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

191–200 of 249 posts

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#191

Post by fctorial »

danShumway wrote: post #159
fctorial wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I beg to differ. The first website looks horrible on widescreen displays. A lot of old websites follow the style of first website and their readability could be improved 10 times by adding 10 lines of CSS.

> The first website looks horrible on widescreen displays But you were able to read it, right? You didn't have to go find a separate computer to use to figure out what it was saying. The text didn't get cut off when you resized your browser window. > The first website looks horrible I mean, yes? I'm not sure what you're saying by this though. Nobody (at least nobody worth taking seriously) is telling you that you sho…

The problem is that people do build sites that look like the first website:

https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/multiboot/multiboot...

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#192

Post by kuschku »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #177
kuschku wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> WHY. WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS. Do you like 400 nits of #ffffff right into your eyeballs? No? Me neither. The alternative is absolute darkness with extremely bright text, which in turn makes it unreadable (if you have astigmatism as I do) and literally causes pain due to the high contrast. Nothing in nature has such an extreme contrast. The only reason anyone would ever use full contrast is if they have a shitty 6-bit…

> Do you like 400 nits of #ffffff right into your eyeballs? If you don't like what your display does, tweak its settings to do what you like.

I like what my display does: it displays colors perfectly accurately, and I've got 3 monitors, all color profiled, and all with perfectly matching colors as result.

Colors are standardized and have a very specific meaning.

I just dislike the colors these website authors have chosen, often without knowing what they're choosing, as their monitors often distort the colors and show something wrong.

None of this can be solved until we've got widespread color managed workflows and tonemapping on the web.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#193

Post by throwaway823882 »

"What I’m saying is that it’s so, so simple to make sites easier to read."

If it was so simple, wouldn't everyone be doing it already?

"Websites are broken by default—they are functional, high-performing, and accessible, but they’re also fucking ugly. You and all the other web designers out there need to make them not total shit."

Or we could leave them total shit, and it would probably continue to work just fine. Focus on meeting your minimum requirements first, then add improvements over time.

Yes, it should be simpler, and we should make it easier for people to make things "work right" and "not be total shit". But until then, just make a shitty webpage and get on with life.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#194

Post by 12ian34 »

kempbellt wrote: post #32

"Fuck" is used here almost as frequently as it is in the book, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck I made it about two pages into that book before I stopped giving a fuck about reading it. I made it to the first headline before I stop giving a fuck about reading this website. If that was the goal, nailed it. Swearing for effect can work sometimes, but YMMV. It lost me in this case.

Stopped giving a fuck about reading this comment after two occurrences of the word "fuck".

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#195

Post by berniemadoff69 »

coldtea wrote: post #152
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 want to hecking scream. Overreacting much? > 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…

'a perfecter motherfucking site' will 'improve' this site adding 10 more tiny CSS lines

'the most perfectest motherfucking site' will improve that site by adding just 6 teeny tiny more CSS lines and maybe like the most little tiny bit of javascript.

'the absolute final most perfectest motherfucking site'.. will improve THAT site, and the feature creep goes on.

they're all built off of the concept of the original, so it makes sense to 'care' about the 'point' of the original website. the only sacred ultimate truth was that nice things are possible with HTML only. i disagree that this particular website offers any improvement.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#196

Post by GoblinSlayer »

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…

Yep, http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ gets it right: uses your preferences. Doing anything else are various forms of failure.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#197

Post by GoblinSlayer »

lhorie wrote: post #170
GoblinSlayer wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, that article is about smartphones. Second, even on smartphones, logical or physical, pixels are not related to text, they are related to the screen resolution.

Not sure what argument you're trying to make; can you clarify? This article is also partially about smartphones (dark mode, responsiveness, etc). Back when `em` was not a thing yet, text was measured in `px`, where 16px was considered to be the "default" size for readability purposes (and `em` sizes are a function of a base value in `px`). Saying that pixels are unrelated to text isn't really accurate, since text obv…

If the font size is different, em width adapts to that, px width doesn't. Text occupies space in pixels, but not vice versa.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#198

Post by danShumway »

fctorial wrote: post #191
danShumway wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The first website looks horrible on widescreen displays But you were able to read it, right? You didn't have to go find a separate computer to use to figure out what it was saying. The text didn't get cut off when you resized your browser window. > The first website looks horrible I mean, yes? I'm not sure what you're saying by this though. Nobody (at least nobody worth taking seriously) is telling you that you sho…

The problem is that people do build sites that look like the first website: https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/multiboot/multiboot...

Fair, but using GNU's work as an example almost feels like cheating in a weird way ;).

GNU is not building a hard-core minimalist website, they do include CSS on their page -- in fact they include more of it than this website does. So the problem isn't that GNU is too minimal or that they've sworn off of CSS, the problem is that modern GNU increasingly doesn't seem to know how to design anything at all when it comes to UX, and that there's probably somebody somewhere on their chain of authority for this page seriously arguing that line-wrapping is bad design or some other nonsense.

But I don't know. To the extent that GNU's design aesthetics actually represent a web design trend, then I do concede that it's a bad trend, and everybody who's following it should add `body { max-width: 40em; margin: auto; }` to the top of their CSS files.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#199

Post by kuschku »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #196
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…

Yep, http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ gets it right: uses your preferences. Doing anything else are various forms of failure.

perfectmotherfuckingwebsite does it right: enough contrast that everyone can read it, not too much to be painful.

motherfuckingwebsite does it right, too: follow the preferences (which in my case is almost exactly the same as the perfectmotherfuckingwebsite)

The worst are websites with far too little or far too much contrast that don't even follow preferences. At work I've had to repeatedly go against designers wishes refusing to implement their design and saying: I'll implement you anything within of 4.5:1 to 10:1 contrast ratio. But I won't go below that (no, I can't make the text 10px tall in #c0c0c0 on #f0f0f0) nor above that.

Re: Perfect Motherfucking Website

#200

Post by [deleted] »

542458 wrote: post #44
progval wrote: post #8

> And did you let the browser choose the font? Don’t make me read such text with Times New Roman. I don't understand this attitude. If you don't like Times New Roman, why don't you change your browser's default font? What I don't like is when websites tell my browser to use a different font or different colors than the ones I configured. (Off-topic, but something that really annoys me is websites that make text in ve…

Most websites are not designed for you, the 0.5% of users who are running some personalized style sheet override. They’re designed for the other 99.5% of people who don’t even realize that’s possible.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN