Would be so convenient to have an intermediate CA cert constrained to *.my-name.com to avoid situations like this. Being forced to either use a private PKI infrastructure or using wildcards to not leak host names is so annoying.
If your organisation is competent enough to handle an intermediate CA certificate safely, you're certainly competent to handle a wildcard cert safely which is a much easier task.
Sadly it's unlikely you'll ever see the Name Constraints extension adopted. All it takes is one model of 15 year old smart TV failing to respect it, and the CA/Browser Forum will consider it too dangerous to allow.
In my current org we have hundreds of TLS termination "configuration points" (cdn's & cloud loadbalancers / networking appliances / k8s ingress controllers / raw VM's). We have standardised on ACME issued certs for almost everything. Using a wildcard certificate would force us back to manual cert updating procedures, or finicky scripts. Undoubtedly causing issues when certs become expired.
(Not to mention the trust boundaries. An org can be competent enough to handle an in-house CA securely, and simultaneously have a bunch of quasi-sloppy vendors for stuff like the visitor badge kiosk.)
But I sadly agree that it will probably never happen…
Just because I trust a server to hold the cert for preview.example.com doesn’t mean I’d want it to be able to pose as prod.example.com, for example.
"Certificate Transparencyis an open framework which helps log, audit and monitor publicly-trusted TLS certificates on the Internet. This tool lets you search for certificates issued for a given domain and subscribe to notifications from Facebook regarding new certificates and potential phishing attacks."
most commercial offerings are about monitoring your own domain, e.g. from cloudflare, sslmate, etc.
Some creators also seem to suggest they know what is going on, youtube mattvidpro hinted at it when talking about the gpt2-chatbot, he mentioned he knew something but couldn't talk about it or get sued.
I'd say "just chatgpt it"? is closer to being in the lexicon and this url just doesn't roll off the tongue
>"here let me search.chatgpt that for you"
There I was hoping sama-gpt5-chatbot had some creativity chops for naming new things but they must have decided not to use it this time.
Why would you say it like that though? You don't set "let me google.com that for you"
In the same way you don't say "let me chat.openai it for you", likely search.chatgpt.com will just become the new default interface to chatgpt, and "to chatgpt" something will mean to look it up on search.chatgpt.com
Compare this to what I would have to do with google. Open browser, type the query, guess which of the top 10 results are likely to answer the issue I was having. Click few link to open them in new tab. Read though it to see if the correct problem was being discussed. If not see another link in the top 10 list. Repeat.
I even thought where in that interface, Microsoft could place the future ads. It's totally in the realm.
EDIT: At this point, ChatGPT is basically old school "I am feeling lucky" on steroids.
This is outdated. I repeated your experiment with Google query [how do I print from Autodesk] and the top result is the step by step instructions (not a link but the actual instructions, with a link to the source following). The second result is a link to Autodesk's own help docs for the print function. No ads above the fold.
But you make a point that people will keep assuming what they want to anticipate how the search will unfold, and I admit this is in part due to the enshittified commercial and news-related (and other) results, the bias is coming from somewhere, right? But I would encourage anyone to at least verify this assumption before posting it as fact.
So actually, what Copilot does is to prefilter and condense results. If I like it and it seems legit, it's enough to get my answers. Sometimes I take up the source. Most of the times I reprompt Copilot to list me alternatives and find errors in them. That discloses erroneous things like contradictions enough.
But what's more useful is "how can I mix up two dictionaries with different keys one by one into a set."... 20 seconds later, I can read how and don't have to search SO for whole 20 minutes of reading.
But yes, it will impose the same changes as Google did. Before Google, you should know where you get the information needed or already have it in your hrad/learned. After Google, you don't have to. So everyone changed into stupid mode but being way more productive. So, I fear, that's the next wave of stupid:)
Me: How to add missing monochrome.ctb file in autodesk dwg trueview?
[Upto this part google is same. Pointing to the same link, but not showing any steps though.]
Copilot: Here are the steps. Put them here in this folder......
Me: I put it there as suggested. Still didn't work. How to make tureview refer another folder location?
Copilot: Here are the steps.
Me: It worked thank you. [I really thanked it ;)]
I've noticed an interesting pattern: before releasing LLaMA 3, OpenAI provided access to ChatGPT 3.5 without requiring registration.
Meta might also follow this path with its own search engine. Did you know that you can now ask questions directly on Instagram and receive answers from Meta AI using LLaMA 3?
Why go elsewhere for information when you can easily find it in the app you use every day?
I am guessing that this falls under the "we will steamroll" clause of OpenAIs gradual move towards AGI.
So the money will come in, that or that way.
