WeChat ID
aaronpk_tv
-
Portland, Oregon • Sun, November 15, 2015 12:57pmCoworking — with anomalily -
AsleepAwake5h 41mSlept
-
Twitter is all over this #demdebate
-
I’m 22 years old and what is this. — Medium (medium.com)
I’m not sure simply reverting back to what we had is the right path if we want to include people who have never experienced the open web or understand its principles.
-
Flashing om1p with stock openwrt (jasonschaefer.com)
-
AsleepAwake8h 14mSlept
-
-
JawboneSupport
https://twitter.com/JawboneSupport
•
Nov 12
@aaronpk Definitely not the expected experience. We can help you get back to tracking. Give us a call at 1-800-JAWBONE
@JawboneSupport Just had a nice chat with support and am getting a replacement. Thanks! Hope I don't have to call you back in another 8 mos! -
Josh “3D Printed” Marinacci
https://twitter.com/joshmarinacci
•
Nov 14
@aaronpk wanna test it? what's your preferred email for iOS stuff?
@joshmarinacci sure! you have it already -
Josh “3D Printed” Marinacci
https://twitter.com/joshmarinacci
•
Nov 13
My first #AppleTV app running on real hardware. https://t.co/zu9Z67rREu
@joshmarinacci Yours is much prettier than mine is going to be, since I'm writing an OAuth client. #AppleTV -
0.30000000000000004 - Floating Point Math (0.30000000000000004.com)
-
In reading this over, I noticed a subtle difference from the Facebook and
Google implementations, and I'm wondering if this was intentional or not.
Section 3.1 says "The authorization server prompts the end-user to
authorize the client's request by entering the end-user code provided by
the client." The introduction has even more explicitly different wording:
"(D) ... If the end-user agrees to the client's access request, the
end-user enters the end-user code provided by the client."
However this is different from Facebook and Google's implementations, which
work as follows:
- Device shows the verification URI and code to the user
- The user visits the URL and is prompted to sign in to the service
(Google has the extra step of then choosing which Youtube account to use)
- The user is then prompted to enter the device code
- After entering the device code, the authorization prompt is displayed
In reading this draft, the implication is that the act of entering the code
also is the authorization. The problem is that the server won't know things
like the scope or application name until after the code is entered, so it
can't properly show an authorization prompt.
I think this needs to be reworded to separate entering the code from
showing the authorization prompt. I believe it is only a wording change.
Maybe something more like:
3.1 "The authorization server prompts the end-user to enter the end-user
code provided by the client, after which it prompts the end-user to
authorize the client's request."
and in the introduction:
1. (D) "The authorization server authenticates the end-user (via the
user-agent) and prompts the end-user to enter the end-user code provided by
the client. The authorization server validates the end-user code and
prompts the end-user to grant the client's access request."
