
Motherfucking Website - titlex
http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/
======
hawkharris
The one thing I remember from economics class is the concept of marginal
utility. It basically says — if I remember correctly — that the perceived
value of a good declines as a consumer accumulates more of it. One cookie?
Delicious. Ten cookies? Each one doesn't taste quite as good.

I mention this because I think that fucks are like cookies....The first one:
well, that's something special. It's funny. It makes a statement. The 70th
one? Well, I'm not sure what to do with all these fucks.

In other words, I can tell that there's a potentially poignant idea about web
design in this post, but it was a little drowned out because of the way it was
presented.

~~~
npsimons
_Well, I 'm not sure what to do with all these fucks._

You could be generous and give them to people; just think of all the fucks you
could be giving!

~~~
tunnuz
The man has a point.

------
ender7
I can certainly relate, but please don't try to pretend that this is a
pleasant reading experience on a desktop. Lines of text should be about 45–90
characters long (including spaces) in order to create a pleasant reading
experience. Do not make me resize my browser window to do this for you.

~~~
tomphoolery
You can also just hit Ctrl-+ to zoom in and out to make the text larger,
therefore easier to read.

Alternatively, since most websites reset CSS anyway, you can change your
browser defaults to make it a more "pleasurable reading experience". If you're
into that.

I'm just saying, these problems aren't really problems. The web was created
_for_ desktop viewing...

~~~
ender7
The issue is not the size of the text (which is small but still legible) but
the _line length_ \-- that is, how wide the lines are. If lines are too long,
then reading becomes an exhausting experience as you sweep your eyes back and
forth across the page like a lighthouse.

It's not really possible to enforce line-length with a user stylesheet
(increasing the point size doesn't solve the problem, it just balloons the
letters up to goofy proportions). This page just needs max-width set somewhere
on the text container.

~~~
bjeanes
I'm not disagreeing with you but I thought I'd try this as a user stylesheet
for this page just now and it looks pretty great on my screen:

    
    
        body { -webkit-column-count: 3; } // or -moz- or no prefix or whatever

~~~
dredmorbius
I'm note a huge fan of column layouts, but first time I saw that particular
trick.

Might split out the header separately.

~~~
bjeanes
Yeah... and doing it on the whole body would be fatiguing on long pages
because you have to scroll up and down the whole page after each column. I'd
probably want to do column-split content areas over a certain width (e.g. an
<article> or something).

~~~
etcet
I played around with columns a few years ago[0] after I first saw them being
used. I use some JS to keep the containing div the same height as the window
and hook into scroll events. This was several years ago fairly soon after
columns were being implemented and I'm sure there's a better way of doing it
today.

[0] [https://etcet.net/projects/columns/](https://etcet.net/projects/columns/)

------
DigitalSea
Yeah, it might be responsive and nice, but the line lengths on my resolution
are so ridiculously long, they're unreadable... How about setting a
550px/600px width on the body element to make the lines of satire actually
readable, motherfucker?

There are some very valid points here, especially the last part about browser
problems being created by us developers and designers. It's all true, but
honestly, I would rather put the effort in for a website that looks nice, has
nice line lengths and heck, if the designers was gimmicky animated background
colours, they can have them.

One widespread problem I've noticed since the early 00's is the lack of
hierarchy. Designers are trying desperately to break the mould of a
conventional webpage design but forget to distinguish between headings and
page content all too often. I don't remember the last time I saw a website
that wasn't a blog that had proper content hierarchy (H1, H2, H3, etc).

Internet connections are so fast nowadays that it doesn't even matter if your
website is 1mb, even 3G mobile connections can load a page that big in a few
seconds. The real problem with modern development is not page weight, it's the
abuse of Javascript. Reflows and repaints are the real problem because people
have a lack of understanding when it comes to Javascript, not 1mb of
Javascript and CSS on a website.

~~~
abritishguy
I disagree about the thing about page sizes, my internet connection is not "so
fast it doesn't matter".

~~~
ghayes
While page sizes do matter (esp. when it's JavaScript and needs to be parsed &
run), remember that things like "establishing an SSL handshake" or "resolving
a DNS query" can very much be slower than downloading say 10KB of compressed
assets. We should be smart about reducing the amount of junk you download when
you goto a webpage, but make sure you don't save a penny and lose a pound.

------
undershirt
This is basically the Web Site Guidelines for the GNU Project [1]:

    
    
      - Our goal is to get information to people. Keeping the site design simple
        helps accomplish that.
      - The use of graphics should be minimized, so pages load fast over slow
        links, especially animations. The GNU Project is for everyone, even those
        with slow Internet access and/or text-only WWW browsers.
    
    

[1]: [http://www.gnu.org/server/fsf-html-style-
sheet.html](http://www.gnu.org/server/fsf-html-style-sheet.html)

------
markdown
> Yes, this is fucking satire, you fuck

No. Not it isn't. I don't think you know what satire is. Satire would be if
took a jab at the ridiculous 80MB TeehanLax page by making an 800MB one and
pretending it was a serious endeavor.

> Yes, this is fucking satire, you fuck

Whatever it was, you ruined it by trying to explain it.

~~~
hablahaha
Yeah, it's a joke, not satire. It could have been satire if he had
incorporated all the bad web practices that he was making fun of, like add
jQuery UI just for giggles and have items that were hidden at different
resolutions - that sounds like the start of satire...

------
mordae
And there he goes and spoils it with the GA script. Point taken.

~~~
ehynds
and by disabling pinch zoom on mobile.

~~~
kibibu
Absolutely. Takes the most simple-to-render website and makes it unusable for
an entire class of device, just by adding:

    
    
        <meta name="viewport"
              content="width=device-width,
                       initial-scale=1,
                       maximum-scale=1,
                       user-scalable=no">
    

(wrapped for your viewing pleasure)

Why would you _ever_ do this on a page designed for readability?

------
cjubb39
Gizoogling commence:
[http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=http://motherfuckingwe...](http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=http://motherfuckingwebsite.com)

~~~
krapp
[http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=https://news.ycombinat...](http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6791297)

------
gabemart

        body {    
          max-width: 600px;
          margin: 0 auto;
        }
    

Improves readability by an order of magnitude in my opinion.

~~~
dredmorbius
If you want to go for cross-platform compatibility, you'll specify your
dimensions in ems. _Especially_ line lengths.

------
dredmorbius
Oh dear sweet good so much this.

Not that the site is beautiful as specified (I prefer margins, a slightly
narrower text width, and slightly different color schemes). But _if the
motherfucking idiot designer doesn 't overload the sites' CSS in the first
place I can simply drop my default style on the page._

If the page _is_ overdesigned, then I've got to tear it down and figure out
what elements to re-style first. Worst: those Microsoft auto-converted pages
with embedded styles. On. Every. Fucking. Element.

And for the people saying "but it should be XXX px wide". _Don 't specify line
widths in px -- you almost _certainly* mean to use ems. In fact, you probably
want pt and ems for _most_ of your dimensions.

------
bjourne
Fucking anyone can pretend they have a fucking insightful fucking idea by
using the fucking fuck word enough times. It doesn't fucking prove that you
fucking know what you're talking about. Tt fucking only makes you look
retarded because you fucking can't express your angry ideas using more fucking
varied language. You motherfucker.

~~~
hash9
This is EXREME advertising. I very much doubt he is angry.

[http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/extreme-
advertising](http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/extreme-advertising)

[http://extremeadvertisements.com/popular/advertising](http://extremeadvertisements.com/popular/advertising)

------
jonobird1
Definitely agree with some of the points in here and I understand that this is
the extreme.

One thing I would definitely say is that there is minimal structure besides
for heading/paragraph and if I was selling something, this website wouldn't
work.

You need a basic structure through brand recognition > wtf the websites is
doing > convince > call to action. Or something along those lines.

Again, I understand this is an extreme so the straight up headings &
paragraphs are there but I think a nice middle ground would work as long as
people THINK about what damn content they put on their site instead of stupid
parallax sites for the sake of it.

/end rant

------
vezzy-fnord
I guess it's better than the millionth blatantly obvious Bootstrap layout.

~~~
yashodhan
Every time I see another metoostrap site, I die a little inside.

------
Gertig
This looks like it was inspired by mijustin's post "This is a web page."
[http://justinjackson.ca/words.html](http://justinjackson.ca/words.html)

------
r0ash
Funny but true. I believe that German was a Linux programmer :)

May be not designers but hardcore programmers feel the same, why all the bells
and whistles while the sole purpose is merely to inform your audience. There
are people who still like the Linux black screen, instead of moving mouse or
fingering the mobile devices, they love to key-punch the commands.

~~~
fumigatecvg
agree to some extent.

not just programmers there are people who dont like fancy things, like my
grandma dont like smartphones, she is still using those pesky telephones.

------
reinhardt
From view source: <!-- FOR THE CURIOUS: This site was made by @thebarrytone.
Don't tell my mom. -->

So it's not Zed Shaw?

~~~
yaph
They both play the Guitar.

------
rikacomet
I don't find this post funny, I agree with the points raised.. and the manner
of satire. But its too much over the top. This is a good opportunity to say
what I have been holding down for long.

I usually substitute words like "FUCK" with "FREAK" .. "WHAT THE FUCK" with
"WHAT THE HELL" .. or as Prof. Eric Grimson likes.. instead of "Pain in the
ass" .. use "Pain in some part of anatomy"

I'm talking about refraining from overexpression.

JUST LIKE RIGHT NOW I'M WRITING IN CAPS, THIS WHOLE SENTENCE, IT MIGHT BE
BECAUSE I'M EXTREMELY ELATED TO TELL YOU SOMETHING YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED, BUT
THAT DOESN'T DO AWAY WITH THE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE JUST HATE CAPS BECAUSE IT
SEEMS LIKE SHOUTING TO THEM.

Yes we all are pretty much very smart[SELECT * FROM DB BODY PARTS] to know
that yeah.. use of swears is just a way of expression and not in this way--->
a oh soo.. "COOL AWESOME!!!!!! WOAH~!!" type of thing these days.. specially
with advent of english and its spreading acceptability as language of choice
over [include <tim berners lee creation.h>] .. they are well at the end of the
day still insults. So my point is that, yes its okay to use it sometimes to
show how psychologically simulated you are.. but eventually its going to hurt
someone out there.

What disturbs me, is that use of insults have become too common these days.
For example, A friend showing up late might already be crumbling over inside
about keeping the other guy waiting, but upon late arrival.. if he just DUDE
TALKS you and say "What the fuck were you at man?!!!" .. it may sound normal
to the speaker.. but more than a few times it does hurt to be on the receiving
end, try putting yourself in his shoes. No one makes a point out of it because
life is too short to make the discussion about this, and not just get on with
the day.. but as you see:

#substituting insults with similar sounding words won't make you uncool!

#but it might on that rare occasion save you from hurting someone you cherish.

~~~
Myrmornis
> What disturbs me, is that use of insults have become too common these days.

It doesn't disturb you that, for example, the USA and its allies have been
carrying out or supporting unnecessary military action resulting in the deaths
of hundreds of thousands of people in south-western Asia and the Middle East
for the last 13 years? It doesn't disturb you that those countries have
granted vastly increased power to the state, greatly reduced personal
freedoms, and reintroduced torture as an acceptable procedure, in the course
of doing so? It doesn't disturb you that they think it is okay to kill people,
away from the battlefield, along with any family members that might be nearby,
by remote control from the other side of the world?

No, apparently what has been disturbing you is that people are using vulgar
language in ways which could be perceived as offensive. If you don't like it,
then don't have them as your friends, and/or don't read the things they write.
No one cares about your prudishness.

EDIT: I see your profile says you live in New Delhi so you're probably not
paying taxes to directly fund the last decades butchery. Still, I imagine that
New Delhi is not short of phenomena more disturbing than vulgar language.

~~~
rikacomet
If anything as such exist as you say, if anyone is responsible.. it is not
USA, it is individuals. That is, if so.

Besides, that would have been very off-topic

------
wowaname
Oh my god. To everyone complaining about the overuse of crude language: so
what? This is the Internet, not meant to be taken seriously. So put your
judgment aside and read the damn article for once without making a snide
remark about it.

------
aabalkan
There was a similar article on HN a few months back. It was saying, there's no
fancy javascript, css and yet you are still reading... Does anyone remember
that? It is closely related to this.

~~~
pshin45
I remember that as well and would love to read it again in light of this post.

Tried searching for it but to no avail, though.

~~~
rk0567
I guess, it's the one :
[http://justinjackson.ca/words.html](http://justinjackson.ca/words.html)

~~~
pshin45
Yup, that's the one! Thanks!

------
Houshalter
Serious question because I am not a web developer at all, is it possible to
make a website that looks decent with just raw HTML? And not have it look like
this or like it's from 1999.

~~~
krapp
I think that depends on what you mean by "decent." If you exclude css
entirely, you're left with tables for complex layouts, basic colors (font
color, border color, etc) and imagemaps. Not terribly exciting but not
necessarily ugly either.

------
cheeaun
Not relevant but I almost thought this is one of those Mother Effing websites
:) [http://mothereff.in/](http://mothereff.in/)

------
cgcardona
If you view source:

`<!-- FOR THE CURIOUS: This site was made by @thebarrytone. Don't tell my mom.
-->`

And then at the bottom in the quote:

> "Good design is as little design as possible." > \- some German motherfucker

There is the following cite:

`<blockquote cite="[https://www.vitsoe.com/us/about/good-
design">`](https://www.vitsoe.com/us/about/good-design">`)

Which cites this article:

Dieter Rams: ten principles for good design

------
bane
I said it recently [1] and I'll say it again, there's nothing wrong with sites
that look and function like this. I agree completely that most of the problems
we have with web design today are ones we've made.

1 -
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6786902](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6786902)

------
jamesk14022
Source motherfucker, "<!-- FOR THE CURIOUS: This site was made by
@thebarrytone. Don't tell my mom. -->".

------
runn1ng
It would look better with Bootstrap though.

------
Aardwolf
"This site doesn't care if you're on an iMac or a motherfucking Tamagotchi."

Ha ha, best quote imho :)

------
pirateking
My home page is currently 11 KB (no stylesheets or scripts), and any work on
it can be done with one-liner scripts. I don't feel like coming back to the
"modern" web again. I would rather continue experimenting with alternative
hypertext systems.

~~~
Pfiffer
I agree, I find websites like tarsnap[0] to be a welcome break from all of
these landing pages with complex scrolling.

[0] [http://www.tarsnap.com/](http://www.tarsnap.com/)

------
brianbarker
Now just make some t-shirts, maybe put up some google ads for the traffic your
site could get, and make $$ off your rant. Just like [http://programming-
motherfucker.com/](http://programming-motherfucker.com/).

------
Link-
This is one motherfucking 'extremist' message, but funny as hell!

------
DustinCalim
The comments here are very typical HN... Too much semantics and nit-picking -
and I think a lot of people missed the point the site was trying to make.

Maybe that means the site failed by being too distracting...\

------
julespitt
Just the other day I was wondering to myself: does anyone A/B test against no-
nonsense simple 90s HTML? Because I bet there are some particularly unexpected
cases where it would win out.

------
Adrock
"Good design is as little design as possible." \- Dieter Rams

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams)

------
dlsym
It just works.

Btw.: Here is a very popular blog, that has always had this style:
[http://blog.fefe.de/](http://blog.fefe.de/) [german]

------
websitescenes
Sure, this is a website but what the author fails to realize is that while
this may work for the Hacker news crowd, it will not be affective if you are
trying to target other groups. The general public likes pretty things and in
most cases are willing to give up function for looks. Just look at fashion,
I'm sure women wear heals because they function better than typical shoes.
There's a bigger picture here.

------
dictum
You know what's amazing? Every website made with HTML, CSS, JS and images can
look like that and get all the listed benefits! You can choose to have your JS
_and_ your CSS, or you can choose to have only the JS or the CSS, or only have
the HTML! "Wait, so you're telling me I don't have to try hard to be
unimpressed with new web technologies to make my website look like that?" Yes!
You can disable JS, CSS or images on your browser.

> Did you seriously load 100kb of jQuery UI just so you could animate the
> fucking background color of a div? You loaded all 7 fontfaces of a shitty
> webfont just so you could say "Hi." at 100px height at the beginning of your
> site? You piece of shit.

I try every front end optimization technique I can, and I hate when developers
don't even try to optimize their sites, but honestly, I don't subscribe to a
fast [1] connection and have a fast, capable computer just to see pages with
the default user agent styling. I _want_ the parallax scrolling, the
animations, the typefaces, etc. I just want the right to turn them off when I
need to, but when I'm just browsing the web, I want websites to look as crazy
as they can. That's the beauty of progressive enhancement.

[1]: You can hardly call low end DSL fast these days, but I don't have trouble
with most websites. Maybe I'm just browsing well-optimized websites most of
the time.

------
Lockal
5 KB of html, and 22 KB of Google Analytics JS + 1 gif.

It's 2013 and website owners still can't parse theirs motherfuckingwebserver's
logs, extract browser info and apply GeoIP database for visitor counting. They
speak about privacy, but prefer to send all the data about theirs 5KB
motherfuckingpages to motherfuckinggoogle.

------
lupinglade
While we're at it, why don't we just switch to fax? But seriously, this
article does have a bit of a point.

------
moocowduckquack
Has De Niro recently started coding HTML?

------
johngrefe
"Load this motherfucker in IE6. I fucking dare you."

-Always looking out for the PRC when I design.

------
etler
Littering an unfunny writeup with profanity doesn't make it funny, it just
makes you sound like a middle schooler.

------
nullgeo
I use a handful of JS libraries in my website because I need to add stuff like
equations (MathJax) and syntax highlighting (prism.js). His premise is wrong
because he thinks sites only convey message using plain text and nothing else.

Imagine how unreadable equations and code can be if they are presented as
plain text.

~~~
prab97
You could create images for equations and put them on the site.

------
lispylol
this is motherfucking funny

------
Kluny
I felt inspired and updated my own site. rocketships.ca/

------
dsego
But does it scale?

~~~
officemonkey
It scales like a motherfucker.

------
wrongc0ntinent
Reminds me of this, only not as funny :
[http://gradientsmotherfucker.com/](http://gradientsmotherfucker.com/)

------
amerika_blog
I love it. The original idea of the web was, like gopher, to detach content
from presentation and universalize it. Custom design especially flash has
gotten away from that.

Then again, it was also fun to play with.

[http://www.anus.com/etc/prozakhistan/autoexec.htm](http://www.anus.com/etc/prozakhistan/autoexec.htm)

------
anon4
And yet there is javascript on the site. And it's not even in the head
section. Now that's what I call humour.

~~~
websitescenes
There's no rule that js has to go in the head. It's more common for it not be
these days.

------
jbeja
I wouldn't make a similar thing to my clients XD.

