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

Perfect Motherfucking Website

perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 249 posts

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#141

Post by npsimons »

danShumway wrote: post #56

I want to hecking scream. The point of the original website in this chain was not that you couldn't do media queries, or that all of your designs had to be unstyled. It was a gosh-darned satire that showed that even if you did literally nothing , your website would still be responsive and readable and load fast. The fact that it did nothing, that it was just a completely unstyled HTML page was the reason that the jok…

I felt like the original was definitely taking the piss from websites that were 90% static textual content, but won't even load without Javascript. The sort of sites in search of a solution to a problem that does not exist.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#142

Post by dathinab »

Veen wrote: post #57
rkangel wrote: post #7

From " http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ " which is one up the chain: > A little less contrast WHY. WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS. To give this person credit they have at least chosen some sensible values, rather than gone with something that was just about enough on an expensive graphic designer high-contrast monitor and then not tested it on anything else. Leaving the rest of us squinting to try and read text or manua…

> WHY. WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS Because designers are taught that too much contrast causes eye strain. They're advised against putting pure black text on bright white backgrounds. https://www.wired.com/2016/10/how-the-web-became-unreadable/

But to little contrast causes so much more eyestrain, and can't be fixed by changing your screens brightness.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#143

Post by dspillett »

not2b wrote: post #77
camgunz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fundamental design principle is that full black is unnatural. It's like, point three on "I don't know anything about design, give me a quick list" articles. And it's pretty true, frankly. Making text a little more navy or gray makes a big difference. Sure people have eyesight issues and not everyone has a great monitor, but most people prefer it this way.

Slightly greyer is OK, but if you give up most the contrast and use a small font, a large fraction of the population will find your site hard to read. There are way too many low-contrast web sites out there.

I have sometimes used slightly grey and used "full" black for small emphasis (when the bold version available for the font in use is a just too much or you want a level in between). On pages where other colours are used for highlighting things (links, call-outs, warnings, ...) it can also help them not look a bit more subtle than you want agaist the hard black.

You have to be very careful not to rely on it though: as you mention lighting and protection conditions or just plain bad monitors can kill the more subtle difference completely. And, more importantly, those with sight deficiencies might miss it even in ideal circumstances.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#144

Post by SamuelAdams »

bob1029 wrote: post #66
hardwaregeek wrote: post #42

The overly curse happy programmer speak is so very stale. I'm not offended or anything but it's just not that great. It doesn't make the content more interesting. It doesn't make the author seem any cooler. It's just meh. It reminds me of Epic Meal Time; a facade of coolness based on cursing, alcohol and over the top food. I love that instead of this style we're getting a new generation of programmers who are genuine…

There is always a balance with these things. I try to be careful to use profanity as a tool rather than a literary crutch. If you only use a phrase like "fucking bullshit" once across an entire blog post or book, you will find it has far greater impact on the reader. They will think "wow out of 400 pages of polite discourse, this is the one thing the author would really like to highlight as adverse".

Agreed, this is what I liked about the book “The Martian”. The protagonist only curses a couple times in the book and they really carry weight given the circumstances.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#145

Post by CivBase »

lxe wrote: post #74

I built an antithesis to this: https://lxe.github.io/everywebsite/

> Also you have to click "I Agree"

No thanks. My preferred method for removing cookie banners is to just delete the node from the DOM. It works 99% of the time and I don't have to agree to anything. I suspect it's only a matter of time until someone makes uBlock Origin for cookie banners instead of ads.

EDIT: Nevermind. It's already part of uBlock Origin.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#146

Post by JackFr »

redisman wrote: post #101
hardwaregeek wrote: post #42

The overly curse happy programmer speak is so very stale. I'm not offended or anything but it's just not that great. It doesn't make the content more interesting. It doesn't make the author seem any cooler. It's just meh. It reminds me of Epic Meal Time; a facade of coolness based on cursing, alcohol and over the top food. I love that instead of this style we're getting a new generation of programmers who are genuine…

It’s so dated. Like early 2000s edgy Maddox et al. I still swear a lot but this “style” is obnoxious

Reminded me of Zed Shaw.

Feel the same way about the style.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#147

Post by perennate »

danShumway wrote: post #56

I want to hecking scream. The point of the original website in this chain was not that you couldn't do media queries, or that all of your designs had to be unstyled. It was a gosh-darned satire that showed that even if you did literally nothing , your website would still be responsive and readable and load fast. The fact that it did nothing, that it was just a completely unstyled HTML page was the reason that the jok…

I agree that they might be missing the point, but I also feel that adding a one or two extra CSS lines is really needed to turn something that is very unpleasant to read (the biggest problem being the unlimited width) into something that is really basically perfect. Like, this one is actually pretty much perfect, while the original makes me want to manually add a max-width from the inspector.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#148

Post by corobo »

juped wrote: post #16

No, your motherfucking website is not improved by jamming your pet design theories into it. This is why all these spinoffs are terrible, with the possible exception of https://bestmotherfucking.website/ which removed things from a different spinoff. The low contrast meme in web design is especially harmful.

I'm properly on board with getting rid of light grey on white but this is a little much. I don't even have that great a monitor and this is kinda burning my eyes out.

Take the background to a #111 and the text to a #ddd and you've hit my personal perfection

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#149

Post by kuschku »

dathinab wrote: post #136
kuschku wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a good monitor, the color contrast between #ffffff and #000000 is far beyond the contrast possible in nature. No reflective material can reach those colors or that contrast. That color contrast is perfect for a game, a movie or an image. But you don't want the feeling of something as bright as looking into the fucking sun mixed with the darkness of the deepest starless night. That's just painful, both in light mod…

> If you use a color-calibrated Over 99% of users don't, most phones are not high end and as such don't have such a screen. > feeling of something as bright as looking into the fucking sun Again, not a experience around 99% of internet users can follow, their devices don't get that bright, especially not on a per-pixel basis. Also most people use devices in rooms with varying degrees of natural sunlight showing in. A…

> And if whites are to bright then it's because my screen is wrongly setup for my eyes/usage. A perfect color calibrated screen is ironically often not a perfectly setup screen for normal usage.

There are very specific definitions for colors, and what they mean.

#000000 means 0.1 nits, #ffffff means 100 nits. That's standardized and specified.

The screen can't be wrong if it correctly matches the standard. If real-world content doesn't obey the standard, the content is wrong, not the standard.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#150

Post by arthur2e5 »

kuschku wrote: post #90
munchbunny wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes I know the art theory stuff about never using black because it doesn't appear naturally. I think the underlying reasons for that are underappreciated. When you pick #000000 for your text color, people won't see it as pure black anyway. Imperfections in your screen's backlighting aside, your screen reflects the ambient lighting, or, if you're outdoors and pointed the wrong direction on a sunny day, your screen r…

On a good monitor, the color contrast between #ffffff and #000000 is far beyond the contrast possible in nature. No reflective material can reach those colors or that contrast. That color contrast is perfect for a game, a movie or an image. But you don't want the feeling of something as bright as looking into the fucking sun mixed with the darkness of the deepest starless night. That's just painful, both in light mod…

Making sRGB 1000 nits is extremely bad colorimetry. sRGB is supposed to go with 80 nits in its original definition, and being an order of magnitude off indicates something very wrong with your system's concept of what "standard dynamic range" entails.
Post reply on HN