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

Burying the URL

allenpike.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 376 posts

Re: Burying the URL

#191

Post by duncans »

general_failure wrote: post #107
cpeterso wrote: post #87

Chrome developer advocate Paul Irish says: this is terrible. From what I can tell only 6 people have been involved in this so far. Going to do my best to stop it. https://twitter.com/paul_irish/status/461737936078123008

Unnecessary powerplay from Paul. And leaking information which is outright insulting to the 6(?) involved. This is a bad reaction for a developer relations guy.

This is Paul's job: keep developers using Chrome as their primary/default browser to ensure sites run the best they can on Chrome.

Re: Burying the URL

#192

Post by gohrt »

brc wrote: post #151
snewman wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old cars: you could fix it yourself. Modern cars: rarely need fixing; also much more efficient. I know which I prefer.

Every modern car becomes an old car. It's fine if you want to turn over your vehicle every three years. 'Modern' cars are not fixable - even the specialists tear our their hair on some cases and give up completely. Classics are rising steeply in value for people who want to own and understand a piece of machinery for its own sake. Much of modern automotive history will disappear into the maw of the crusher because ir…

> It's fine if you want to turn over your vehicle every three years.

more like eight years, which is not a bad deal.

Re: Burying the URL

#193

Post by userbinator »

blablabla123 wrote: post #160
userbinator wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but am I supposed to edit them as an end user or draw conclusions from their look? Here is a data point that may be of interest: On YouTube, since links are filtered from comments, many users link to other videos by posting the "tails" of URLs - some with "watch?v=xxxxxxxx", some "?v=xxxxxxxx", and some just post the random-looking video ID part with nothing other than "see video xxxxxxxx". In other words, there's ev…

Yeah and the "otherwise computer-illiterate" may also think: oh wow, this is a cool feature I should rely on. Eventhough you can just paste the Youtube URL into the comment field and get a nicely formatted link. For me this is another evidence that the main argument is broken. Youtube is super successful but in fact it is really restrictive when it comes to hyperlinking and mashing things together. Update: just for c…

They might've changed it with the new comments system, but I know that links of any sort were completely disallowed not long ago. Nevertheless, I still see the posting of bare video IDs in many recent comments.

(I've basically never participated in YT comment discussions. There's definitely a lot of idiocy, but it's also interesting to just observe and see the sometimes surprising positive things like this that can occur.)

Re: Burying the URL

#194

Post by WWLink »

From the description of it: I already fucking hate the feature.

Moreso, I also hate the morons that make sites so heavily embedded in crappy javascript that you can't just copy the link and paste it in another window (or to someone else). Seriously? You're incompetent! Stop making websites like that!

Re: Burying the URL

#195

Post by yaph »

paulirish wrote: post #121

This is a new UI experiment that's deployed to a small fraction of users. We're looking at a few key metrics to see if this change is a net positive for Chrome users. (I imagine it may help defend against phishing). My personal opinion is that it's a very bad change and runs anti-thetical to Chrome's goals. I hope the data backs that up as well. But regardless, this change is far from shipping as the new default beha…

I can't imagine using a graphical browser without an address bar. Regarding the possible benefits, I think phishing would become a lot easier, if users don't see the URL any more, anyone can still link to phishing pages.

Re: Burying the URL

#196

Post by vacri »

jpatokal wrote: post #45
userbinator wrote: post #12

I somewhat expected this, given the trend of where things seem to be heading with software these days. In the name of "usability" configuration is removed, UIs are "simplified", and gradually the choice and freedom of the user is degraded. Opportunities to make mistakes and learn from them, or to explore and discover, a chance for users to grow . Dumbing-down software only encourages more of the same. The "senior try…

For kicks, try replacing "software" with "automobiles" in your paragraph. The innards of a modern car are incomprehensible to all but "the few elite", and its interface goes a long way to hide all that complexity. I only have the vaguest idea how it works, and am perfectly happy to outsource its maintenance to professional mechanics, because all I care about is that it works . This should apply to computers. My famil…

The user interface with cars is more complex than it used to be. Not just gears, pedals, and a wheel. You now have an entertainment centre, adjustable seats, reversing camera, so on and so forth. Driving is more complicated with more road rules, longer commutes, and a larger culture to absorb. So if the public can deal with an increasing complexity in vehicles, why can't they deal with staying at the same complexity with software, given your analogy?

Not knowing the innards of such a car has nothing to do with the UI - just the same as the people complaining about the change in UI don't need to know the innards of the browser: the source code.

And no, your preschooler isn't in need of understanding the difference between http/s, but sticking with your analogy, your preschooler also isn't driving. Maybe playing with a toy car instead, but not the full monty.

Re: Burying the URL

#197

Post by 1stop »

chronid wrote: post #173
snewman wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old cars: you could fix it yourself. Modern cars: rarely need fixing; also much more efficient. I know which I prefer.

Are you implying that new cars rarely need fixing and are much more efficient because they are completely closed down and harder to work on than old cars?

It's pretty obvious that is the implication... How about rather than condescension you make your counter point?

Re: Burying the URL

#198

Post by lotsofcows »

edanm wrote: post #158
deanclatworthy wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can disable it by going to chrome://flags/#origin-chip-in-omnibox, change it to Disabled and restart chrome. Edit: Apparently a useful comment offering a solution to the parent's comment is not HN worthy?

You shouldn't be downvoted, but please don't talk about being downvoted - it's against the site guidelines, mostly because it makes for boring conversations. Thanks!

Not half as boring as not writing anything. Also, not half as boring as pointless answers. Division by 0 err#!07wwfxy6

Re: Burying the URL

#199

Post by 1stop »

WWLink wrote: post #194

From the description of it: I already fucking hate the feature. Moreso, I also hate the morons that make sites so heavily embedded in crappy javascript that you can't just copy the link and paste it in another window (or to someone else). Seriously? You're incompetent! Stop making websites like that!

That's right, people should limit what culture they produce in order to make sure WWLink isn't upset.

Alternatively, people can do what they like, and if linkable URLs are superior then things will trend that way anyway.

Re: Burying the URL

#200

Post by scottjad »

Swizec wrote: post #19

As a power user, the only time I care about URL's is when copy-pasting and when developing web apps. I like to explicitly know what I'm copy pasting. It offends my personal sensibilities to make websites with ugly links. Other than that ... I don't know. I can't decide how I feel about this, but I can't help but think that I really don't care about the URL being accessible. Not like I ever do anything with it.

Here are some use cases I thought of:

go to the top level domain directly instead of hunting and hoping that they have a link there

going up several directories on an ftp site

go from reddit.com/r/starcraft to reddit.com/r/nba

go from a foo.github.io/bar docs page to github.com/foo/bar instead of hunting, and hoping, for a link

increment the page number on a blog by several instead of clicking next repeatedly

prepend http://www.google.com/url?q= to NYTimes urls to avoid paywall

add ?limit=100 to see more comments on reddit comment page

going to a new topic on wikipedia

Post reply on HN