Re: lynx-dev Cookies and command line operation

[Henry Nelson]

> >> >My memory may be faulty, but that's what I still think *should* happen.
> >> >PERSISTENT_COOKIES should not be enabled by default.
      ^^^^^^^^^^
> >> 
> >> Why not?
> >> 
> >> As much as I slam GUI browsers, shouldn't Lynx come as close to providing
> >> the same out of the box (err, tar archive) experience as a GUI browser?
> >
> >No.  Why should it?
> 
> Because it makes the web actually *useful* with Lynx.

Lynx is MORE THAN *useful* without _persistent_ cookies.

> >It's just not done, and I don't think people *want* or *expect* lynx
> >to do this.  If you want persistent cookies, fine, turn them on,
                            ^^^^^^^^^^
> Yes they do, we see questions here all the time about people trying to get
> cookies to work.
[...]
> People are unreasonably paranoid about cookies.

I assume we are talking about "persistent cookies", not just "cookies."

I am totally opposed to default _persistent cookies_.  I have no beef
with _cookie support_ what-so-ever; in fact I believe it is essential to
Lynx, despite the fact that I personally blanket-refuse all cookies.
If efforts are made to have Lynx write to disk "behind my back", then
I might as well go to MSIE; there wouldn't be much reason not to.
(That argument that Lynx crashes less, is faster, etc. than MSIE _on
Windows95/98_ is pure BS.)

__Henry