←back to thread

Web page annoyances that I don't inflict on you

(rachelbythebay.com)
569 points todsacerdoti | 3 comments | 05 Jan 25 01:54 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
swyx ◴[05 Jan 25 02:41 UTC] No.42599320[source]▶
this is exactly the sort of idealistic post that appeals to HN and nobody else. i dont have a problem with that apart from when technologists try to take these "back to basics" stuff to shame the substacks and the company blogs out there that have to be more powered by economics than by personal passion.

its -obvious- things are mostly "better"/can be less "annoying" when money/resources are not a concern. i too would like to spend all my time in a world with no scarcity.

the engineering challenge is finding alignments where "better for reader" overlaps with "better for writer" - as google did with doubleclick back in the day.

replies(8): >>42599404 #>>42599406 #>>42599783 #>>42599973 #>>42600198 #>>42608321 #>>42610248 #>>42610867 #
1. matheusmoreira ◴[05 Jan 25 04:32 UTC] No.42599783[source]▶
This actually appeals to everyone. There are words and people can read them. It literally just works. With zero friction. This is peak engineering. It's how the web is supposed to work. It is objectively better. For everyone. Everyone except advertisers.

The only problem to be solved here is the fact advertisers are the ones paying the people who make web pages. They're the ones distorting the web into engagement maximizing content consumption platforms like television.

replies(1): >>42599869 #
2. fragmede ◴[05 Jan 25 04:53 UTC] No.42599869[source]▶
The words are nice and all, but it's no https://ciechanow.ski/
replies(1): >>42600053 #
3. skydhash ◴[05 Jan 25 05:59 UTC] No.42600053[source]▶
The nice thing about your example is that it works even in eww (emacs), and quite well (not the JS part, of course).