11–20 of 218 posts
I love this, but also wonder how this plays out when tooling designed to de-enshittify is owned by a YC startup that must have some sort of future exit.
I love this, but also wonder how this plays out when tooling designed to de-enshittify is owned by a YC startup that must have some sort of future exit.
https://www.tweeks.io/ "refused to connect", sayeth Chrome. Serious question to Tweekers: What is your site built with that an HN traffic bump instantly melts it?
Their page itself looks classic v0/ai generated, that yellow/orange warning box, plus the general shadows/borders screams LLM slop etc. Is it too hard these days to spend 30 minutes to think about UI/user experience? I actually like the idea, not sure about monetization. It also requires access to all the data?? And it's not even open source.
To be fair, we're not sure about monetization either :) We just had a lot of fun building it and have enjoyed seeing what people make with it.
> It also requires access to all the data??
Think of us like Tampermonkey/some other userscript manager. The scripts you run have to go through our script engine. That means that any data/permission your script needs access to, our script needs access to. We do try to make the scripting transparent. If you're familiar with the Greasemonkey API, we show you which permissions a given script requests (e.g. here https://www.tweeks.io/share/script/d856f07a2cb843c5bfa1b455, requires GM_addStyle)
Chrome only, that’s too bad
I agree. I'm a firefox guy myself and it's been painful shifting my workload to chrome for testing + developing this. The extension has a lot of browser engine complexity (and unfortunately us non-chromium folks seem to be a dying breed) so I haven't been able to justify implementing cross-browser support yet. Hopefully soon!
Web extensions API is emerging and a lot of it is already somewhat standardized https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web...
Just some different fields in the manifest, and there are specifics that work completely different or are not available (for example favicons).
I have tried Chrome -> Firefox before and it was surprisingly easy. Safari is more difficult in my experience, it's missing complete API's like the bookmarks one.
Is this another closed-source extension that casually requests access to (all) 'Website content'? Why do these hit the HN home page so often?
> Think of us like Tampermonkey/some other userscript manager. The scripts you run have to go through our script engine. That means that any data/permission your script needs access to, our extension needs to have.
> We do try to make the scripting transparent. If you're familiar with the Greasemonkey API, we show you which permissions a given script requests (e.g. here https://www.tweeks.io/share/script/d856f07a2cb843c5bfa1b455, requires GM_addStyle)
So the permissions are either to 1) enable you to run scripts that can do many powerful things or 2) allow us to capture your active tab content if and only if you make a generation request (no passive logging).
https://www.tweeks.io/ "refused to connect", sayeth Chrome. Serious question to Tweekers: What is your site built with that an HN traffic bump instantly melts it?
uh oh... We do have a bunch of gifs + images on the page that are poorly optimized, but that shouldn't matter at this scale. I haven't been able to see "refused to connect" on my end. Still happening for you?
[flagged]
And if you don't want to use AI and just want to install other's scripts (with no sign up required), that is also totally valid and supported