On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Arthur Corliss <corl...@digitalmages.com>wrote:
> I think you're still missing my point and focusing on defending a company > you obviously like. All you had to do was originally write "as much as I understand people's desire for encryption, I still believe that 1. SSL is only necessary in specific websites (example A, example B) and 2. when working with Google we shouldn't be worrying about encryption there, but rather Google itself." Instead you opted to butt heads with someone, belittling their whole "SSL doesn't have large overhead" remark with "who cares? Google!" You could have made an eloquent respectful comment, saying that while SSL apparently doesn't cost much, Google is really what bothers you and that you'd rather have a discussion about that. I don't think anyone (including myself) would have anything bad to say about it, and you would have been most likely successful at raising that point of issue. I've personally moved to DuckDuckGo and considering replacing Gmail. Unfortunately, I've most likely committed the same belittling, whether it was towards you, Shlomi, David, or anyone else here. So, my apologies for this and I will be clearing my desk of this thread. Apologies, and warm wishes to all, s.
