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

Just use HTML

justfuckingusehtml.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 188 posts

Re: Just use HTML

#111

Post by daxfohl »

obsolete_wagie wrote: post #38

"AI's out here, a gift from the heavens (or at least from Sam Altman's nerd fortress) ready to write your shitty little to-do app in five seconds flat. It can churn out pixel-perfect HTML, debug your fuck-ups, and probably even wipe your ass if you ask nicely. But no, you're still humping your frameworks like they're the last lifeboat on the Titanic." Personal opinion is that AI will reduce the need for higher abstra…

Or it could make abstractions even more important and useful. If it's able to identify common but nuanced patterns across the entirety of github, it could build libraries and frameworks that satisfy them. Then it would fine tune itself based on those tools, and start using those abstractions going forward.

That would improve the consistency and reduce the complexity of software everywhere in a way that gaggles of human engineers across thousands of computers never could.

It would be beneficial for the AI too, as the fewer things it has to keep track of, the more efficiently and accurately it will be able to generate correct applications on top of it. This would cut costs, hallucinations, and allow smaller local models to perform better.

Re: Just use HTML

#113

Post by untrust »

cheschire wrote: post #23

I’m not entirely sure this form of satire lands the same way it used to now that screaming and insults are considered a normal form of discourse, especially in TV politics.

This form of banter reminds me of Maddox from the early 2000s, which funnily enough is still active at https://maddox.xmission.com/

I agree its relatively played out at this point. Really this page is just a showcase of HTML features for web developers who don't have much experience with HTML, and I think the insulting attitude and comedic approach may hold reader's interest than a more dry technical presentation of the content.

Re: Just use HTML

#114

Post by reconnecting »

uallo wrote: post #107
reconnecting wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, as the webpage has a viewport meta tag. May I ask what your phone model is?

This sets the width to a mininum of 800px, no matter what phone model or browser you use. I'm a little confused how you can can claim this "Works well on any device" when apparently it was not tested on a phone. I, too, closed the tab before I even had a chance to learn about your product. Update: Not OP, but I'm on a Pixel 8a with Firefox.

It has been tested and works well on various devices, including phones, which is why I’m kindly asking for your exact device model.

Re: Just use HTML

#116

Post by garylkz »

obsolete_wagie wrote: post #100
woodrowbarlow wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm not sure i agree. maybe if you're "vibe-coding", but not if you're using AI as an assistant. a good abstraction makes it hard to write bugs, so telling AI to use a certain library (which i know to be high quality) is a good way to constrain the types of bugs i have to look for when reviewing the code.

once AI reaches a certain level of accuracy, it will seem foolish to make it use abstractions built for humans

and once the "accurate" AI accidentally wrote bugs, it will seem even more foolish for humans to debug the binaries built by AI.

Re: Just use HTML

#117

Post by reconnecting »

Mashimo wrote: post #105
reconnecting wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The short answer: Because anyone can do this using in-line or in-file CSS. The long answer: Technologies are a blend of humans and machines. Typing HTML code by yourself, especially in 2025, gives another level of meaning and human touch. It's more like modern art in some way.

Might be art, might be fun. But you also claimed it's easy to update. But now you have to write every time you create another one of those elements. And if you want to change the font you would need to search and replace in different .html files. It does not seem easy to update.

Easy to update means you only need a text editor and source code to maintain it.

Regarding the effort to write `` (I'm just typing this again), it's fairly easy, and taking into account the meaning of the text inside those tags, it is worth spending the time for typing.

Re: Just use HTML

#118

Post by [deleted] »

untrust wrote: post #113
cheschire wrote: post #23

I’m not entirely sure this form of satire lands the same way it used to now that screaming and insults are considered a normal form of discourse, especially in TV politics.

This form of banter reminds me of Maddox from the early 2000s, which funnily enough is still active at https://maddox.xmission.com/ I agree its relatively played out at this point. Really this page is just a showcase of HTML features for web developers who don't have much experience with HTML, and I think the insulting attitude and comedic approach may hold reader's interest than a more dry technical presentation of…

[deleted]

Re: Just use HTML

#119

Post by xnorswap »

throwanem wrote: post #98
xnorswap wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just always show it?

You can configure that as a default in Safari, and manually opt sites out to allow them to render normally; I use the setting on iOS and have for years. I think Firefox requires an extension (vendoring Readability.js) to behave similarly, since it doesn't expose its built-in version even to extension developers. (I don't think that's even part of the manifest spec.) I've never wanted the behavior on a desktop browser…

I'm not asking for default loading sites into readability mode, just that the button to load a site in readability mode isn't arbitrarily hidden.

I don't understand how hiding a button is "giving users control". Wouldn't it be under more control of the user to always have the button to load in reader mode available?

Re: Just use HTML

#120

Post by reconnecting »

uallo wrote: post #107
reconnecting wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, as the webpage has a viewport meta tag. May I ask what your phone model is?

This sets the width to a mininum of 800px, no matter what phone model or browser you use. I'm a little confused how you can can claim this "Works well on any device" when apparently it was not tested on a phone. I, too, closed the tab before I even had a chance to learn about your product. Update: Not OP, but I'm on a Pixel 8a with Firefox.

This is a software website, and we don't expect many visitors from mobile devices. However, I'll check if this issue can be resolved without using CSS.

Thanks for letting me know.

Post reply on HN