Feb 17, 2020

Dating Purgatory: A Review of Dating Apps in Small Town Colorado

If you look back at my posts for the last five years or so, you see references to my smoking hot girlfriend. I used to mention her quite a bit as she and I both work in the IT field, so when I would help her with an issue, it was relevant to the blog.

Well, last year we broke up. Not sure the catalyst exactly. Maybe I'm an asshole and people can only take my crap for so long. Maybe it was because all of her kids grew up, and moved out and she finally had the freedom that she never had after high school, and I was cramping her style. Maybe it was because she is into chubby fat guys, and when I lost a bunch of weight four years ago, I was no longer her type. Who knows for sure, but it ended. At least it ended somewhat amicably. I wish her all the best.

Anyway, since then I've been in what I like to refer to as Dating Purgatory. I say that because I live in a very small town, and the dating pool here is extremely shallow. All of the local bars are usually filled with old drunks or are completely dead. The only way to meet anyone is by using one of the myriad of dating apps available. It's like a living hell.

On top of that, since it is small town Colorado the quality of prospects isn't that good either. How's a nice way to put this... There are a lot of corn fed women, and women who look like they have lived really hard lives around here. I can only imagine the type of creepy dudes that show up on these apps for the women around here.

Don't get me wrong, there are attractive women around, they are just few and far between. I'm assuming it is the same for quality men too. Just the luck of the draw I guess.

With that being said, here's my review on the dating apps I'm on:

Facebook Dating:

I'm starting with this one because just about everyone is on Facebook. In fact, the town I live in is such a technological black hole that businesses around here don't even have their own websites! They just use Facebook.

So if everyone had Facebook, you would think there would be more people using the dating feature right? Well, you are mistaken. There is almost nobody on this app, and the people that are on it are pretty ghetto. This is my least favorite.

Plenty of Fish:

This app is the first app I ever tried during my separation and subsequent divorce back in 2014/2015. Sometimes it's good to see things stay the same, but not when those things are complete garbage. Plenty of Fish, or POF is trash folks, and it hasn't really improved since 2014. Sure, it's free, but it's worthless as a dating app. They added a "Meet Me" feature that is almost just like Tinder (See below), but what is the point when they are showing you pictures of people 5 hours away?

One of the biggest drawbacks of POF is that when there is nobody in your area, they automatically expand your search to 100 miles. Seriously, I don't know about you but I don't like driving 35 miles to Grand Junction for a date that might not work out. I sure as hell am not driving 100 miles for a date that might not work out! Expanding my radius is a waste of everyone's time!

Another drawback to this app is that anyone can message anyone. The problem with that is that legit prospects are getting bombarded with dick pics constantly, so they are afraid to look at messages. They are flooded and overwhelmed and eventually leave the app.

Finally, since this is one of the more popular free apps, there are a lot of... low class people on the app. It really does make finding decent prospects more difficult.

This is my second least favorite.


This is probably one of the most popular dating apps/sites out there. They are heavily advertised on television. One of my best friends from growing up met his wife on Match. I actually had a brief reprieve from Dating Purgatory myself when I met a smoking hot cop on Match a few months ago. Unfortunately that didn't work out... I digress. It was the only successful story I've had from that app though. At least she and I are still friends. It's always nice to have a friend in law enforcement!

Match isn't a bad app, but it certainly isn't one of my favorites. It is like a slightly better version of POF. You can limit your search radius, and the quality of people on it are better. The issue here is that anyone can message anybody, and you have the same issues you have with POF. Women get overwhelmed and rarely message you back.


I just started playing with this app, and to me it is like Tinder and POF had a bastard love child. You have all of the swiping goodness you have with Tinder, but the range filter is completely worthless. In fact, it is even worse than POF.

I have my max range set at 35 miles, and I am constantly seeing chicks from Pittsburgh or Sacramento. Ladies and gentlemen, I've already established above that I won't drive 100 miles. What on God's green Earth makes you think I'm going to buy a plane ticket and fly to Pittsburgh?! It's a waste of time, and you are inviting scammers!

Some good things about this app are that the interface is pretty nice, and you can't message anyone unless you've matched with them. This is very important in an app in my opinion!


This is another newer app that I've just started using. There aren't a whole lot of people on it in my area yet, so I haven't had the opportunity to dig in too much. I like what I see so far though.

This app gives you a very minimalist profile, which is nice because when you have too much in your profile I feel like people judge you before even getting to know you. It also gives you a couple of "prompts" that other users can like individually and strike up a conversation with.

I'd say the drawback is that again, anyone can comment on your prompts, which leads to women getting overwhelmed and not wanting to check their inbox. Still, this seems like an improvement over Match and POF.


This app at first seemed like it would be my favorite. It is almost just like Tinder in my opinion, but you have expanded profiles and the biggest thing is that women must make the first move.

That, kind of makes me wonder about lesbians using the site then... Who gets to make the first move there?

What about gay men? Do they not even get to message each other? I digress...

Anyway, the interface is nice and there seems to be a decent number of quality users in my area. The drawback comes to that women must make the first move rule. I honestly don't think most women WANT to make the first move. They get too nervous! I have had countless matches that eventually time out because women don't want to make the first move on the app! It's kind of ridiculous if you ask me.

Ladies, if you are too scared to make the first move then this app is NOT for you!

I mean, if you look at the issue above with Match, POF and Hily you would think that would be appealing for women. The conversation can only start if THEY start it. Well, I guess the creators are ahead of their time with the women's equality movement, because it seems that women are still old fashioned... At least in my area. They prefer that the guy initiates the conversation.

A good thing about this app is that if you don't like someone, you can un-match them and they disappear forever. Tinder has the same feature. Some might find it rude, but if you've only been messaging for a little bit, or only been on one or two dates, do you really owe them anything?


Last, but certainly not least is the king of the dating apps in my opinion. A lot of folks think of Tinder as a hook-up app, but it's not. I mean, it can be, but that's not the only thing it is good for. I met my aforementioned smoke show girlfriend on Tinder in 2014 and we ended up dating for four and a half years!

Meira Gebel just wrote a piece on Business Insider about how she met her husband on Tinder. So again, it isn't just for hooking up!

This by far is my favorite app. I've had more success on this app that any other. The interface is simple, the profiles are minimal and you can only contact people you match with! The best thing about apps like this is that it really cuts out the bullshit. You see a picture, you either like it or you don't. If you want to see more, then you can open a profile, but attraction at first site is important and very real.

It's like the electronic equivalent of being at a bar or a club. You see someone you are physically attracted to so you swipe right. The difference being that if they don't swipe right too, you don't get to approach them with your witty pick-up line. That means they have to find you attractive as well! Again, it cuts out the bullshit!

I think the stigma of this being just for hooking up is what keeps more people from using it. If the word got out that you can find your long-term partner on this app, more people would start using it for that.


These are my opinions of the dating apps I've experimented with in small town Colorado. I think the experience with all of these apps is way different in heavily populated areas. I've noticed that when I travel to Denver or to San Diego that my phone blows up with all sorts of prospects. That leads me to believe that you might have a different experience with these apps if you live in a big city.

It would be certainly nice if the creators of these apps found a way to advertise them more to people in small towns. It would be good to let the eligible ladies around me know that they have other options than the dive bars with old creepy dudes available for meeting men their age!

Are you using a dating app? Which one is your favorite? Is there one that you recommend trying? Let me know in the comments!

Side Note:

Ladies, can you please stop using the Snapchat animal pics in your profiles?! They are not cute, they are childish and stupid... just stop.

Feb 10, 2020

You can help stop .COM Price Increases!

Do you own your own domain or multiple domains like I do? Are any of them .COM domains? Well, it turns out that ICANN just made a deal behind closed doors with Verisign, the company that operates the .COM top level domain (TLD). This change means that .COM wholesale domain prices can grow by more than 70% over and above current prices over the next decade.

According to NameCheap:
On January 3, 2020, ICANN announced significant changes to the contract it has with Verisign, Inc. to operate the top-level domain .COM.  
ICANN and Verisign made these changes in secret, without consulting or incorporating feedback from the ICANN community or Internet users.  
Although ICANN has a history of making similar deals behind closed doors, and also of ignoring unified opposition against such action, Namecheap will continue to lead the fight against price increases that will harm our customers and the Internet as a whole. (For more information about Namecheap’s efforts to maintain domain name price controls, visit pricecaps.org.)  
The changes to the .COM agreement will have a much bigger impact on the Internet than the previous action for .ORG, .INFO, and .BIZ domains, due to the dominance of .COM. There are 359.8 million total domain names, of which 144 million are .COM — that’s 40% of all domain names. With 161.8 million country-specific TLDs (ccTLDs), there are 198 million generic TLDs (gTLDs). That means that .COM makes up 73% of all gTLD domain names. 
ICANN was created in part to introduce competition between domain name registrars, but now ICANN itself is at the heart of the problem, without considering any input from Internet users on these critical decisions. 
So what can you do to help us stop this? You can let your voice be heard! ICANN has opened a public comment period that is open until this Friday, February 14th. You can submit your own comment using their form to let them know you are opposed to this change!

Jan 31, 2020

How To Replace An Expired SSL Certificate For Dyamics Management Reporter

I periodically find myself blogging about Microsoft Dynamics products. Mainly because they are a pain in the ass, and fixing problems tends to yield decent blog articles...

Anyway, the other day I was faced with an issue. We use Dynamics Management Reporter 2012 at my day job, and it rarely gets used. Because of that, certain issues like an SSL certificate expiring easily gets overlooked until someone goes to use it and you find out a certificate has expired and you neglected to replace it!

Well, that happened to me when our Accounting Director went to use it and received the below error when trying to connect to our Management Reporter server:

Management Reporter 
The server presented a certificate that could not be validated. Verify the certificate has been installed and is configured as a trusted root certificate on the client. Contact your administrator for help with certificate configuration.
I Googled around a bit and only found articles about changing the certificate in IIS. The issue is, we don't use IIS with Management Reporter in our environment. I did find a solution though, using netsh via the command line!

Before you do anything else, install your new SSL certificate in your local computer's certificate store like you normally would. Google how to do that if you don't already know how.

Next, find out how binding is currently configured by running the following:
netsh http show sslcert
You will get something like this:

Next you want to delete that binding by running the following:
netsh http delete sslcert hostname=hostname:4713
Be sure to replace hostname and port above with the information provided from the first command.

Now, we want to bind your new certificate. First you will need the thumbprint from your new certificate. You can find that by looking at your certificate's details tab, and scrolling to the bottom to see the thumbprint. Copy that information to notepad and remove the spaces.

Now you are ready to bind the new certificate by running the following:
netsh http add sslcert hostnameport=hostname:4713 certhash=<your certificates thumbprint> appid=<Your Application's ID> certstorename=MY
Be sure to replace the hostname with the hostname from the first command above, use your new certificate's thumbprint without spaces, and use your application's ID from the first command above.

After that, not sure if you have to, but I restarted the Management Reporter services and everything worked fine.

If you know of an easier way to do this, I'm all ears. This worked for me though. If this helped you too, let us know in the comments!

Jan 13, 2020

Cisco Finesse Cannot Authenticate With The Notification Service

I love waking up in the morning extra early, and hearing the lovely sound of my IM client at my computer (I work from home). It usually means that something is broken for someone. Well, this morning was no different. I got a message from one of my company's client support folks saying that she couldn't get into the Cisco Finesse phone queue, and that she was getting an error saying that it failed to load workflows.

When I tried logging in myself, I was greeted with a much different message. I got a message saying:

Cisco Finesse
Cannot authenticate with the notification service. There may be a configuration mismatch. Please contact your administrator.

Well shit... That's no good...

Anyway, I decided to try logging into Cisco Unified CCX Administration. When I logged in there I was greeted with a different message. This one said:

The Cisco JTAPI Client versions are inconsistent. Please go to Cisco JTAPI Resync in the Unified CM Telephony Subsystem to install the Cisco JTAPI Client.

Well shit... That's no good...

So I decided to follow instructions. From within Cisco Unified CCX Administration I went to Subsystem > Cisco Unified CM Telephony > Cisco JTAPI Resync. Then clicked OK when prompted.

After that I got another message saying:

For changes to take effect, please restart the Cisco Unified CCX Engine.

In order to do that, I had to go into Cisco Unified CCX Serviceability. Once in there I had to browse to Tools > Control Center - Network Services.

Once in there I had to find Cisco Unified CCX Engine service and restart it. Once that was done, I restarted the Cisco Finesse Tomcat service as well. After that users were able to login to the call queues again!

These last two services have to be restarted from an SSH terminal using the following commands:
  • utils service stop Cisco Unified CCX Engine
  • utils service stop Cisco Finesse Tomcat
  • utils service start Cisco Unified CCX Engine
  • utils service start Cisco Finesse Tomcat
Did this post help you out? Let us know in the comments!

Dec 16, 2019

How To Disable Weak CBC SSL Ciphers in Nginx

I'm always looking for ways to improve my encryption settings on my personal email server. I'm constantly checking SSL Labs to see how my configuration stacks up. For a little while now they have been complaining that I use weak CBC ciphers still in TLS 1.2. However, since they have continued to give me an A+ rating I didn't really care until today.

I decided to fix it by disabling those ciphers, and it's actually pretty easy. The answer on how to do it comes from user imgx64 on Stack Exchange in this thread where he says all you have to do is add a couple of extra items near the end of your ssl_ciphers portion of your ssl.tmpl config file in Nginx:
You can use !SHA1:!SHA256:!SHA384 to disable all CBC mode ciphers. There are some non-CBC false positives that will also be disabled (RC4, NULL), but you probably also want to disable them anyway. 
Note that while GCM and CHACHA20 ciphers have SHA* in their name, they're not disabled because they use their own MAC algorithm. The SHA* in their name is for the PRF, not the MAC
I changed my ssl_ciphers string from:




After I made that change and restarted the Nginx service my SSL Labs report went from this:


Simple right? Did this help you out? Let us know in the comments!

Dec 4, 2019

SSL Labs Error: Chain Issues Incorrect order, Contains anchor

An issue came up the other day that frankly really isn't an issue. We had a client at my day job (that shall not be named) that ran an SSL Labs test against one of our sites and it came back with this message regarding the chain certificates:

Chain Issues Incorrect order, Contains anchor
I say this really isn't an issue because according to this forum thread from Qualsis, it really is just informational. Ivan Ristic said:
...It's not an issue in the sense that the anchor is not allowed, but that the extra certificate (which serves no purpose) is increasing the handshake latency. Some people care about that, which is why provide the information in the test.
The solution is relatively easy if you are running an Nginx or Apache server, just don't include the root (aka anchor) certificate in your web configs, and only include the intermediate cert.

My problem was a little more complex because we use Imperva's Incapsula CDN/WAF service, so in order to upload a custom certificate you need to import a PFX file. If you export the PFX file from a Windows server, it typically includes all certificates in the chain.

If you opt to not include all certificates in the chain when exporting, then import that to Incapsula, then SSL Labs will cap your grade to a B because you are missing the chain certs... Kind of no win theater situation.

The solution? First you need to have OpenSSL installed in Windows, or you can do this on a Linux box. Do the following:
  • Export your certificate to PFX format and don't include the chain certificates. 
  • Export your intermediate certificate in x509 format separately. Name the file intermediate.cer
  • Put both files in a folder then run the following from a command prompt or Linux terminal in the directory containing your files:
openssl pkcs12 -in <domainname>.pfx -clcerts -nokeys -out <domainname>.crt
openssl pkcs12 -in <domainname>.pfx -nocerts -nodes -out <domainname>.key
openssl pkcs12 -export -out <domainname>_new.pfx -inkey <domainname>.key -in <domainname>.crt -certfile intermediate.cer

Be sure to replace <domainname> with whatever your original PFX file's name. You will be prompted for your export password after each command.

After this is done, you can import your <domainname>_new.pfx file to Imperva's Incapsula service (Or whatever load balancer/SSL offload device your using) and re-run your SSL Labs scan. Boom! The issue will be gone!

Like I said above, all of this is kind of unnecessary. Your website will work fine and not be any less secure if you have the root/anchor certificate in your chain. Still, if you are a stickler for details, or you have clients that want it done, now you know how to do it.

Did you have to do something different to fix your issue? Did this help? Let us know in the comments!

Nov 18, 2019

Blockchain In Mobile Application Market (Infographic)

When someone mentions Blockchain, the first that that comes to mind for most people is cryptocurrency. Did you know that there are plenty of other use cases for Blockchain technology though?

Blockchain offers immense speed and highly-secured features, which is idea for banking, real estate and mobile applications!

Speaking of the latter, here is an interesting infographic we found for Blockchain in the Mobile Application Market!

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More

Design by Free WordPress Themes | Bloggerized by Lasantha - Premium Blogger Themes | stopping spam