Agreed. Our site was almost completely delisted a couple of months ago due to a completely fabricated claim.
https://playerassist.com/4000-playerassist-urls-removed-due-...
We’re still submitting the urls one by one. 10 days ago they said the complainant had 10 days to file suit or they would relist. Still waiting on relisting.
Unfortunately we didn’t generate the negative pr that the intercept was able to generate. And I’ll never know who did this either. Very frustrating
I understand, the part that's insane is having to press a plus button and copy and paste each url into a text field. Also, the lack of notification of any sort
Does anybody else not worry about providing access to their investments via direct access to the various exchanges? If they are hacked, they have a direct pipeline to my accounts? Surely not all exchanges are setup to provide secure read only data? And what about the initial auth connection?
I just hate to add another point of vulnerability into an area that is no doubt being heavily targeted by hacking groups
I don't have a dog in this fight, but sometimes, companies are left with no other solutions. We had some websites hosted with Wordpress VIP. Because of their full page caching and just general restrictions, creating a login and user registration system like we wanted was not possible. We had to use a 3rd party hosted solutions that loaded with javascript(we used Gigya). Before that, I thought exactly as you do.
There is a reason Gigya just raised 25mm more dollars. Granted, they do more than just user login as a service.
In my daily use, I find Chrome to be overall faster and easier on the computer in general. I have recently run into a case during my development where Chrome actually has trouble compared to Firefox ANNNNNNND IE. It involves a large unordered list with several different divs, buttons, and links in it. There is some serious jumpy scrolling compared to both of the others, which surprisingly render smoothly.
This is the only instance I've ever run into where it didn't quite measure up.
The first comment on this article says it all:
"This valuation is preposterous, because the methodology is preposterous. There is zero evidence that either the markets or investors use some arbitrary "multiply users by a dollar amount" calculation to determine a valuation for these companies. Using such a formula to arrive at an absurd number is especially egregious here because people will now use the authority of this publication to say "Businessweek reports that Goodreads sold for a billion dollars", though that's almost certainly not the case."
Unfortunately we didn’t generate the negative pr that the intercept was able to generate. And I’ll never know who did this either. Very frustrating