This Page is Designed to Last • Hacker News Board

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#451

Post by hashmal » Tue, Dec 24, 2019, 3:44 AM UTC

a1369209993 wrote: post #420

hashmal wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on why/how they suck? Do you have example links, to set a common ground for the conversation? I think most fonts that get your attention suck, the best ones are invisible and get you directly to the meaning of text, without getting in the way. So maybe there's a kind of bias (selection or sampling bias?) operating here?

Because they they are not the single system default sans-serif and single system default sans-serif-monospace fonts that all websites MUST use, period, no discussion. As you put it: > fonts that get your attention suck If I can tell the difference between your font and the system default font, your font sucks; if I can't tell the difference, what's the damned point?

"not getting your attention" and "can't tell the difference" are not the same thing.

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#452

Post by akho » Wed, Dec 25, 2019, 5:40 AM UTC

chaostheory wrote: post #395

akho wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not see how using a web thing is a solution to web things going away.

Then what do you propose the answer is? The blog post just proposes using “web things” differently

For archiving web pages? ArchiveBox is ok.

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#453

Post by a1369209993 » Wed, Dec 25, 2019, 6:17 PM UTC

hashmal wrote: post #451

a1369209993 wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they they are not the single system default sans-serif and single system default sans-serif-monospace fonts that all websites MUST use, period, no discussion. As you put it: > fonts that get your attention suck If I can tell the difference between your font and the system default font, your font sucks; if I can't tell the difference, what's the damned point?

"not getting your attention" and "can't tell the difference" are not the same thing.

Fair nitpick - "haven't noticed the difference yet" would be more accurate - but I don't see how that changes the argument; if I haven't noticed a difference, what's the point?

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#454

Post by tripu » Thu, Dec 26, 2019, 10:04 AM UTC

fyp wrote: post #69

I don't think there's any good solution to the dead link problem. For example there are 11 links in this article: https://jeffhuang.com/ https://gomakethings.com/the-web-is-not-dying/ https://archivebox.io/ https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/25315/hotlinking-what-is-it-and-why-shouldnt-people-do-it https://goaccess.io/ https://victorzhou.com/blog/minify-svgs/ https://evilmartians.com/chronicles/images-don…

http://www.pgbovine.net/python-tutor-ten-years.htm seems dead already, in fact.

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#455

Post by edisonjoao » Thu, Dec 26, 2019, 8:35 PM UTC

i love this

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#456

Post by rusk » Sun, Dec 29, 2019, 2:00 PM UTC

atoav wrote: post #367

rusk wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With digital technology this became much much harder and costly for them, because it often means cobbling together the last working tape players I think something might be getting lost in translation. Could she have meant “electronic” rather than “digital” (which to me suggests digital media such as DVD etc) This whole anecdote makes more sense to me with this substitution.

She was refering to both, she said they have similar problems with CDs and even stuff on hard disks, because often the used Video Codecs are hard to get running without the right knowledge and resources, especially because some of the non-consumer-codecs were often also proprietary and sort of made fore specific plattforms, but I don't know too much on that, so take this as speculation.

Yes when you equate it with “both”it all makes more sense! Just that digital as I’m used to the term excludes the analogue stuff like VHS as well

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#457

Post by gildas » Mon, Dec 30, 2019, 4:46 PM UTC

SirYandi wrote: post #437

gildas wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi! I think it confirms that there's a real interest in this feature.

Off topic, but could I ask how you knew your software was being talked about? Did you just happen by or have you some monitoring agent looking for mentions? Just curious

Sorry, I didn't see your question. I check the posts on HN very regularly. The title of the post made me think that people might have been talking about SingleFile. Sometimes, friends of mine tell me someone on the Internets is talking about SingleFile :). I also sometimes use the integrated search engine.

Re: This Page is Designed to Last

#458

Post by railmeat » Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 10:31 AM UTC

shasheene wrote: post #7

There's no reason why a web browser bookmark action doesn't automatically create a WARC (web archive) format. Heck, with the cost of storage so low, recording every webpage you ever visit in searchable format is also very realistic. Imagine having the last 30 years of web browsing history saved on your local machine. This would especially be useful when in research mode and deep diving a topic. [1] https://github.com…

This comment misses the point.

The point is to make a webpage that lasts. So people can link to it and get the page. That means making a maintainable webpage and a url that does not change.

It is great that you can archive every page you visit for yourself, but that is not the same as making a lasting web.

Lets make something that others can use too.