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

Show HN: Whosfiring

whosfiring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 187 posts

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#131

Post by sergiotapia »

codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

This type of comment was already popular 4 years ago. The web changed back then, it changed even more now. Just enable JS.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#132

Post by noxToken »

codedokode wrote: post #55
Swizec wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm someone who builds a lot of SPAs for things that really don't need to be SPAs. The ability to host on gh-pages and to not implement a backend at all seals the deal for me. That said, I try to load a static version of the compiled result as part of the skeleton HTML. Even if it gets overwritten by the SPA afterwards, it makes things look faster.

Storing and processing data locally in a user's browser without using server API actually can be a valid reason to build a client-side application. But they just use one megabyte of JS code to implement client-side rendering for JSON data received from API. Serving a 10 Kb HTML page is obviously a better solution. I see no single benefit from using complicated JS framework here.

Experience?

Everyone is talking about X, but I've never used it. Perhaps I can build something simple just to dip my toe into X.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#133

Post by quickben »

JasonSage wrote: post #98
codedokode wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pages load faster with JS disabled, show less advertisement and no popups. Browser processes take less memory. Social network tracking scripts (usually disguised as share buttons) do not work. Annoying fixed headers, footers and sidebar usually don't work without JS too. I got used to this comfortable way of browsing the web and seeing more sites that don't work without JS doesn't make me happy.

So you're in a memory-constrained environment, you can't be bothered to block social network tracking scripts by another means (some of those still load as pixels so you haven't gotten rid of them entirely), you don't like fixed headers, footers, or sidebars, and you're taking it all out on this site because the fastest way they could bang out their little idea did not include server-side rendering in the initial ite…

But the website is down right not. Everything is resource constrained environment. With exposure to larger traffic hitting various services comes experience to not do things like that. Somebody had to keep the world running and some of us do care for proper engineering approaches.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#134

Post by hluska »

codedokode wrote: post #62
mamadrood wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That meta configuration looks like ember.js

I looked at Ember documentation and saw a tutorial on building a rental site [1] that could be easily implemented without Ember. They should have chosen a better example that would show clear benefints from using complicated JS framework otherwise it just looks like over-engineered solution for a simple problem. Also Ember documentation doesn't give any reasoning why (or when) one should or should not use their frame…

I've read several of your comments on this thread and, while you do make some good points, you are extremely condescending. So condescending that it is almost impossible for me to read an entire one of your comments.

In the wild, yeah, js failovers are a good idea. But this is a show HN...the author had no idea if it would even work and just wanted to get something out. Instead of substantive comments designed to help the author build a better application, you instead choose to go on a failover holy war??? That's not only weak, it's uninteresting and absolutely not helpful.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#135

Post by mitchty »

codedokode wrote: post #84
tokenizerrr wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of webassembly, and I'm sure that codedokode would explode if s/he were to notice that a website such as this was written using it. It wouldn't run without JavaScript being enabled, for one.

In future publishers will probably use web assembly for DRM, for example, to render decrypted article text on a canvas so that it cannot be copied, zoomed, read aloud or viewed without advertisement and annoying popups. Maybe you will change your mind about Javascript then.

You jest, but in one of the discussions for EME, that exact case was brought up.

Only they wanted to drm javascript sent to the browser. We got rid of Flash only to see a new hydra head emerge. People clamoring for javascript applications should be careful what they wish for. They just might get it.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#136

Post by rasz_pl »

MattBearman wrote: post #49
codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

Fair comment that this site doesn't look like it needs a JS framework, but I think it's a little unfair to assume the dev doesn't know about HTML or server side languages. It's more likely that the OP uses this JS framework a lot and knows it well, so it was quicker for them to build it this way.

I would guess said dev made this website because he got fired, and looking at the code you start to understand why.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#137

Post by lucideer »

beagle3 wrote: post #76
romanovcode wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I totally agree about this site, it's stupid to disregard JS as a whole. Imagine websites like FB without JS - it would be horrible.

You don't have to imagine, you can try: https://mbasic.facebook.com/ - a lot of people prefer it to the standard monstrosity.

The great thing about this is that it's paginated. You can literally "scroll infinitely" through feeds without creating a ridiculous scroll offset and filling up browser memory (or losing Ctrl-F functionality due to Facebook's complex memory-saving exercises)

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#138

Post by jsjohnst »

iodbh wrote: post #43
jbpetersen wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make an app called "As Seen On HN", post about it, then the cycle will be complete and we can go back to the regular smorgasbord of things that get posted here. Taken a step further, a webapp that tracks businesses that emerge from different online communities would be super useful for improving commercial targeting of social media, and with a delay on content updates baked in for free users could probably find a goo…

I love the way you turned this around : from frustration to an action course. Making me consider doing what i was criticizing moments ago. kudos.

Please don't build a needlessly bloated SPA obviously thrown together without much thought just so you can say "first" and post it on HN. If you care enough to do it, you should care enough to make it not suck. :)

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#139

Post by codedokode »

JasonSage wrote: post #98
codedokode wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pages load faster with JS disabled, show less advertisement and no popups. Browser processes take less memory. Social network tracking scripts (usually disguised as share buttons) do not work. Annoying fixed headers, footers and sidebar usually don't work without JS too. I got used to this comfortable way of browsing the web and seeing more sites that don't work without JS doesn't make me happy.

So you're in a memory-constrained environment, you can't be bothered to block social network tracking scripts by another means (some of those still load as pixels so you haven't gotten rid of them entirely), you don't like fixed headers, footers, or sidebars, and you're taking it all out on this site because the fastest way they could bang out their little idea did not include server-side rendering in the initial ite…

I have a feeling that with Chrome any environment gets memory-constrained pretty fast. I have 3 (three) gigabytes of RAM (that can hold over 3 billion bytes inside) available to OS, is that not enough?

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#140

Post by pragone »

codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

I was wondering why its just a blank, white page when i view it on my ipad. Now i know
Post reply on HN