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

Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

bugzilla.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 176 posts

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#151

Post by afiori »

stemlord wrote: post #141
sanderjd wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree to disagree :) The "human readable" is better at a glance, and timestamps are better when I care about the specifics. > People would more likely want to copy the actual date than the human readable delta. I agree that this is true when copying, but text is primarily for reading, not copying.

I find dates more readable as an ordered list of numbers. A thread can be quickly scrolled down through while seeing >2001 then eventually >2024 at the same x-position on the page. Same goes with the month then day. Anyway, in the context of a comment/activity thread, how long ago from today that an entry was tends to be less important than the age of the comment relative to the other comments.

If all the comments are 1 year ago then it is not very informative on the relative order

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#152

Post by afiori »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #97
tomovo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Xenoamorphous 4 minutes ago", got it. Edit: 5 minutes ago.

Ha! Maybe, maybe for something happening in the past day or so it’s ok, esp. due to timezone conversion confusion. But for anything older than that, just show me the date!

Personally it is more about avoiding big relative errors: 1 month ago can be between 10 and 45 days ago (maybe, nobody knows how the rounding works). 8 months ago is less of problem

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#153

Post by ayewo »

jraph wrote: post #123
ayewo wrote: post #69

On a related note, starting today, I noticed that x.com (fka Twitter.com) is no longer working in Firefox. I get the following error: > Something went wrong, but don’t fret — let’s give it another shot. > Firefox’s Enhanced Tracking Protection (Strict Mode) is known to cause issues on x.com

Only very remotely related if you squint hard enough though, no? (sorry for sounding a bit rude, not my intention, I would like to read friendly but I can't find a nice way to point this out and still want to do it - it's just that I wouldn't find it very enjoyable if all HNers started commenting about general / random issues they encountered on some product P in a submission about a specific/historical issue in P -…

Well, x.com was working completely fine on my version of Firefox until yesterday so it’s an intentional breakage for Firefox users.

My comment was more of a PSA to other Firefox users who are likely the ones also reading about the bug fix here, so it’s definitely on-topic. I guess you disagree which is fine.

If they don’t fix it, I have to either switch to a different browser or device (mobile) to visit x.com.

The good news is I’ll spend less time there.

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#154

Post by pyb »

ayewo wrote: post #69

On a related note, starting today, I noticed that x.com (fka Twitter.com) is no longer working in Firefox. I get the following error: > Something went wrong, but don’t fret — let’s give it another shot. > Firefox’s Enhanced Tracking Protection (Strict Mode) is known to cause issues on x.com

Same here.

This also happened about a week ago, but was reverted/fixed within a few hours. So, I'm hoping Twitter will fix this.

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#155

Post by beeboobaa3 »

chungy wrote: post #143
beeboobaa3 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's weird about the most common date format in the world, dd-mm-yyyy?

I've never encountered that particular format before, and based on that, I'll question the claim of "most common", but even still, I could understand what was meant.

Have you ever left the united states?

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#156

Post by beeboobaa3 »

mjevans wrote: post #103
beeboobaa3 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's weird about the most common date format in the world, dd-mm-yyyy?

ISO8061 or RFC3339 are the only correct date formats; though if for some forsaken reason your ledger starts accounts on the right hand page and treats the left as part of a prior record, then placing the least frequently changing part of the date to the edge of the page is good as a primitive index. https://xkcd.com/1179/ https://ijmacd.github.io/rfc3339-iso8601/ https://stackoverflow.com/questions/522251/whats-the-d…

Sure, for data-interchange. Good luck convincing normies.

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#157

Post by sanderjd »

Vegenoid wrote: post #128
sanderjd wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but I think the solutions work fine; tap, hard press, whatever. Don't get me wrong, I share the annoyance with interfaces where I have no way to find the actual timestamp. It's better to only have a timestamp than to only have the "human readable" version with no way to get the timestamp. But (in my opinion) the best is to have the human readable version, with a way to get at the timestamp.

I think the problem is that the mechanism to trigger mouse-hover is not clear on a touchscreen - there are several different ways that need to be remembered and tried, as evidenced by your comment.

Yes, but I think the venn diagram of people who really want to see a timestamp and people who are willing and able try a few different things to find it is pretty close to being a circle.

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#158

Post by latexr »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #79
latexr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hover over the date to see the exact day and time.

In Outlook for Mac if I hover "Yesterday" in the tooltip I get... "Yesterday".

I see now it wasn’t clear, but I was referring to bugzilla. I don’t use Outlook.

Re: Firefox bug gets fixed after 25 years

#160

Post by bombcar »

aendruk wrote: post #149
2Gkashmiri wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then you have stale bot on GitHub closing issues for no activity in like 3 months -_-

Closing is one thing—at least you can still use the issue as a communal gathering point to make slow progress. The casual locking on the other hand is mystifying. And so often there’s the added gaslighting of a project that provides some rationale for closing but then inexplicably locks too as if that’s the same.

Closing is great - it’s an honest assessment that “we’re not going to work on it.”

It still turns up in search and you can comment on it (some even reopen automatically if you do).

Locking automatically is just the worst - we don’t care, we won’t care, and you’ll never get us to care.

Post reply on HN