Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please make your products work with URLs

anderspitman.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 353 posts

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#291

Post by acqq »

apitman wrote: post #98

Author here. Sorry for those having trouble viewing the site. That's obviously never the intention. The current incarnation is actually a bit of an experiment. Unfortunately, my blog is only occasionally tested against front page traffic so I don't always get a feel for what's not working. That said, I assure you I am intimately familiar with the tradeoffs of different methods of delivering HTML. TL;DR it's my person…

Firefox 72.0.1 with no blocking, just private window: still no "Reader view" can be shown.

The page which can't be shown in the "Reader view" is definitely broken for me and everybody with disabilities who depends on Reader view.

(Also, the same browser, when JS blocked by the extension: just black screen)

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#292

Post by acqq »

Lev1a wrote: post #260
acqq wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even worse, once the JS is whitelisted, the resulting page still can't be opened with the Firefox "Reader View" so it is unreadable for me (having the black background). JS should not be needed to show five paragraphs of text. And even with the JS the resulting HTML is still unreadable.

Not defending the OP's practice of (apparently) pushing the rendering cost on each user instead of doing it once themselves in a build task, but: FF72, uBlock Origin in medium mode, no whitelisting => site renders just fine both in normal and in reader view.

I'm not using uBlock Origin and my extension still (after the author added the broken "noscript") shows just a black screen before enabling js.

His "noscript" is also broken as it still doesn't show the darned 5 paragraphs of text. It's that hard for him, as he writes what others should do.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#293

Post by catalogia »

zeta0134 wrote: post #30
jchw wrote: post #17

I hate smart TVs with a burning passion. They accomplish literally the bare minimum to keep people happy and sometimes not even that. Samsung’s Tizen OS is the most genuinely frustrating experience I’ve had with a consumer device outside of printing. Advertisements on my home screen that can’t be disabled, dubious privacy, bugs that require me to reboot my TV, and of course security so bad that they recommend install…

I've long since run with the notion that if you must have Smart TV features, do it with an external box. Last time I checked the Roku devices were decent for this, but there's a bunch of alternatives, and some lovely FOSS stuff (Kodi comes to mind) that is much more privacy focused. The TV itself is a black box of mystery, and does NOT get to go on my network. It doesn't need my wifi password, and I certainly don't w…

I've tried Kodi and whatnot and found those sort of solutions to be confusing, slow, and not particularly confidence inspiring. I taken to just using mpv with --input-ipc-server==... --vo=gpu --gpu-context=drm. It can play anything from my NAS over NFS, or any URL that youtube-dl supports (which is most anything.) It works with youtube, twitch, vimeo, basically anything except netflix or amazon prime. And it doesn't need a new "app" or "plugin" for each, since youtube-dl is a nice piece of software.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#294

Post by godelski »

bagacrap wrote: post #28
jchw wrote: post #17

I hate smart TVs with a burning passion. They accomplish literally the bare minimum to keep people happy and sometimes not even that. Samsung’s Tizen OS is the most genuinely frustrating experience I’ve had with a consumer device outside of printing. Advertisements on my home screen that can’t be disabled, dubious privacy, bugs that require me to reboot my TV, and of course security so bad that they recommend install…

Can't you just remove the smart TV's internet access (no wifi pw, no Ethernet) and treat it as dumb? Then attach a Chromecast or whatever "smart" dongle you think has the best UI.

I remember reading in another of these threads that the TV will try to connect to open networks or neighboring networks that they know the passwords to (like Xfinity). But I can't find any good source through a quick search, so this might just be HN rumors.

Keeping the comment in case anyone does have a source. If no response, let's assume rumor.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#295

Post by justforyou »

crazygringo wrote: post #100

I don't believe I've ever, once, in my entire history of browsing the internet, come across a direct hyperlink to a video file to play in the browser. Virtually universally, videos are embedded in webpages, and occasionally a link is provided that downloads rather than plays a video. So I think this is just a use-case issue: the average user is exceedingly unlikely to ever want to watch a raw video file specified by…

>> There's no philosophical reason why a consumer product should support computational primitives like URL's or files when the use case is rare or non-existent for the target market.

There are plenty of philisophical reasons to support it, you might disagree with them, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#296

Post by Mindwipe »

anderspitman wrote: post #206
Mindwipe wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Sony Android TV would - you could paste the URL into either VLC or the Internet Browser provided with the TV using the Android TV remote app on your phone, as you can paste into that.

Ah so you can just cast whatever is on VLC? That was the first thing I tried with Roku but my TV doesn't support it, and I was disappointed there wasn't any VLC companion app.

Well, VLC does have casting, but here I more meant you can run VLC on the TV itself, and you can enter a URL directly into VLC on the TV itself. While that's a bit clunky, if you use the remote app on a phone you can enter keyboard data and, most importantly, paste keyboard data from your phone into an input field on the TV itself. So no casting would be required.

Kodi would also enable the same use case.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#297

Post by anderspitman »

kbenson wrote: post #177

As of at least 5-6 years ago when I was doing independent development on the Roku there have been apps/channels in the Roku channel store that can accomplish what the author is trying to do, and many for free.[1] Perhaps the author should have looked into the applications that area available? 1: https://channelstore.roku.com/browse/apps

I tried. The point of the post isn't that solutions don't exist. It's that I couldn't find one before I had to give up from time constraints.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#298

Post by lukifer »

dvdgsng wrote: post #223
causality0 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fear that soon we're going to need an open-source alternative to Plex. Increasingly aggressive monetization seems to be creeping into the Plex experience. I keep finding things I don't own and don't want showing up on my home screen. "Suggested movies" and "Suggested podcasts" and the like. You can prune them back but a few months later you find some other garbage you don't want.

> I fear that soon we're going to need an open-source alternative to Plex. Alternative: Emby https://emby.media/ Open-Source Alternative: Jellyfin (fork of Emby v3) https://jellyfin.org/

> no strings attached, no premium licenses or features, and no hidden agendas

Subtle. :) Anyone know the motivation for this fork / dig against Emby, other than the premium licensing?

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#299

Post by egdod »

anderspitman wrote: post #246
Dunedan wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> TL;DR it's my personal site and I'll do what I want with it. It's for fun. That's great and I hope you keep on doing that. That said I have a few comments on your actual implementation. > If you clone my blog[1] (with submodules) you should be able to host it exactly as-is from the repo. Who would want to do that? Somebody interested in running your website is probably somebody also willing to install and run a bui…

>> If you clone my blog[1] (with submodules) you should be able to host it exactly as-is from the repo. > Who would want to do that? Future me. Actually just today in order to publish this post I had to re-learn how I had set up my dependencies, so I switched it to submodules so it won't be a problem again. > However if you want to optimize for subsequent page loads I suggest you do so without compromising your initi…

Static HTML publishing is a solved problem. Don’t reinvent the wheel. Don’t make me run random JS to display plaintext. Don’t justify said random JS with silly whizbang features that no one actually wants.

Re: Please make your products work with URLs

#300

Post by anderspitman »

deanebarker wrote: post #58

I wrote this five years ago, and it actually made from the front page of Hacker News back then. "We Suck At HTTP" >"We have broken HTTP. We’ve done it for years in fits and starts, but apps have completely broken it. HTTP was a good specification which we’ve steadily whittled away." https://gadgetopia.com/post/9236

This is a great post. Thanks for sharing.
Post reply on HN