcofx already done, voyager 1 and 2 [04:21] What good is an archive if you can't get to it? [04:22] Frogging: now a lot of people think that TLS will be a burden resource-wise, but that hasn't really been true for a while now [04:22] not to a point that it matters [04:22] wumpus: only a small sample of humanity on the vinyl [04:22] DoomTay: other people can get to it later, even if you can't [04:22] integration is now also readily available for almost all software, so that's usually not an argument anymore either [04:22] the third secret goal of TLS is awesome error messages [04:22] Google increased load by about 1% in their servers by turning it on, IIRC. [04:22] note that the usual librarian definion of archive is not about access. [04:22] Frogging: so in summary: TLS is essentially free for the user, we want it to be enabled by default, there are clear privacy benefits, and not really any real-world drawbacks anymore. [04:22] Frogging: and from that perspective, "give me HTTP if I want HTTP" makes no sense [04:23] aranje thus my browser looks like netscape communicator in 2016 (bookmarks bar collapsed) http://i.imgur.com/zsYmHsx.png [04:23] and it makes much more sense to ensure that every client will always use HTTPS regardless of any downgrade attacks that might occur on their network [04:23] maybe I don't care about my privacy [04:23] maybe I'm crazy and want to destroy it [04:23] Frogging: sure, but that's irrelevant [04:23] frogging: we don't care that you don't care ;-) [04:23] DoomTay: an archive for distant ancestors to find I suppose? [04:23] if you're crazy then I shouldn't let you make decisions ;) [04:23] wyatt8740:) hehehe that's a hilarious look :> [04:23] I love it. [04:23] Frogging: and you can always voluntarily publish your browsing history [04:23] if you intend on destroying your privacy [04:23] several people have done so [04:24] (to make a point, primarily) [04:24] It works and DOESN'T CHANGE EVERYTHING with each update [04:24] and I recommend you use tls for that copy of your browsing history, so somebody doesn't insert fake pages [04:24] wyatt8740: If you don't have it already: Let's Encrypt is free secure certs, forever, for everyone, that are accepted in all relevant TLS users. And it's easy to set up as well. [04:24] Aranje: that's an interesting threat model :P [04:24] joepie91:) :D [04:24] Frogging: then make a proxy that accepts HTTPS and outputs HTTP, and put that as far away (network wise) from you as you can gt [04:24] Seamonkey follows the principle of least astonishment [04:24] wyatt8740: So there's essentially no reason to use self-signed certs anymore. [04:25] wyatt8740: okay, so to get back to Let's Encrypt, now that the "what is TLS for" thing has been covered... Let's Encrypt is a CA that gives out free domain-validated certificates, that are considered valid by browsers, in an automated manner. [04:25] pikhq: there are a few [04:25] but not any that wyatt8740 is likely to encounter [04:25] pikhq: okay except maybe I want to scare off people who use HTYPS [04:25] HTTPS [04:25] wyatt8740:) nothing in chrome changes from version to version because there's no UI to change :D [04:25] aranje: mainly referring to firefox transforming more and more into chrome each release [04:25] joepie91: Well, sure. Things like "not on the public Internet at all" or "using it in a closed system with only one key trusted" or the like. [04:25] wyatt8740: anyway, if you want automagical browser-valid TLS that takes you 0 effort to configure, there's even things like Caddy - a HTTPd that, for every hostname you configure, *automatically* obtains and periodically renews a Let's Encrypt certificate, sets it up, and so on [04:26] joepie91:) side question: do you think the kazakh government's legal requirement of a root cert on every browser for tls stripping is a CA model failure or [04:26] pikhq: also wildcard scenarios, API servers, etc [04:26] Right, yes. [04:26] wyatt8740:) oh, haha, indeed [04:26] wyatt8740: ref https://caddyserver.com/ [04:26] 'we have deprecated everything our user base stayed with us for so we could become chrome which other users like' - mozilla [04:26] But not for the common case of "I want a secure website". There, Let's Encrypt is better and easier. [04:26] Aranje: I wouldn't consider that a CA model failure, no [04:26] that's essentially just a client compromise [04:27] by legal means [04:27] wyatt8740:) they also helped standardize addons to be cross browser and are finally going to have the capacity to sandbox the browser [04:27] could've happened for any auth model [04:27] joepie91:) heh, alright [04:27] However they destroyed customizabiluty [04:27] *customizability [04:27] *** yipdw changes topic to: Archive Team: Oh Yeah, Negotiation is the Answer | Shut Up | Strike Up A Conversation With These Three Amazing Letters [04:27] since sandboxing and 100% configurability are mutually incompatible [04:27] aye [04:27] Aranje: now if kazakh CAs were coerced to sign certificates for third-party sites when they are served within kazakhstan using MITM, then -that- is what I would consider a CA model failure [04:27] but also likely a very short-lived one [04:28] that doesn't really work at scale, tends to get you noticed [04:28] :P [04:28] *** RavetcoFX has quit IRC (Quit: Page closed) [04:28] wyatt8740: why are those incompatible? [04:28] wyatt8740: anyway, anything unclear about LE, or? :P [04:28] joepie91:) yeah I don't know what the super detailed specifics of their legal requirements are, I just saw in passing that they asked for inclusion into the root store because kazakh law requires ssl stripping ability. browsers are notably reticent [04:28] jesseW: look at something like downthemall. [04:28] what's this +t bullshit? the topic would be more interesting if I could set it. [04:29] wumpus: I think that's precisely why the +t is there ;) [04:29] wumpus:) you don't have operator [04:29] they can add special javascript functions to allow that particular adon to adapt, but a download accelerator is simply one of infinite use cases [04:29] you need +h or +o to edit topic [04:29] aranje I am the wumpus who formed EFNET. I am aware of how irc works. [04:29] the code is GPL because of me. [04:30] (server) [04:30] * JesseW is actually rather surprised to see wumpus breaking his no-EFNET rule... [04:30] and I'm the guy who mis-designed kick and ban. [04:30] wumpus:) excellent, I would have no idea about that since it's 10 years before I had an internet connection [04:30] yeah yeah rules are made to be broken, more than a decade later [04:30] more than 2 decades, sheesh [04:31] Unless you can arbitrarily inject code into any point of the browser userspace you're going to meet things you can't do in the new model. [04:31] wumpus: gonna say thanks for efnet then [04:31] no-EFNET rule? [04:31] oh, founded 1990 [04:31] Hi, my name's Greg and I'm an IRC addict. [04:31] okay, 15 years before internet [04:31] WHAT [04:31] lol [04:31] oh, just your internet. [04:31] I did not have internet until 2005 [04:31] 26 years old if 1990 [04:32] I'm 19 years old:\ [04:32] :) [04:32] The Intenet didn't exist in 1990, I was on NSFNet [04:32] (late 1996) [04:32] BBSes existed though right [04:32]