Hey @linuxxx
Why do you use Let's Encrypt now again? ;)

😂😂

Oh boy

Linux gets sponsored by Microsoft. Are you also going to use that? :p

Legal loophole :D when challenged Google will label Chrome team a "splinter cell"

arent we like... more concerned about the thing underneath?

> Facebook

Oh boy you better explain @linuxxx

@lithiex
I trust MS more then Google

@linuxxx get over here :D

📌

Do multiple mentions create multiple notifications if they're in the same comment?

@linuxxx @linuxxx @linuxxx @linuxxx @linuxxx @linuxxx @linuxxx

@ocab19 Nope

dun dun duuun

@ocab19 Nope :P

As long as I don't have to deal with Google myself I'm all good :P.

Certificate signatures are nonsense anyway. Browsers are hard-coded to accept the SSL signatures of a specific set of commercial vendors without question, and to nag the user otherwise. I see the value of a verification entity, but the trust breaks down entirely, in my opinion, when they charge mountains of money to rubber-stamp it. The fact that they charge money for it undermines the validity of the whole process.

So, if there is a trusted signer that doesn't charge for their automated signature, then frankly, I don't give a shit who's partnered with the project.

@Linux MS just collects data, but doesn't give you the kind of service you get from Google. I would be more concerned about MS.

@bahua I can assure you that they are not hardcoded, they accept certificates trusted in the os certificate store (or similar in different os-es)

@mrbig00

Noted. In any case, the (hopefully) unintended effect of that is the driving of business to specific companies.

@Zennoe I'm using FF Quantum a lot at the moment. It's so awesome and fast, it deserves the hype.

BTW several browser companies (Microsoft, Google, Samsung, W3C) also sponsor Mozilla now for the MDN documentation project.

When it suits them, companies can play nice. Unlike humans, they're less hindered by emotions and can more easily fiercely compete in one area while collaborating in another.