I'm sure that Volida's motives are honest as he stated but this practice - buying a domain name that sounds like something popular and setting the A records to the intended site - has the potential to be used maliciously. All you'd have to do is wait for traffic to grow and then, in time, switch the DNS records to your own site. Of course, the HTTPS pages are going to show certificate problems while your A record is pointing at the original target - but many users will just go ahead and accept bad certificates.

How would a legitimate site owner defend against this sort of thing? Would the solution I described in the top paragraph be effective? Has this ever been done maliciously?

Or am I mistaken and this circumvents that?

What HTTPS pages?

The downmods are ridiculous, did I honestly distract from the conversation or did everyone disagree that putting www in front fixes it? This place is dying.

(ctrl-enter adds a leading http://www. and a trailing .com if either is missing)

How can you navigate among your tabs with any semblance of ease or speed?

On a typical day this means that in the morning I start with the session I left the evening before, say 25 tabs or so (usually project + whatever documentation I need for it), then as the day goes by the number of open tabs slowly increases. By the evening it probably is at its peak somewhere between 50 and 70 or so, then before I go to bed I catch up on my reading and close anything that doesn't have to do with work ready for the next cycle.

I agree in theory; that many tabs are pretty difficult to manage. Unfortunately, a garbage collection cycle forces me to focus on garbage collecting (since I will usually have several important sites open among the trash), breaking my concentration on the research. It ends up being more productive to leave them open for a while, until they reach some threshold where I have to do too much work to find the important open sites among the garbage. That point for me is definitely more than 25 but also less than 100. I assume that it's different for different people.

    'M<a-z>' where <a-z> is the letter you want, to set the mark.

    'go<a-z>' to open in the current tab.
    'gn<a-z>' for a new tab.

[1]http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahackerne.ws

Obviously it's just a convenient domain name, so he won't sell it for a lot of money, but should sell it for _something_. PG can afford a reasonably priced domain, I think.

Well, I still think it's irresponsible to provide or use such a "service". I can't think it's good for security if people get in the habit of relying on potentially unreliable third-parties just for the heck of it.

Why ask people to trust that you have only good intentions when that wouldn't even be necessary if you didn't provide a (IMHO less than worthless) "service"?

I might sound harsh, but the whole matter just reeks of sloppiness to me.

Since the domain is registered at GoDaddy, it's trivial to set up a redirect. Just select the domain and click the "Forward" button.

By the way, for someone who prefers to remain anonymous you don't make it very easy to post anonymously on your weblog.

BUT

since it's out there and the owner is willing to donate, I think it's better PG getting it.

The first one isn't a good reason. If it immediately redirects the user will then be at news.ycombinator.com, which can be trusted.

What was the second reason?

Also, pg could solve this by performing the redirect himself whenever the "Host" header is not equal to "news.ycombinator.com"