221–230 of 263 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever done anything wrt search? What you ask is basically mind reading.
Google made it work from 1999~2006 before SEO was a thing.
(Not defending kagi necessarily, I've never tried it, no opinion on how it fares on today's Internet but comparing it to how 1999 Google did on the 1999 internet is absurd)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Skeuomorphism didn't fail. It feel out of fashion with designers. We should distinguish between skeuomorphic interaction design and skeuomorphic iconography. Attempts at skeuomorphic interaction design did fail badly, I'll give you that. Document readers that expect you to turn the page by pulling at the edge of the page, mimicking a page turn in a physical book, they're terrible. But skeuomorphic iconography works:…
> Sure, a lot of people have never seen the floppy disk that the traditional Save icon is based on, making the icon less intuitive now than when it was designed. But what would you replace it with? Any alternative you might suggest is just going to be less recognisable. Obviously you replace it with the three stacked cylinders that symbolize a hard drive. ;D
I had to give up when the first example of a "bug" that the author could see, which others are blind to, was search results. "In some cases, people sent me their actual search results. In every such case, the search results did not contain a good result that I could see" Software that does not meet expectations, especially in a field like search, which is basically a long running war between SEO and search engines, i…
> Software that does not meet expectations, especially in a field like search, which is basically a long running war between SEO and search engines, is not a 'bug'. While bug has various definitions, not meeting reasonable expectations is common to all. > That's like saying there is 'bug blindness' in the publishing industry because when I pick up a random book, it sucks No, because there's no reasonable expectation…
Just like when a do a search and the results aren't relevant
Obviously this means both books and web searches are useless
> so the non-LLM options here are some posts that are much sloppier than my normal posts (in a human slop kind of way), or almost no posts. I'm a little confused, but as far as I understand this is a LLM-written post, isn't it? That would explain the very big length of it. Or maybe I've understood things wrong, in which case my excuses to the writer (which, in that case, could reasonably be called a writer).
The author uses LLMs for research but writes the articles by hand: "with LLMs, it's so much easier to look at data and figure things out, but the time it takes to write something up hasn't fundamentally changed"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They’re smart enough I worked at a small company that had a policy of putting devs on front-line support in a rotation, both because it was too small to have dedicated support staff and because the owners wanted devs to understand how users interacted with the system better. I can assure you that while some users merely think differently than devs, there is cohort of users who are absolutely not smart enough. It's…
There's a selection effect here in that smart-enough users won't bother contacting support if they work around an issue on their own, or if something is actually a non-issue for 99%+ of the user base. The ratio of usage and support contacts can be monitored. I fear a lot of devs develop unproductive mental models of the user purely from a minority sample.
CS has been trained to close conversations, not to resolve issues.
I’ve reported critical issues with my bank where the accounting was broken, money was missing, transfers were inconsistent. Customer service loves to explain “well that’s just how the system works”.
Sorry no, the system has failed. It’s an accounting system, and by definition needs to be accurate, or at least report an error if it can’t remain consistent.
The same standards that would fail an interview are completely ignored for paying customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A developer sees an application as a toolkit to help them solve a problem. The more flexibility and power, the better it is. They’ve become comfortable with complex tools on the computer, over the years, because they enjoy learning about and using computers. A nontechnical end user generally isn’t interested in operating a toolkit— they want to solve their problem, and the application claims to do that. The easier it…
Respectfully, I ain't reading all that with this opener. UX failed
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were 2 typos in that sentence (the one I didn’t mention is “fully” instead of “full”). Talking about intelligence in such a sloppy manner sounded like a joke to me.
Ah sry - phone typing
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had this same discussion on another HN thread a while back. I prefer lines to run as long as possible; I find it difficult/distracting to move my eyes to the beginning of the next line every few seconds. I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I have to believe I'm not the only one out there who feels this way. Rather than having the website author wrap lines at a width that works for the average user or use case (which…
Making the browser windows narrow is a bad suggestion. Because most websites have some sort of navigation bar on the left and another bar on the right, so we need a wide enough window to get enough of the main text (width). There are very few websites without those columns.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had this same discussion on another HN thread a while back. I prefer lines to run as long as possible; I find it difficult/distracting to move my eyes to the beginning of the next line every few seconds. I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I have to believe I'm not the only one out there who feels this way. Rather than having the website author wrap lines at a width that works for the average user or use case (which…
> I find it difficult/distracting to move my eyes to the beginning of the next line every few seconds. You must find it difficult to read books, magazines, newspapers, as all of them have short lines
In my experience, books are mostly OK, as long as they don't split up the text in columns. Magazines and newspapers often do have columns that are much narrower than I would like.