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

We analyzed 425k favicons

iconmap.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 131 posts

Re: We analyzed 425k favicons

#121

Post by pc86 »

jiggawatts wrote: post #59
shuntress wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "had their nephew throw up a wordpress site instead of hiring a professional" The web is supposed to be accessible to everyone. This type of "blame the victim" attitude is a poor way to handle criminal activity.

If they had used static content, it would remain 100% accessible to them, but also vastly more secure. Dynamic content generation on the fly for a blog is unnecessary complexity that invites attacks.

Static content is definitively not as accessible to the typical person asking their nephew to put up a WP blog on shared GoDaddy hosting.

Re: We analyzed 425k favicons

#122

Post by alextheparrot »

mrkramer wrote: post #119
1cvmask wrote: post #49

The favicon visualization brought memories of the million dollar homepage. I suppose it was precursor of NFTs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/

>The favicon visualization brought memories of the million dollar homepage. I suppose it was precursor of NFTs. It was not; NFTs are digital certificates saying that you own certain digital content on the other hand The Million Dollar Homepage was basically selling ad space on the website. You can argue you could buy part of the website(digital space) and therefore you own the part of the website but in reality you w…

Is it really necessary that we assume a precursor must be a strict equality in all dimensions aside time?

Re: We analyzed 425k favicons

#123

Post by jiggunjer »

Conlectus wrote: post #28
ryan29 wrote: post #17

> In fact, I recommend that browsers ignore these hints because they are wrong much of the time. I don't agree. That's the kind of coddling that encourages incompetence. Instead of compensating for others' mistakes, just let their stuff break. I wonder if Safai on iOS ignores the hints. When I tested, I was surprised to see that pressing the share icon, which holds the option for `Add to Home Screen`, would cause a d…

A problem with this is that when a website breaks in one browser, but works in another, I imagine most people's reaction would be to blame the browser. This leads to a kind of race-to-the-bottom for browser compatibility. See for example the history of User-Agent strings.

depends on the error message? Maybe instead of failing, give an annoying prompt to offer a workaround.

Re: We analyzed 425k favicons

#124

Post by mrkramer »

alextheparrot wrote: post #122
mrkramer wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The favicon visualization brought memories of the million dollar homepage. I suppose it was precursor of NFTs. It was not; NFTs are digital certificates saying that you own certain digital content on the other hand The Million Dollar Homepage was basically selling ad space on the website. You can argue you could buy part of the website(digital space) and therefore you own the part of the website but in reality you w…

Is it really necessary that we assume a precursor must be a strict equality in all dimensions aside time?

No but because of the all aforementioned reasons they are of minimal similarity.

Re: We analyzed 425k favicons

#125

Post by duckmysick »

bugmen0t wrote: post #103

> We did a hacky image analysis with ImageMagick to survey favicon colors. Here is the dominant color breakdown across our favicons. This isn’t very accurate, unfortunately. I suspect that many multicolored favicons are getting lumped in with purple. Writing or reviewing a sentence like this should make you reconsider. Either do the right analysis or remove this from your article. But when you say your analysis is pr…

Imperfect analysis with known limitations still has value. We can build upon it and improve. I'd rather have it out in the open than omitted.

Re: We analyzed 425k favicons

#126

Post by mixmastamyk »

deathanatos wrote: post #95
mixmastamyk wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will it look good on a browser tab? Seems like the res would be too low.

It's a vector graphic; its resolution is whatever you render it at. "S" as in, "Scalable". Sure, there is some nuance in that you wouldn't want some fine detail to get lost at the displayed size, but presumably you know you're making a favicon when you do so. Or, you're the NFL & you're going to supply a 4 megapixel image IDK.

Not at very low resolutions, <= 32 px. See sibling comment.
Post reply on HN