What is the bigger WTF... the FCC, or Oracle?



  • I’m not sure what the biggest WTF is here. It has to be some kind of record, I think.

    Is it that the FCC recommends installing a 5-year-old version of Java in order to file a license application? or that registering a license requires Java at all? that the link’s font is different? that they invented a plural form of the word “New”?

    <center></center>

    …that the link doesn’t work without Javascript? how they managed to make it load in a new window? that they didn’t quote the href attribute? that the URL is outdated?

    <center></center>

    Or is it that Oracle only allows registered, signed-in users to download old versions of Java from the archive? Or the personal information they expect me to provide? Or that they happily accepted the rather obviously fake information I provided?

    <center></center>

    And – what exactly am I supposed to do if I don’t want to be spammed? Leave the checkboxes blank? Click the Do Not Email link to opt-out? I did both, just to be on the safe side… I’m hoping the account confirmation e-mail (politely addressed to “None of your business”) will be the only e-mail I get from them.

    Finally, with the j2se-6u5 installer downloaded, time to uninstall the current version… or… wait, JPC 2 - Ubuntu8?

    <center></center>

    “Remove” didn’t do anything, so I uninstalled Java 7 Update 25 first. Then, it said that the JPC 2 entries may have already been uninstalled, and asked if I wanted to remove them from the list. I shudder to think at what a registry check would reveal when all is said and done.

    I finally got the recommended version of Java downloaded and installed (after installing it, Firefox refused even to acknowledge its existence). It didn’t take me very long to realize that I needed some help with the complicated license application… fortunately, there was a helpful-looking “?” button, and (after disabling IE’s popup blocker)…

    <center></center>

    Oh.

    Yes, it’s been one of those days.



  • Yes, one of those days where pictures don't work.



  • How the hell are those images not working?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    How the hell are those images not working?

    They work for me, but they look all the same.



  • Wait, what the fuck? tinurl redirects to data: URL images?? :(



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    How the hell are those images not working?

    What a fascinatingly WTF way to try to post images. I wonder what the tinyurl folks would say about that?



  • @boomzilla said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    How the hell are those images not working?

    What a fascinatingly WTF way to try to post images. I wonder what the tinyurl folks would say about that?

    Probably "DUUUUUURRRRR" while fiddling with their genitals, because they still don't sanitize inputs to prevent data: URLs or URLs over a certain length..



  • @boomzilla said:

    What a fascinatingly WTF way to try to post images. I wonder what the tinyurl folks would say about that?

    I like too that Firefox is happy to follow those redirects to the gates of Hell, but Chrome just casts a condescending, sideways glance, like the redirects are a guy in a pink shirt and cowboy boots who is taking a shit in the punch bowl.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @boomzilla said:
    What a fascinatingly WTF way to try to post images. I wonder what the tinyurl folks would say about that?

    I like too that Firefox is happy to follow those redirects to the gates of Hell, but Chrome just casts a condescending, sideways glance, like the redirects are a guy in a pink shirt and cowboy boots who is taking a shit in the punch bowl.

    Best part of Chrome is "This web page is not available" when you right-click -> "Open image in new tab" on those suckas.



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    @boomzilla said:
    What a fascinatingly WTF way to try to post images. I wonder what the tinyurl folks would say about that?

    I like too that Firefox is happy to follow those redirects to the gates of Hell, but Chrome just casts a condescending, sideways glance, like the redirects are a guy in a pink shirt and cowboy boots who is taking a shit in the punch bowl.

    Best part of Chrome is "This web page is not available" when you right-click -> "Open image in new tab" on those suckas.

    Check the error at the bottom: Chrome won't follow a redirect from http: to data:, which is probably smart.



  • Those "data:" links work in:

    • Firefox
    • Safari (5.1.7-- the most recent Windows version)

    They do not work in:

    • Chrome
    • IE 10


  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Chrome just casts a condescending, sideways glance, like the redirects are a guy in a pink shirt and cowboy boots who is taking a shit in the punch bowl.

    You've got to let go of things otherwise you'll end up with ass cancer.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Wait, what the fuck? tinurl redirects to data: URL images?? :(
    Is this a tinyurl WTF or an OP WTF?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Those "data:" links work in:

    • Firefox
    • Safari (5.1.7-- the most recent Windows version)

    They do not work in:

    • Chrome
    • IE 10

    So you're the guy responsible for keeping the Safari for Windows guy employed at Apple!



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Wait, what the fuck? tinurl redirects to data: URL images?? :(
    Is this a tinyurl WTF or an OP WTF?

    Why not both? OP set out to abuse tinyurl and tinyurl went along for the ride.



  • @Ronald said:

    you'll end up with ass cancer.

    Like a pink-shirted "cowboy" who's taken one-too-many up the tailpipe?



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    So you're the guy responsible for keeping the Safari for Windows guy employed at Apple!

    You gotta feel sorry for the guy at Apple who is tasked with maintaining their Windows apps. The Apple people probably shun him. And Windows developers will want nothing to do with him. Can you imagine being that guy at a job interview with a real company? "So you're the guy who ported iToons to Windows, huh?" interviewer leans across the desk and punches him in the face "Get the fuck out of my office. You make me sick."



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    Those "data:" links work in:

    • Firefox
    • Safari (5.1.7-- the most recent Windows version)

    They do not work in:

    • Chrome
    • IE 10

    So you're the guy responsible for keeping the Safari for Windows guy employed at Apple!

    We do as well. Well, not me personally, but I know the web guys test our site against Safari using Safari on Windows boxes.



  • @cdosrun said:

    ...the web guys test our site against Safari using Safari on Windows boxes.

    That's like testing out an HIV vaccine by knee-capping African kids.



  • @cdosrun said:

    but I know the web guys test our site against Safari using Safari on Windows boxes.
    What about Windows computers?



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    So you're the guy responsible for keeping the Safari for Windows guy employed at Apple!
     

     Safari for Windows is as dead as Lenin.

     



  • So it's actually alive in North Korea ?

    The OP is pretty funny though when you see the images. I wonder how old exactly is the thing he tried to awaken.



  • @lucas said:

    @The_Assimilator said:

    So you're the guy responsible for keeping the Safari for Windows guy employed at Apple!
     

     Safari for Windows is as dead as Lenin.

    Worshiped in academia and the White House?



  • @cdosrun said:

    I know the web guys test our site against Safari using Safari on Windows boxes.
     

    So they're not testing Safari at all.



  • @TheLazyHase said:

    I wonder how old exactly is the thing he tried to awaken.
     

     Well, FCC form 601 is the Application for a New Licence for almost every radio service exept Amateur. So presumably there are quite a few people out there using it, and apparently they all have an ancient Java version installed. As to when it was built, the FCC's entire Universal License System hasn't changed much in the 5 years or so that I've been using it, and it felt like a clunky POS back then, too.



  • @reverendryan said:

    Well, FCC form 601 is the Application for a New Licence for almost every radio service exept Amateur.
    Emphasis on the "almost." BTW, thank you for reminding me to file a change of address for my Amateur license.

    @reverendryan said:

    So presumably there are quite a few people out there using it, and apparently they all have an ancient Java version installed.
    Hmm, filing the Form 605 didn't ask me to install an old version of Java, and I have the very latest update, having updated itself when I rebooted this afternoon.

     

    @reverendryan said:

    As to when it was built, the FCC's entire Universal License System hasn't changed much in the 5 years or so that I've been using it, and it felt like a clunky POS back then, too.
    This.

    Oddly, I noticed that at least one page (which I cannot find again), displayed in the browser tab, not the FCC logo, but the Sun logo. I wonder what hardware the ULS runs on.

     



  • @anotherusername said:

    ... the FCC...

    Oh yeah, I know all about the FCC.

    ... Cos you can't say penis.



  • Nah, dumb. It should enforce the same security level as the http: URL that sent the redirect.

    I didn’t realise that Chrome wouldn’t load the images. I figured IE might not, but anyone using IE deserves whatever pain they get.

    TRWTF is that I originally just intended on using plain data: URIs, but that doesn’t work. I can type them in HTML source mode, but when I Update, the data: URLs are all prefixed with “http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/”. I don’t know if TDWTF forums is doing that, or if the rich text editor is. Changing the URL using Firefox’s document inspector doesn’t even work… they show up in the editor then, but disappear when I preview.

    Then again, bbCode seems to work too. I didn’t even try that originally, because the rich text editor led me to believe that the only way to edit the code directly was in HTML mode.

    [img][/img]



  • @anotherusername said:

    That would make a good tag.



  • @anotherusername said:

    I can type them in HTML source mode, but when I Update, the data: URLs are all prefixed with “http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/”. I don’t know if TDWTF forums is doing that, or if the rich text editor is.
    All links must begin with  "<font face="courier new,courier">http://</font>"   or else  “<font face="courier new,courier">http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/</font>” gets added onto the front of the URL   It's so completely retarded that I can only assume Community Server is responsible for that behavior.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @anotherusername said:
    I can type them in HTML source mode, but when I Update, the data: URLs are all prefixed with “http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/”. I don’t know if TDWTF forums is doing that, or if the rich text editor is.
    All links must begin with  "<font face="courier new,courier">http://</font>"   or else  “<font face="courier new,courier">http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/</font>” gets added onto the front of the URL   It's so completely retarded that I can only assume Community Server is responsible for that behavior.

    Having to write absolute URLs is relatively annoying



  • @anotherusername said:

    Nah, dumb. It should enforce the same security level as the http: URL that sent the redirect.

    Doing a redirect to a data: URL is fucking stupid. I'm glad Chrome prevents this. As usual, Firefox does the stupid thing.

    @anotherusername said:

    TRWTF is that I originally just intended on using plain data: URIs, but that doesn’t work. I can type them in HTML source mode, but when I Update, the data: URLs are all prefixed with “http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/”. I don’t know if TDWTF forums is doing that, or if the rich text editor is. Changing the URL using Firefox’s document inspector doesn’t even work… they show up in the editor then, but disappear when I preview.

    This is the rare case of CS actually doing something smart. If you're cramming all your images into data: URLs, you clearly don't understand how the Internet works. Especially when there are about five bazillion free image hosting sites out there.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    This is the rare case of CS actually doing something smart. If you're cramming all your images into data: URLs, you clearly don't understand how the Internet works.
    CS did something smart, but entirely by accident.  Putting images in data: URLs is stupid, but so is Community server's handling of any link that doesn't contain "http".



  • @El_Heffe said:

    CS did something smart, but entirely by accident.

    Even a blind clock finds a stopped squirrel twice a day.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    CS did something smart, but entirely by accident.

    Even a blind clock finds a stopped squirrel twice a day.

    Your mixed metaphors are giving me an indigestion.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.