When clicking the link

https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB

I get:

400 Bad Request
Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
cloudflare

The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
Firefox?

I searched for an answer and the results were unsatisfactory...

Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
> When clicking the link
>
> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>
> I get:
>
> 400 Bad Request
> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
> cloudflare
>
> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
> Firefox?

Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and
Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"

FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

On 12/5/23 04:36 PM, this is what Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>> When clicking the link
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>
>> I get:
>>
>> 400 Bad Request
>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>> cloudflare
>>
>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>> Firefox?
>
> Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>
> FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2
>
>
+1
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

Big Al wrote:
> On 12/5/23 04:36 PM, this is what Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>>> When clicking the link
>>>
>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>
>>> I get:
>>>
>>> 400 Bad Request
>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>> cloudflare
>>>
>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>> Firefox?
>>
>> Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>>
>> FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2
>>
>>
> +1

+2

On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 22:36:22 +0100, Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net>
wrote:

>Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>> When clicking the link
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>
>> I get:
>>
>> 400 Bad Request
>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>> cloudflare
>>
>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>> Firefox?
>
>Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and
>Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>
>FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2

Works over here........

emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:

> When clicking the link
>
> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>
> I get:
>
> 400 Bad Request
> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
> cloudflare
>
> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
> Firefox?

Redirects to:

https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
(a *lot* shorter than the URL you gave)

which opened okay for me in FF 120 on Windows 10 Home with my config of
uBlock Origin and a couple other add-ons installed in FF.

Why are you referring to a redirection URL instead of the actual
destination? Since the redirection URL works in Chrome, you could see
what is the actual destination URL. If someone else sent you the URL,
like in an e-mail, they gave you a redirection link, not the direct one.

When was the last time you purged locally cached data in FF, like
cookies? I don't keep any cookies. My FF is configured to purge all
cookies (and other locally cached data) on its exit.

On 06.12.23 00:40, The Chief wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 22:36:22 +0100, Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>>> When clicking the link
>>>
>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>
>>> I get:
>>>
>>> 400 Bad Request
>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>> cloudflare
>>>
>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>> Firefox?
>>
>> Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and
>> Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>>
>> FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2
>
>
> Works over here........

Can you tell us of what you are "The Chief"? *LOL*

--
Sent with Betterbird by a Penguin.
Simply better. www.betterbird.eu

On 12/5/2023 6:25 PM, Frank Miller wrote:
> Big Al wrote:
>> On 12/5/23 04:36 PM, this is what Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>>>> When clicking the link
>>>>
>>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>>
>>>> I get:
>>>>
>>>> 400 Bad Request
>>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>>> cloudflare
>>>>
>>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>>> Firefox?
>>>
>>> Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>>>
>>> FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2
>>>
>>>
>> +1
>
> +2

+3

On 12/6/23 10:49 AM, this is what Retirednoguilt wrote:
> On 12/5/2023 6:25 PM, Frank Miller wrote:
>> Big Al wrote:
>>> On 12/5/23 04:36 PM, this is what Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>>> Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>>>>> When clicking the link
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>>>
>>>>> I get:
>>>>>
>>>>> 400 Bad Request
>>>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>>>> cloudflare
>>>>>
>>>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>>>> Firefox?
>>>>
>>>> Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines and Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>>>>
>>>> FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2
>>>>
>>>>
>>> +1
>>
>> +2
>
>
> +3
Do I hear 4, going going going gong!
--
Linux Mint 21.2 Cinnamon
Al

On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:07:49 -0500, Big Al wrote:

> On 12/6/23 10:49 AM, this is what Retirednoguilt wrote:
>> On 12/5/2023 6:25 PM, Frank Miller wrote:
>>> Big Al wrote:
>>>> On 12/5/23 04:36 PM, this is what Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>> Am 05.12.23 um 22:30 schrieb emfril:
>>>>>> When clicking the link
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?
al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I get:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 400 Bad Request Request Header Or Cookie Too Large cloudflare
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>>>>> Firefox?
>>>>>
>>>>> Opens in FF without any problems: "Did the Sea Peoples (Philistines
>>>>> and Pelasgians) descend from the Minoans?"
>>>>>
>>>>> FF 120 on a Mac with 14.1.2
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>
>>> +2
>>
>>
>> +3
> Do I hear 4, going going going gong!

+4

--
Pull my finger

On 2023-12-05 18:58, VanguardLH wrote:
> emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> When clicking the link
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>
>> I get:
>>
>> 400 Bad Request
>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>> cloudflare
>>
>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>> Firefox?
>
> Redirects to:
>
> https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
> (a *lot* shorter than the URL you gave)
>
> which opened okay for me in FF 120 on Windows 10 Home with my config of
> uBlock Origin and a couple other add-ons installed in FF.
>
> Why are you referring to a redirection URL instead of the actual
> destination? Since the redirection URL works in Chrome, you could see
> what is the actual destination URL. If someone else sent you the URL,
> like in an e-mail, they gave you a redirection link, not the direct one.
>
> When was the last time you purged locally cached data in FF, like
> cookies? I don't keep any cookies. My FF is configured to purge all
> cookies (and other locally cached data) on its exit.

It was a long time ago. I have CClener but I don't use it often
because it also deletes things I don't want deleted. Anyway, I
run it and the link worked. I used to have a button that cleaned
only the cookies... Thanks.
--
It ain't THAT, babe! — A radical reinterpretation
https://emf.neocities.org/bd/itaintmebabe.html

emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-12-05 18:58, VanguardLH wrote:
>> emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When clicking the link
>>>
>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>
>>> I get:
>>>
>>> 400 Bad Request
>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>> cloudflare
>>>
>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>> Firefox?
>>
>> Redirects to:
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
>> (a *lot* shorter than the URL you gave)
>>
>> which opened okay for me in FF 120 on Windows 10 Home with my config of
>> uBlock Origin and a couple other add-ons installed in FF.
>>
>> Why are you referring to a redirection URL instead of the actual
>> destination? Since the redirection URL works in Chrome, you could see
>> what is the actual destination URL. If someone else sent you the URL,
>> like in an e-mail, they gave you a redirection link, not the direct one.
>>
>> When was the last time you purged locally cached data in FF, like
>> cookies? I don't keep any cookies. My FF is configured to purge all
>> cookies (and other locally cached data) on its exit.
>
> It was a long time ago. I have CClener but I don't use it often
> because it also deletes things I don't want deleted. Anyway, I
> run it and the link worked. I used to have a button that cleaned
> only the cookies... Thanks.

Instead of using an external cleanup tool, you can go into FF's settings
to select what history gets purged on FF's exit. I select all types of
locally cached data for FF to purge on its exit. Some want to keep Site
Settings to eliminate losing setup at those sites.

emfril explained :
> When clicking the link
>
> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>
> I get:
>
> 400 Bad Request
> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
> cloudflare
>
> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in Firefox?
>
> I searched for an answer and the results were unsatisfactory...

no problem on FF 120.0.1 / Win 11

--
/-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\
-=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=-
............ [ al lavoro ] ...........

On 07.12.23 05:39, emfril wrote:
> It was a long time ago. I have CClener but I don't use it often
> because it also deletes things I don't want deleted. Anyway, I
> run it and the link worked. I used to have a button that cleaned
> only the cookies... Thanks.

CC-Cleaner is malware. If I were you I would uninstall it immediately.
No need for this kind of snake oil.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:58:24 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> When clicking the link
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>
>> I get:
>>
>> 400 Bad Request
>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>> cloudflare
>>
>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>> Firefox?
>
>Redirects to:
>
>https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi

Both opened for me in Win-7, FF 66.

Usually, I remove the rubbish after the "?" in URLs.

>(a *lot* shorter than the URL you gave)
>
>which opened okay for me in FF 120 on Windows 10 Home with my config of
>uBlock Origin and a couple other add-ons installed in FF.
>
>Why are you referring to a redirection URL instead of the actual
>destination? Since the redirection URL works in Chrome, you could see
>what is the actual destination URL. If someone else sent you the URL,
>like in an e-mail, they gave you a redirection link, not the direct one.

Usually, my FF hates redirections but this one worked after I allowed
Quora to run scripts. Ghostery isn't doing its job very well this
time.

>
>When was the last time you purged locally cached data in FF, like
>cookies? I don't keep any cookies. My FF is configured to purge all
>cookies (and other locally cached data) on its exit.

I don't accept most cookies so this isn't an issue. Those I do allow,
from Banks and things, I never automatically purge. I think this saves
me some typing the next time I log in.

I didn't allow cookies from Quora but they still blocked me from
poking my nose into a different answer from the same author. They
wanted me to log-in through the Gaggle or Farceboke. There was no
alternative offered.

Yet another site for me to remember never to bother with.

J.

John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:58:24 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>
>>emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When clicking the link
>>>
>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>
>>> I get:
>>>
>>> 400 Bad Request
>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>> cloudflare
>>>
>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>> Firefox?
>>
>>Redirects to:
>>
>>https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
>
> Both opened for me in Win-7, FF 66.
>
> Usually, I remove the rubbish after the "?" in URLs.

That would leave the URL string of:

https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc

That fails to open a web page (other than getting redirected to their
login page when not finding a page), because the identifier for it is
missing by dropping the arguments. I tried removing some args, but
Quora couldn't find the page, and dumped me at their login page. I gave
up trying to de-obfuscate their redirection URL. I don't visit there,
only go there because someone else mentions Quora, and have no interest
in how Quora's redirection operates. Their claim is to provide a
repository for information. Nope, it's a web forum site.

I suspect the vast majority of Quora users never bother to read their
privacy policy at:

https://www.quora.com/about/privacy

"How We Share Your Information" might pique the interests of many of
their participants. Of course, this is the same "expert" crowd using
Facebook, and other sites for the socially needy.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 18:36:47 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:58:24 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>
>>>emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When clicking the link
>>>>
>>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>>
>>>> I get:
>>>>
>>>> 400 Bad Request
>>>> Request Header Or Cookie Too Large
>>>> cloudflare
>>>>
>>>> The link opens properly in Google Chrome. What is the problem in
>>>> Firefox?
>>>
>>>Redirects to:
>>>
>>>https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
>>
>> Both opened for me in Win-7, FF 66.
>>
>> Usually, I remove the rubbish after the "?" in URLs.
>
>That would leave the URL string of:
>
>https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc

Yes, I see that, and saw it. I did type "usually" but in that case,
above, Quora didn't even have the courtesy to display the page's name
after its domain name. That's bloody rude. Also yet another reason for
avoiding them.

Pages often do have the full page-name then a "?" then the argument
cruft. Those ones can have the crud left behind when I copy the URLs.
>
>That fails to open a web page (other than getting redirected to their
>login page when not finding a page), because the identifier for it is
>missing by dropping the arguments.

In this case, yes. It's part of their profiteering from collecting
and selling tracking data. Where the page redirects from is probably
inside that cruft.

This possibly also helps Quora pay their "partners" for each click
through *their* sites.

It's all, always and forever, about the money.

That I can't see *where* the redirect is sending me also bugs me.
It's like a QR box. The link could be to a pornado or a drive-by
malware site for all the information in the long URL. That's a *huge*
security no-no.

It's one reason I left the long URL alone until someone else tried
it.

> I tried removing some args, but
>Quora couldn't find the page, and dumped me at their login page. I gave
>up trying to de-obfuscate their redirection URL. I don't visit there,
>only go there because someone else mentions Quora, and have no interest
>in how Quora's redirection operates. Their claim is to provide a
>repository for information. Nope, it's a web forum site.

It's a site for helping advertisers make money. That Quora and their
pals also make some is a bonus.

With the possible exception of Wikipedia, there is *no* free site on
the Web supplying help or information.

>
>I suspect the vast majority of Quora users never bother to read their
>privacy policy at:
>
>https://www.quora.com/about/privacy
>
>"How We Share Your Information" might pique the interests of many of
>their participants. Of course, this is the same "expert" crowd using
>Facebook, and other sites for the socially needy.

Yerp.

Though to be fair, Quora might attract more technically astute people
than Farceboke or Xitter. Slightly and "may".

I will probably never know as I refuse to use G or F to log in to
their site. I'd probably never log in even with a totally "private"
and independent Quro userid.

That "log in to read more" irks me a lot.

J.

John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:

> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>
>> John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>>
>>> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>
>>>> emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When clicking the link
>>>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Redirects to:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
>>>
>>> Usually, I remove the rubbish after the "?" in URLs.
>>
>> That would leave the URL string of:
>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc
>
> Yes, I see that, and saw it. I did type "usually" but in that case,
> above, Quora didn't even have the courtesy to display the page's name
> after its domain name. That's bloody rude. Also yet another reason for
> avoiding them.
>
> Pages often do have the full page-name then a "?" then the argument
> cruft. Those ones can have the crud left behind when I copy the URLs.

Unless it's a redirection for which I then look for an argument with the
destination URL string, like "url=https:...". There are characters in
the URL argument that are not allowed in the path or arg portion of a
URL, so they have to be ISO encoded, but typically it is easy to replace
the 3-character encoding (%xx) with the appropriate character. Alas,
many sites use redirection at the server, so none of the arguments to
the URL pointing at their domain will expose the destination page. The
server has a table pointing at their web pages, so you need to use their
script or index to find the page pointer in their table or in a
database. A lot depends on the tool(s) the web devs use in building the
web site. The devs really don't know how to program a site, so they
rely on tools to develop code they don't understand. Hell, there are a
lot of so-called web "devs" that use Wordpress with a slew of plug-ins,
because those web devs have no clue on how to write the code. They're
designers, not programmers.

> That I can't see *where* the redirect is sending me also bugs me.
> It's like a QR box. The link could be to a pornado or a drive-by
> malware site for all the information in the long URL. That's a *huge*
> security no-no.

Depends on the QR app you use. Some will show a preview a URL before
redirecting you there. They show you the text contained in the QR image
(URLs are just text, but the app passes the string to a handler when
appropriate). Denso, who created the QR code back in 1994 (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code), has their QR app (well, the one
they recommend) that shows a preview as a user option, and described at:

https://www.denso-wave.com/en/system/qr/product/reader.html

Their Play Store link is for the Japanese app page, so just delete the
&hl=ja argument that selects Japanese. The following shows what the app
looks like when the text inside is a URL and the confirm option enabled:

https://qrplanet.com/help/article/how-can-i-see-the-url-behind-the-qr-code

Some AV products include a QR scanner. For example, Sophos Intercept-X
(I've used before, but not currently on my phone) has their own safe QR
scanner which relies on a cloud check regarding the safety of the URL.

https://docs.sophos.com/esg/smsec/ioshelp/en-us/esg/Sophos-Mobile-Security/concepts/QRCodeScanner.html

I think the Google Lens app (or Google Assistant) will read QR codes,
but I don't know its behavior regarding preview versus immediately
dumping a URL string into the default web browser. Using my old phone
with the Google Assistant's camera button in the widget on my home
screen, I tapped Search, got a QR code within the confines of the search
focus, and tapped the shutter button. It showed the URL atop the QR
code; however, text size was so large that only a portion of the URL
could be seen. Luckily a little lower is inserted a textbox that has
the full URL. If I want to go there, I tap on the Website button.

On 2023-12-08 13:17, John wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 18:36:47 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>
>> John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 17:58:24 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>
>>>> emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:

....

>> I tried removing some args, but
>> Quora couldn't find the page, and dumped me at their login page. I gave
>> up trying to de-obfuscate their redirection URL. I don't visit there,
>> only go there because someone else mentions Quora, and have no interest
>> in how Quora's redirection operates. Their claim is to provide a
>> repository for information. Nope, it's a web forum site.
>
> It's a site for helping advertisers make money. That Quora and their
> pals also make some is a bonus.
>
> With the possible exception of Wikipedia, there is *no* free site on
> the Web supplying help or information.

Not true.

>
>>
>> I suspect the vast majority of Quora users never bother to read their
>> privacy policy at:
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/about/privacy
>>
>> "How We Share Your Information" might pique the interests of many of
>> their participants. Of course, this is the same "expert" crowd using
>> Facebook, and other sites for the socially needy.
>
> Yerp.
>
> Though to be fair, Quora might attract more technically astute people
> than Farceboke or Xitter. Slightly and "may".

I know it does for a fact,

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 13:45:53 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>
>>> John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>>>
>>>> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> emfril <emfril@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> When clicking the link
>>>>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjExOTQ4MTY0NTQ0MDI5NDgyODB8MnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3MDYzMjMxMTQifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=amCfO9xTzkQ&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=2&et=2&id=730f33a56f7147aca38ba1b0fa515ed2&q_aid=q6zRojbzPTA&uid=aQKg8udaJqB
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Redirects to:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Sea-Peoples-Philistines-and-Pelasgians-descend-from-the-Minoans/answer/Giota-Detsi
>>>>
>>>> Usually, I remove the rubbish after the "?" in URLs.
>>>
>>> That would leave the URL string of:
>>> https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc
>>
>> Yes, I see that, and saw it. I did type "usually" but in that case,
>> above, Quora didn't even have the courtesy to display the page's name
>> after its domain name. That's bloody rude. Also yet another reason for
>> avoiding them.
>>
>> Pages often do have the full page-name then a "?" then the argument
>> cruft. Those ones can have the crud left behind when I copy the URLs.
>
>Unless it's a redirection for which I then look for an argument with the
>destination URL string, like "url=https:...". There are characters in
>the URL argument that are not allowed in the path or arg portion of a
>URL, so they have to be ISO encoded, but typically it is easy to replace
>the 3-character encoding (%xx) with the appropriate character. Alas,
>many sites use redirection at the server, so none of the arguments to
>the URL pointing at their domain will expose the destination page. The
>server has a table pointing at their web pages, so you need to use their
>script or index to find the page pointer in their table or in a
>database. A lot depends on the tool(s) the web devs use in building the
>web site. The devs really don't know how to program a site, so they
>rely on tools to develop code they don't understand. Hell, there are a
>lot of so-called web "devs" that use Wordpress with a slew of plug-ins,
>because those web devs have no clue on how to write the code. They're
>designers, not programmers.
>
>> That I can't see *where* the redirect is sending me also bugs me.
>> It's like a QR box. The link could be to a pornado or a drive-by
>> malware site for all the information in the long URL. That's a *huge*
>> security no-no.
>
>Depends on the QR app you use. Some will show a preview a URL before
>redirecting you there. They show you the text contained in the QR image
>(URLs are just text, but the app passes the string to a handler when
>appropriate). Denso, who created the QR code back in 1994 (see
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code), has their QR app (well, the one
>they recommend) that shows a preview as a user option, and described at:
>
>https://www.denso-wave.com/en/system/qr/product/reader.html
>
>Their Play Store link is for the Japanese app page, so just delete the
>&hl=ja argument that selects Japanese. The following shows what the app
>looks like when the text inside is a URL and the confirm option enabled:
>
>https://qrplanet.com/help/article/how-can-i-see-the-url-behind-the-qr-code
>
>Some AV products include a QR scanner. For example, Sophos Intercept-X
>(I've used before, but not currently on my phone) has their own safe QR
>scanner which relies on a cloud check regarding the safety of the URL.
>
>https://docs.sophos.com/esg/smsec/ioshelp/en-us/esg/Sophos-Mobile-Security/concepts/QRCodeScanner.html
>
>I think the Google Lens app (or Google Assistant) will read QR codes,
>but I don't know its behavior regarding preview versus immediately
>dumping a URL string into the default web browser. Using my old phone
>with the Google Assistant's camera button in the widget on my home
>screen, I tapped Search, got a QR code within the confines of the search
>focus, and tapped the shutter button. It showed the URL atop the QR
>code; however, text size was so large that only a portion of the URL
>could be seen. Luckily a little lower is inserted a textbox that has
>the full URL. If I want to go there, I tap on the Website button.

All very helpful and interesting, as you usually are. :)

Thank you.

However, I have yet to find a QR blob that I was interested in
sufficiently to make it worth bothering with such things. Nor,
truthfully, do I see the *point* of the thing. An URL is the
human-readable encoding of a website's address, it makes the IP
address easier for us to understand. URL's are *good* things. Sort of
like the street address that comes before the post-code. QR codes are
exactly the opposite. They obfuscate addresses and make malware and
other malevolences easier for the bad guys and reading them harder for
humans. That is a daft move.

Sure, QR codes are probably brilliant for automatic systems such as
Amazon's warehousing and delivery systems but so were ISBN and barcode
types of systems. Those - sometimes - came with human-legible
translations. QR codes often do not.

Even when QR codes *do* have associated legible versions, I tend to
distrust the codes. I have seen bi-lingual Welsh-English road signs.
On some of those the "translation" is not very accurate.

Still, someone must like QR codes. They are certainly plastered over
a lot of places. Even shops have them on their windows.

Sometimes, progress isn't but I can't do anything to affect it so I
guess I'll just accept it.

Thank you for all of your help and Meryy Christmas and a Happy New
Year to you.

J.

John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:

> However, I have yet to find a QR blob that I was interested in
> sufficiently to make it worth bothering with such things. Nor,
> truthfully, do I see the *point* of the thing. An URL is the
> human-readable encoding of a website's address, it makes the IP
> address easier for us to understand. URL's are *good* things. Sort of
> like the street address that comes before the post-code. QR codes are
> exactly the opposite. They obfuscate addresses and make malware and
> other malevolences easier for the bad guys and reading them harder for
> humans. That is a daft move.

The intent was to make the text string readable to more than humans,
like to computers using scanners. Even URLs are unusable by humans:
they have to be converted to IP addresses (humans like strings,
computers demand numbers). DNS already provides that conversion, so
humans can go on reading strings that represent something meaningful to
them while the computers handle the translation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code

At first, QR codes were on auto parts to get scanned by computers, not
for human consumption. Takes time for a human to properly orientate a
reader to a bar code, but much faster when reading a QR code. How many
times have you had to rescan a loaf of bread across the register's
scanner before it finally decided to read the digits, and perhaps have
to get a clerk to help enter the numeric code by hand, because bar codes
don't like to be disoriented or warped?

I recall when a flight got delayed by 2-1/2 hours. The airline sent
e-mails with a temp credit card number that expired at midnight the next
day. So, the card number was really meant to feed their riders while
waiting. However, the e-mail had the 16-digit credit card number,
3-digit CVV code, and the numeric expiration date. Instead of including
a QR image with all that info that the vending machines could read (and
the ones I saw did have scanners), riders had to enter something like 27
digits trying to enter the card number in the e-mail. Folks kept making
mistakes during entry, so the lines got damn long to use the vending
machines. With a QR image in the e-mail, processing a vending machine
transaction would've taken less time than having to shove in paper
money, select an item, and grab the change.

When you used an old rotary dialer phone, the station read the number of
pulses, not what numbered hole you stuck your finger. When you touch
keys of a digital phone, they hear different tones, not some digital
equivalent of which key you pressed. When you use a URL, that is *not*
to where you go. A DNS lookup is first required, but that is automated
for you, just using a QR code is often automated for you.

If whatever QR reader you're using doesn't show the destination (if a
URL) or whatever is the text content (URLs are also just text) then use
a different QR reader. There are several that will preview the content
of the QR code *before* relaying it to an associated handler.

> Sure, QR codes are probably brilliant for automatic systems such as
> Amazon's warehousing and delivery systems but so were ISBN and barcode
> types of systems. Those - sometimes - came with human-legible
> translations. QR codes often do not.

Bar codes have no alignment marks. QR codes do. Watch when trying to
read a QR code, and notice the app will eventually trigger on the corner
squares to provide alignment with the image within. With bar codes, you
have to hope your alignment was sufficient to read the code, and you
only know that after reading the bar code to find out if you have to
take another snapshot of it. QR codes can be read from various angles
or orientations. Bar codes have to be read nearly perpendicular and
must be scanned horizontally. Ever notice when using the checkout
machine at the library that you have to place the book's bar code in a
particular orientation to have the machine read it left to right? QR
codes can be in any orientation, and even at far more severe angles.

Typically bar codes are subject to more physical damage which renders
them unreadable. Even wonder why all the same digits are listed under
the bar image? QR codes remain readable with 7-30% corruption. Bar
codes have no resilience. QR codes do.

The bar codes you are accustomed are called 1-dimensional images.
However, there are 2-dimensional bar codes that are remarkably similar
to QR codes. Without the numbers underneath, a bar code is just as
useless to your eyes as is a QR image.

Bar codes must exceed a minimum size to be scannable. QR codes can be
10 times smaller than bar codes while still carrying information.

A 1-dimensional bar code can store up to 20 characters. A 2-dimensional
bar code can store up to 7089 characters, which is what a QR code can
also store, but then a 2-dimensional bar code looks the same as QR code.

Bar codes cannot be encrypted. QR codes can.

> Even when QR codes *do* have associated legible versions, I tend to
> distrust the codes. I have seen bi-lingual Welsh-English road signs.
> On some of those the "translation" is not very accurate.

The road signs have QR codes? Just how are drivers expected to read
them while speeding by at highway or roadway speeds?

I'm not a native Welsh speaker, but I cannot see any translation needed
when using Google Translate to convert some examples I entered for what
road signs might say.

> Still, someone must like QR codes. They are certainly plastered over
> a lot of places. Even shops have them on their windows.

Which means the shop is giving you a URL string to their web site, or
it's just text with their operating hours. That would require using
alphanumeric characters for either type of string. Not sure how a
string of numerical digits is going to tell you anything in a bar code.

On 2023-12-15 07:19, VanguardLH wrote:
> John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:

....

>> Sure, QR codes are probably brilliant for automatic systems such as
>> Amazon's warehousing and delivery systems but so were ISBN and barcode
>> types of systems. Those - sometimes - came with human-legible
>> translations. QR codes often do not.
>
> Bar codes have no alignment marks. QR codes do. Watch when trying to
> read a QR code, and notice the app will eventually trigger on the corner
> squares to provide alignment with the image within. With bar codes, you
> have to hope your alignment was sufficient to read the code, and you
> only know that after reading the bar code to find out if you have to
> take another snapshot of it. QR codes can be read from various angles
> or orientations. Bar codes have to be read nearly perpendicular and
> must be scanned horizontally. Ever notice when using the checkout
> machine at the library that you have to place the book's bar code in a
> particular orientation to have the machine read it left to right? QR
> codes can be in any orientation, and even at far more severe angles.

Bar codes can be read with hardware that is basically a sweeping laser
and a phototransistor. QR codes instead seem to need a camera.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 12/15/2023 12:19 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>> Still, someone must like QR codes. They are certainly plastered over
>> a lot of places. Even shops have them on their windows.
> Which means the shop is giving you a URL string to their web site, or
> it's just text with their operating hours. That would require using
> alphanumeric characters for either type of string. Not sure how a
> string of numerical digits is going to tell you anything in a bar code.

Here the QR code is usually a link to the restaurant's menu.

Most restaurants have removed physical menus from their windows,
probably because they want the option to change prices on a more
frequent basis without having to reprint the menu. Even take-out-only
restaurants have dispensed with the paper menus they used to hand out
freely. All to save costs.

Since I hardly ever carry a phone with me, it annoys me when I see a new
restaurant with only a QR code in the window and no clue as to what food
options the restaurant might be serving or what the prices are. Many
restaurants are closed more often than they are open now, so you can't
always go inside to look. Except for places like McDonald's, very few
people seem to eat lunch out anymore since the prices are so high.

As far as posting hours in a QR code, heck, they don't even post them on
the door. Many places that I used to frequent have scratched off the
closing time because they want to close early if there aren't enough
customers, which means you have to call before you go every time to make
sure they're open.

In article <f8fnnil3kci7vkhtlacrvdn8j7ictvjtrr@4ax.com>,
[Snippy]
John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
> All very helpful and interesting, as you usually are. :)

> Thank you.

> However, I have yet to find a QR blob that I was interested in
> sufficiently to make it worth bothering with such things. Nor,
> truthfully, do I see the *point* of the thing. An URL is the
> human-readable encoding of a website's address, it makes the IP
> address easier for us to understand. URL's are *good* things. Sort of
> like the street address that comes before the post-code. QR codes are
> exactly the opposite. They obfuscate addresses and make malware and
> other malevolences easier for the bad guys and reading them harder for
> humans. That is a daft move.

[Snippy]

Even harder to read for some of us.
Here with multiple phones in the house and not one of them can read a QR
code.

Even the Android smartphone is incapable of even installing a QR code
reader because the expletive version of Android is too old...

And no, the old version of Android can't be updated, so neither can it
install a QR reader app.

Kind of catch 22.
The world was a mad enough place in the 1950s now it's just one big
lunatic asylum.

D.

On 15 Dec 2023 08:29:37 +0000 (GMT) News wrote:
>In article <f8fnnil3kci7vkhtlacrvdn8j7ictvjtrr@4ax.com>,
>Even harder to read for some of us.
>Here with multiple phones in the house and not one of them can read a QR
>code.
>
>Even the Android smartphone is incapable of even installing a QR code
>reader because the expletive version of Android is too old...
>
>And no, the old version of Android can't be updated, so neither can it
>install a QR reader app.

How old is your Android? I have ZXing on my Android 4.4 and still have it
on thus Android 13 tablet, The help menu directs to here:
<https://github.com/zxing/zxing>

It's in Playstore, or I'm sure you can find an APK.
--
(Remove numerics from email address)