News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Marking HTTP as Non-Secure by coldtea on Saturday December 13, 2014 @04:44AM (#8744739)
>The problem is that costs 100 times as much as what I pay now

The "100 times as much" is not that impressive, if it merely goes from 6 cents to 6 dollars.

Re:Marking HTTP as Non-Secure by ctz on Saturday December 13, 2014 @07:41AM (#8745060)
I suggest looking at the world beyond your immediate environs.

6 cents vs 6 dollars is the difference between a person in a low-income economy spending 0.1% vs 18% of their income on a website.

Re:Marking HTTP as Non-Secure by Mister_Snuggles on Saturday December 13, 2014 @11:56AM (#8745576)
That works out to an income of about $33/mo. I think that person has a lot more to worry about than where to host their static site.
Re:Marking HTTP as Non-Secure by ctz on Saturday December 13, 2014 @01:29PM (#8745866)
My source for that figure was the World Bank[1], which gives a GNI per capita of 400USD PA for the Democratic Republic of Congo.

[1]: http://data.worldbank.org/country/congo-dem-rep

Re:Marking HTTP as Non-Secure by egwor on Saturday December 13, 2014 @05:15AM (#8744791)
Which in big chunks of the western world is not that much, but it will increase the barrier for entry for many in poorer nations. For commercial sites, then maybe I see a benefit. For everything else... why bother? The info isn't secret, doesn't need to be and since there's so much data going around already is anyone malicious bothering to look?
Re:Marking HTTP as Non-Secure by tomjen3 on Saturday December 13, 2014 @10:37AM (#8745358)
And what do you think that means for websites that are 100 times as big? They go from being rather cheap to host to being money drains.

We need better infrastructure.