Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | dan1234's comments login

And anyone who wants to browse with JavaScript disabled…

reply


I stopped worrying about those users years ago. Don't even bother with <noscript> anymore. It's 2015 and all browsers support JS these days. If you disable browser features then you really shouldn't be surprised when functionality breaks. The same would happen if you disabled CSS or images.

reply


Funny you should invoke turning off CSS and images -- a lot of people have actually worked pretty hard to make standards that would work for cases where visitors had them disabled, or want low bandwidth options, or had their own custom style sheets, or weren't using a visual user agent (or even, for that matter, directing the user agent manually).

A failure of function availability from turning off images or CSS is a failure of developers, not a failure of the platform or user agent. You can find sites even in 2015 that either straight up work or degrade gracefully when being browsed by Lynx (a browser that I don't think has seen even a dot-release update since 1999) because they were put together by thoughtful professionals who understand the platform.

If you're trying to deliver an application that absolutely requires client side computation or specific browser APIs, you can have a pass for choosing the have your site not work without JS.

If your site really is just a series of documents (either static or dynamically computed), though, there really isn't much of an excuse.

reply


>a lot of people have actually worked pretty hard to make standards that would work for cases where visitors had them disabled, or want low bandwidth options

In cases like this, wouldn't it make more sense to have that information available in an API? Once you've removed all styling and interaction, it seems like something that would work better as simply sending raw data, and letting the client decide what to do with it.

Schema.org is a good example of how this would work with the modern web. Markup relevant data (eg. product ratings, movie times) and let the clients render it as desired. You can still provide CSS/JS for modern browsers.

Seems a lot more elegant to me than designing pages to gracefully fallback when JS/CSS is missing, as that would seriously restrict design.

reply


When you say "simply send raw data, and let the client decide what to do with it," you're more or less describing the original vision behind delivering markup before we got obsessed with instructions of one stripe or another to control visual presentation.

The crucial question is probably what's considered "raw" -- or perhaps to talk more in terms of web-related philosophy, which media type you'd expect most user agents to be able to handle by default... and despite the (reasonable) popularity of JSON, the answer is pretty much HTML with some kind of microformat information embedded via attributes.

In other words, the schema.org approach is arguably pretty much what you're supposed to do in order to design pages to gracefully fall back. I'm not sure why you might think those two concepts are at odds. :)

reply


People who disable features of their browser on purpose will always be getting a degraded experience. No way around that.

reply


People have JS disabled without their intent. Corporate security standards, broken JS in CDN served libraries, mobile proxy browsers, the list goes on…

reply


With the rate CSS is accumulating kludges and the fact that, when together with HTML5, it has already crossed the Turing-completeness threshold, I wonder how long it will take before companies start requiring browsers to disable subsets of CSS...

reply


Seems to be missing all of the Digital Ocean UK prices. Also would like to see what OS flavours are offered, what networking options (private net, IPv6 range, IPv4 costs etc), hide plans that use non-SSD, which providers offer 2FA logins, backup costs.

-----


Looks like it might have been patched already. FTA:

>Further research suggests this could be the issue detailed in CVE-2014-4451 but this has yet to be confirmed. We plan to test the same attack on an 8.2 device and will update with our progress.

-----


https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2014-4451

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bok9Zgas6g

It was fixed in 8.1.1

-----


The article was posted a week ago, but there are no updates about iOS 8.2 as of today and since it shouldn't be too long to just upgrade iOS and see if after 10 attempts the device gets wiped I'm guessing that the fix for CVE-2014-4451 actually patched this but the news wasn't as interesting as it would've been "iOS 8.2 vulnerable too" to update the post with

-----


Reminds me of Major Hayden's man page résumé[0]

[0]http://majorhayden.com

-----


Nice. Here's one I always remember (written in Haskell) - https://ocharles.org.uk/

OCharles originally did it in Perl/Moose and with a module of mine (Acme::URL) which is how I stumbled across the CV in the first place - https://web.archive.org/web/20120119150530/http://ocharles.o...

-----


My actual résumé is written in BSD mandoc: http://r.dakko.us/

-----


Cmd+Shift+G then type /tmp

-----


In Open and Save dialogue boxes, you can also start typing with a / to open up a "go to path" dialogue box that lets you enter the unix path (with tab completion).

-----


How did I not know this? I've always run the open command in the terminal for hidden folders.

-----


> How did I not know this?

Because it isn't obvious, or even really very easy to find.

-----


To be fair the average user doesn't ever need to see hidden folders. Who cares what the defaults are, set your Mac up however you want, I'm sure everyone here is plenty capable.

Also, people will spend days customizing their Linux systems, but think OS X needs to be exactly the way they want it out of the box. Why is that? I agree the software quality has declined over the past few years, but many people here seem to be nitpicking.

-----


Dude, it's even in the Finder's menu. Go > Go to Folder (⇧⌘G)

-----


"dude", yes, I know. Once found, nothing is hard to find.

But it's shitty UX. You can navigate to folders, except this arbitrary list of them that you can't control, in which case you go somewhere else to navigate to them.

And the 3 or 4 ways to view the folders, in (at least) one of them you can't create a new folder, but others you can. Brilliant.

-----


If you search "shortcuts for Finder" in your preferred search engine, this is one of the first that will be listed.

-----


You can also do: cd /tmp; open .

-----


Never knew about the dot. I always use open $(pwd)...

-----


. = current directory

.. = parent directory

-----


Or just `open /tmp`

-----


I'm asking myself the same question!

Here's the funny thing: Click the Go menu in Finder, and look down at the bottom where it says Go to Folder...

See the shortcut? Yup, it's Command-Shift-G.

I have no idea why I never paid attention to that before.

-----


That's just the public part, which your server will send to clients. The private part is the key, which shouldn't leave your server.

-----


Such a shame there are no videos on the site. Photos don't seem to do it justice.

-----


Videos are currently work in progress. Making a good video is difficult because of the light reflection. It's not easy to film something thru a glass.

-----


If you haven't already, definitely try a polarizing filter. I had to take some shots of some glass-framed artwork and it worked really well for those!

-----


I'd love to see a making-of timelapse.

-----


It's a bit sad that the Christmas Lectures have been relegated to BBC4, they used to have a pretty prominent position in the Christmas schedule.

-----


Channels and schedules aren't really that relevant any more, though. They'll be available on iPlayer, which is probably all that matters.

-----


I think you get more casual viewers when something is on a prime channel.

People who might not normally watch something with the word 'lecture' in it would just skip over it in iPlayer might continue watching it if they run into it as it's being broadcast and something interesting is happening.

-----


> I think you get more casual viewers when something is on a prime channel.

This is how I first came across them as a child.

-----


The television channels have wider reach. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_One#Availability_outside_...: "BBC One is [...] available on cable and IPTV in the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and Liechtenstein"

iPlayer is more restricted.

-----


Honestly, the Internet of Things is a design proposition rather than a scientific one. Are there any algorithms or crucial technical innovations that are specific to IoT? The totally underwhelming range of hacks that have emerged from the Arduino (etc.) maker scene makes me really skeptical that this is an important area for really valuable innovations. Design has more to do with phenomenology than technology, and probably always will.

The RI is apparently not in great shape anyway, although I have heard little since this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/6964971/Susan-Greenf...

-----


It is (though it might be an encouragement to sample the joy that is BBC Four), but the bigger sadness is that they're down to 3 lecures. I used to attend in person as a kid, back in the days when there were five hour long lectures, allowing the presenter real space to explore their subject in depth. 3 hours is still a good run, but I hanker for what once was!

-----


Assuming the video stream is compressed (MP4?) it shouldn't take too much. We're pretty used to streaming HD over the internet, so even USB2 should be able to handle it.

-----


Non of the major UK ISPs seem to be passed the planning stage and my mobile network seems to be using carrier grade NAT.

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: