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

I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

indiehackers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 143 posts

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#31

Post by komali2 »

a13n wrote: post #10
oil25 wrote: post #8

Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo . Looking at the page source code, it's completely unreadable - just a single line with a bunch of third party scripts and trackers. Disappointment over what the Web has become ensues.

That's really weird that the internet doesn't work with JavaScript disabled in 2019.

I understand why you feel justified in this tone, because it would be absurd to assume a web application could work without Javascript in 2019.

But like... a static blog post? Why bother with JS at all? It seems like creating more work that necessary, bloating downloads, increasing load speed, and for no reason blocking out people with JS disabled (so like, not just people using Firefox with plugins, but people that browse from emacs or whatever... which seems weird, except those are exactly the kind of people that are also technologists building 20k side projects). Also makes accessibility harder than necessary.

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#32

Post by andai »

Avery3R wrote: post #27
rtkwe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I disabled one of the core technologies of the modern web and it breaks things."

"Just download 8 megabytes of javascript and wait 10 seconds for a page that's mainly made up of static content and should be under ~1mb and load instantly"

It's mostly text, isn't it? So more like 10kb.

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#33

Post by grey-area »

rtkwe wrote: post #13
oil25 wrote: post #8

Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo . Looking at the page source code, it's completely unreadable - just a single line with a bunch of third party scripts and trackers. Disappointment over what the Web has become ensues.

"I disabled one of the core technologies of the modern web and it breaks things."

This statement is only true for certain values of modern web.

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#34

Post by jdironman »

sp332 wrote: post #28
jdironman wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Archive site I believe is down for maintenance at the moment.

This site isn't the Internet Archive, which is down due to a fiber cut. https://mobile.twitter.com/internetarchive/

Ah, thank you for the clarification.

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#35

Post by dymk »

Avery3R wrote: post #27
rtkwe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I disabled one of the core technologies of the modern web and it breaks things."

"Just download 8 megabytes of javascript and wait 10 seconds for a page that's mainly made up of static content and should be under ~1mb and load instantly"

The page loaded in about a second for me

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#36

Post by komali2 »

rtkwe wrote: post #13
oil25 wrote: post #8

Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo . Looking at the page source code, it's completely unreadable - just a single line with a bunch of third party scripts and trackers. Disappointment over what the Web has become ensues.

"I disabled one of the core technologies of the modern web and it breaks things."

I get your point in general regarding the internet, but I'm not clear at all on how Javascript would be required for any of the tasks in this website.

1. Show text content

2. Make the text content look good

3. Allow submission to a comment section

All of those things can be accomplished with some or none javascript. Why make the job harder than necessary? Why screw over screenreaders?

Oh, I see there's a graph there, that probably would use some JS. But why not just hide the graph for noscript users?

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#37

Post by dymk »

sp332 wrote: post #26
oil25 wrote: post #8

Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo . Looking at the page source code, it's completely unreadable - just a single line with a bunch of third party scripts and trackers. Disappointment over what the Web has become ensues.

The site does have an odd architecture. I can't even find the article text in one of the downloaded files. Kinda looks like they serialized a large JS object into a string inside one of the JS files, wonder if it's in there. In addition to being un-archivable, it's probably also impossible to use with a screen reader. Edit: ok I don't really know anything about screen readers. I just miss graceful degradation being a…

The DOM of the loaded page clearly has the article content in it (just right click -> inspect), and is visible to a screen reader.

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#38

Post by urda »

rtkwe wrote: post #13
oil25 wrote: post #8

Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo . Looking at the page source code, it's completely unreadable - just a single line with a bunch of third party scripts and trackers. Disappointment over what the Web has become ensues.

"I disabled one of the core technologies of the modern web and it breaks things."

"I need 8 megs of Javascript and a loading splash screen to display my own blog article in the 'modern web'".

No you don't.

Re: I bootstrapped my private-journaling project into a lifestyle business

#40

Post by komali2 »

dymk wrote: post #35
Avery3R wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Just download 8 megabytes of javascript and wait 10 seconds for a page that's mainly made up of static content and should be under ~1mb and load instantly"

The page loaded in about a second for me

20.4 seconds for me, before I could see text at all.

If the SEO people are to believed, a vast majority of people would click away, what, 5 seconds into that?

Post reply on HN