You need to mention how you are saving the passwords, where you are storing them, what kind of encryption you are using and also is your code open sourced ?
These are the very first things that I would look for in a password storage mechanism. You cannot just expect people to trust you with their passwords.
Yea, I share your pain. However, for this specific problem, you are best off using flexbox because there is a good tutorial for it: http://flexboxfroggy.com/
How about learning some CSS? This "joke" should really be retired by now. I've been doing this stuff 10+ years ago when stills supporting IE5, for fucks sake.
Totally valid point, we thought a lot about privacy, and our approach to managing the issue is two fold
1. Your browsing history isn't identifiable on our databases since we use a random hash from your credentials to track your history.
2. We have absolutely no interest in using the data, even non-identifiable data for marketing purposes
3. We leave the final control in your hands, if you feel your privacy is breached, you can clear all your data from our servers and uninstall the extension.
Not to be overly critical, but it sounds like you are asking us to just trust you with no proof of your claims.
How do we know that you in fact have properly randomized the hashes, really aren't using the data, and most importantly, how do we know you really are clearing the data from your servers when we ask you to? Are you going to make the source code available?
If its running on your servers, you have to plan to monetize right? How do you plan on doing that?
Edit: I should note it looks quite cool, and I am probably going to try it, but was wondering about the above points.
One additional question. Is it possible to ban specific sites from showing up? Like work related intranet things?
You can block sites from the settings button in the extension
Our plan is to work with an initial customer base to create enough features to let users support us directly through paid features, instead of resorting to mining data and throwing up ads to sustain. Thats your best clue as to why we're not interested in your data. We don't have a motive to do that.
Also, to answer why an extension for Browser History:
1. Fetch indexes page content as well as the titles and URLs of your history, making it easy to find links
2. Fetch ranks search results by engagement which means the most useful links usually surface on top when you search.
Imagine hypothetically today you are researching a router. You would look up youtube video reviews, look it up in amazon may be craigslist, checkout consumer reports etc. The next day if want those links you will either comb your browser history or go those sites you visited again. But with fetch all you have to do is type the name of the router and it will show the links in descending order of time you have spent on various websites associated with the router :) Imagine the time saved :D
Does fetch aggregate the logged time you've looked at the pages that you're now looking at to find the same page you found before and ruining all the results?
The search results are ranked by engagement, so yes, if you're currently looking at a page related to say python and spend lots of time on it, then when you search python on the extension, it will show up near the top. But what we've noticed is that the ratio of useful pages to useless pages in browser history is very high, and so when we rank by engagement, all valuable pages end up on top. Hope this answers your query.
You should be following the 1 white path before the n black paths, not afterwards. In particular, following "3 blacks then 1 white" in the last step, when the final digit is three, is an error; it will produce the wrong modulus for any number that is not divisible by 7.
(1) 1 white then 1 black, ending up in state 1
(6) 1 white then 6 blacks, ending up in state 2
(0) 1 white then 0 blacks, ending up in state 6
(3) 1 white then 3 blacks, ending up in state 0
The graph keeps track of ((the number so far) mod 7); following a white arrow multiplies your total by 10, and following a black arrow increases your total by 1.
I can see how you'd like to hold the order of operations correct for readability purposes (especially if the states were labeled with digits), but I don't see where psyklic's method could produce an error for the divisibility test.
Your initial white doesn't change anything, since it brings you back to the starting node. Any whites after the the final digit either keep you on the starting node or keep you in the graph where.
The graph isn't just a divisibility test, it reports the remainder after division by seven. I specifically acknowledged that this error won't mutate a "divisible by 7" result into "not divisible by 7" (because any number that is divisible by seven will still be divisible by seven after multiplying it by ten), but in every other case it will give you the wrong answer. (e.g. "remainder 2" will mutate into "remainder 6".)
