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

Make front end shit again

makefrontendshitagain.party

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 227 posts

Re: Make front end shit again

#81

Post by Rotten194 »

scyclow wrote: post #9

Oh man, I love stuff like this. It's too bad that the web has been taken over by bootstrap, WordPress, and squarspace. But you can do a lot with raw html, css, and JavaScript! And as a bonus, it ends up looking really unique. It's sort of weird that whenever I show friends the dumb shit I make [1], their immediate reaction is lump it in with geocities. [1] ex. http://fastcashmoneyplus.biz

I went through this up to where it actually asked for Ether -- is it real? Have people actually bought it?

Regardless, this is art.

Re: Make front end shit again

#82

Post by about_help »

wereHamster wrote: post #30
jameskilton wrote: post #19

I love the point the site is trying to make but I'm confused as to why this is built with a vue.js static site generator requiring node/npm/yarn and an almost 7,000 line yarn.lock file. Shouldn't this literally be a single page, hand-built HTML file with inline CSS? Is this trying to be self-ironic or something?

Hand-build HTML file with inline CSS, that you edit with $YOURFAVOURITETEXTEDITOR which requires an OS that's 50 million lines of code. And you're complaining about 7000 lines in an auto-generated file, which doesn't even have to be touched nor edited by a human? The tools we use are insignificant, what's important is the result. If the result is a HTML file with inline CSS, who cares how it was created? You can use…

As someone else said you missed the point.

I will tack on my own opinion that building sites that only function with javascript is a massive disservice to everyone. From disabled people with accessibility needs, to old hardware/software, and even to security/privacy conscious people the JS paradigm is a massive problem. The trend for "new shiny" has become ridiculous and I find most modern websites to be pretty but rather useless. I have to scroll forever past slices with massive images and marketing lingo just to find something that seems potentially helpful but just goes on to more marketing bullshit.

Want to get my buy-in for your tools? Stop making them a hard requirement and make sure you have a non-JS fallback that works.

Re: Make front end shit again

#83

Post by Nadya »

I mean, there are plenty of sites like this on Neocities [0] - which has a goal to be the New Geocities. :) If you seek it out, you can find the fun web again. But I do agree that it's a smaller and smaller fraction of the web. But with Facebook, why would people follow strangers on their websites when they can follow all their friends on Facebook?

[0] https://neocities.org/browse

Re: Make front end shit again

#84

Post by TeMPOraL »

citricsquid wrote: post #74
TeMPOraL wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool! I like the simplicity. If anyone wants to play, I've made a town for us. https://residents.hypertext.town/join/hackernews

Although undocumented, there is a way to programmatically get the camps in a town, you can check the www. town source for an example of how I've done it, the endpoint is `/camps`, e.g: https://hackernews.hypertext.town/camps :)

Thanks; updated town page with some hand-written JS that makes use of this :).

Re: Make front end shit again

#85

Post by TeMPOraL »

timvdalen wrote: post #78
citricsquid wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although undocumented, there is a way to programmatically get the camps in a town, you can check the www. town source for an example of how I've done it, the endpoint is `/camps`, e.g: https://hackernews.hypertext.town/camps :)

Ah that's cool, the Town had better show off all of the cool camps :)

Done!

Re: Make front end shit again

#86

Post by jacquesm »

tetha wrote: post #77
reaperducer wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Needs more dancing hamsters.

I just had to look this[1] up again. Made me very happy for some reason. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WpMlwVwydo

I knew what that linked to before I clicked it. To get it really stuck in your head for the next 24 hours:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qN72LEQnaU

Re: Make front end shit again

#88

Post by JepZ »

jameskilton wrote: post #19

I love the point the site is trying to make but I'm confused as to why this is built with a vue.js static site generator requiring node/npm/yarn and an almost 7,000 line yarn.lock file. Shouldn't this literally be a single page, hand-built HTML file with inline CSS? Is this trying to be self-ironic or something?

Most headlines aren't even bitmaps :-D ;-)

Re: Make front end shit again

#89

Post by ptx »

AriaMinaei wrote: post #54

Web pages used to be amazingly creative, with terrible usability. Now they're the exact opposite. Usability is good, but they all look the same. I wonder what social sciences have to say about this. About public opinion swinging from one extreme to the other, never seeming to be able to land on the sane middle.

The used to be plenty of sites with great usability, in the style the FOX Toolkit website[1] still uses. Everything you expect is listed in a simple static menu to the left, requiring no hovering, no scrolling, no additional navigation. It's not trying to guide you to what they're guessing most people want (while hiding the things you actually want) with gigantic colorful buttons.

Today's "usable" websites seem to consist mostly of gigantic irrelevant photos, huge expanses of whitespace, and navigation consisting of buggy JavaScript puzzles for the user to trick into showing correctly.

[1] http://fox-toolkit.org/

Re: Make front end shit again

#90

Post by emodendroket »

madeofpalk wrote: post #43

> We used to make websites because it was fun and at a point we lost the way I know this is just some little tongue in cheek joke, but I can't help but vehemently disagree with this. Never did we only make websites just "because it was fun" any more or less than we do now.

They did in the sense that the kind of person writing this was once doing it for fun instead of a job.
Post reply on HN