www/proprietary malware-appliances.html proprie...

[Pavel Kharitonov]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Pavel Kharitonov <ineiev>       17/04/24 06:16:21

Modified files:
        proprietary    : malware-appliances.html 
                         proprietary-surveillance.html 

Log message:
        Use absolute URLs.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/proprietary/malware-appliances.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.22&r2=1.23
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/proprietary/proprietary-surveillance.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.120&r2=1.121

Patches:
Index: malware-appliances.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/proprietary/malware-appliances.html,v
retrieving revision 1.22
retrieving revision 1.23
diff -u -b -r1.22 -r1.23
--- malware-appliances.html     24 Apr 2017 09:26:00 -0000      1.22
+++ malware-appliances.html     24 Apr 2017 10:16:21 -0000      1.23
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
 <p>The suit accuses that this was done without the users' consent.
 If the fine print of the app said that users gave consent for this,
 would that make it acceptable? No way! It should be flat out
-<a href="https://gnu.org/philosophy/surveillance-vs-democracy.html";>
+<a href="/philosophy/surveillance-vs-democracy.html">
 illegal to design the app to snoop at all</a>.
 </p>
 </li>
@@ -607,7 +607,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2017/04/24 09:26:00 $
+$Date: 2017/04/24 10:16:21 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: proprietary-surveillance.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/proprietary/proprietary-surveillance.html,v
retrieving revision 1.120
retrieving revision 1.121
diff -u -b -r1.120 -r1.121
--- proprietary-surveillance.html       24 Apr 2017 09:26:00 -0000      1.120
+++ proprietary-surveillance.html       24 Apr 2017 10:16:21 -0000      1.121
@@ -1072,7 +1072,7 @@
 <p>The suit accuses that this was done without the users' consent.
 If the fine print of the app said that users gave consent for this,
 would that make it acceptable? No way! It should be flat out
-<a href="https://gnu.org/philosophy/surveillance-vs-democracy.html";>
+<a href="/philosophy/surveillance-vs-democracy.html">
 illegal to design the app to snoop at all</a>.
 </p>
 </li>
@@ -1310,7 +1310,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2017/04/24 09:26:00 $
+$Date: 2017/04/24 10:16:21 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>