6 ms·

Why not just serve static text over HTTP? At least then you'd have the ability to inline images. This--the use of Javascript and other technology for tracking p

by psim1 8y ago

Why not just serve static text over HTTP? At least then you'd have the ability to inline images. This--the use of Javascript and other technology for tracking purposes--isn't a problem for Gopher to solve. It's a problem for web content creators.

okl 8y ago
Correct, here are some tips for content creators how a website can look like without all the bloat: https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/
- Ultramanoid 8y ago
  I have no idea how I could ever repay you for those precious links -- you made my night. ( Or how I haven't ever encountered those until now. )
- testplzignore 8y ago
  I was loving these until they said they were satire. Is it taboo to actually be serious about minimal design?
  - okl 8y ago
    satire != comedy
- rdiddly 8y ago
  Hadn't seen the last two. There's a slippery slope effect going on.
  - runeb 8y ago
    Really, I feel like its showing 0.01% of the process that got us to where we are today.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- subless 8y ago
  You're missing two: https://bestmotherfucking.website https://bestmotherfucking.website https://evenbettermotherfucking.website https://evenbettermotherfucking.website
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  https://codepen.io/dredmorbius/pen/KpMqqB https://codepen.io/dredmorbius/pen/KpMqqB
fouc 8y ago
Instead of fixing the protocol, maybe the solution is to come up with a modern browser that doesn't support javascript at all. If there's widespread adoption of such a browser, then that would change the trend. I think the USP could have to be something about "reading friendly" or "consistent reading experience" etc.
- krapp 8y ago
  It's already possible to block javascript in modern browsers, why do we need browsers that can't support javascript in any case? Javascript is just a general purpose programming language. It has uses besides tracking and advertising.
  - planktonite 8y ago
    Because mother fucker JS sucks and it’s a huge security problem. Fuck JavaScript. You don’t need a Turing complete, garbage heap language to watch fucking YouTube. You don’t need it for 99 percent of shit on the web and the only time you need it is so some ass hole can make a shitty rube-Goldberg website with dumb functionality that nobody likes. And also because html only sucks. You need more than text and images to do most of the stuff that’s on the web. You need lots of stuff baked in like forums, form handling and whatever. If you had a browser/protocol that had image, text, video, forum, comment tree/collapsing, etc baked in rather than re-implemented by every fucking individual website in shitty horrible broken JS then it would be more secure, more uniform and higher performance. It would also have the astounding effect of lowering the complexity of browsers massively since they don’t have to do Js, which would mean we would have more than two fucking browsers and all those new browsers would compete with each other to best serve the interests of the users. As opposed to what we have now which is a bunch of fucking bullshit. Don’t you ever say “derp derp derp html” again you dumb mother fucker
- pmlnr 8y ago
  > a modern browser that doesn't support javascript Modern-ish: https://www.dillo.org/ https://www.dillo.org/ (it's very far from a lot of CSS features, but it works)
planktonite 8y ago
It’s not a problem of content creators. Assuming people are using ff/chrome, html mode only supports basic functions. If you had a new protocol/browser then you could have lots of style and functionally baked in. How are you going to do html only forums? Html isn’t enoug. And html sucks anyway. Expecting people to make html only content and view html only content is rediculous.
ken 8y ago
Well, Gopher is one solution to the problem -- a technical one. Getting web content creators to knock it off is another solution -- a social one. The problem with that is that it requires restraint, and I just don't see much of that in web content creators. In an environment where everyone is competing for attention and clicks and tracking, how do you expect people to willingly do less? The only approach I could possibly see working is picking some subset of web browser functionality, and branding it as the Next Cool Thing, somehow. Maybe some way to badge or advertise pages, like "JS-free", or "KB-fast" (all content < 1.0MB). You can still do some pretty amazing designs in a million bytes of HTML+CSS.
- pmlnr 8y ago
  something like 'works without JS'. The only things I'm now using JS for on my site: - dark/light auto or manual theme switching - syntax highlighting ( https://prismjs.com/ https://prismjs.com/ ), because in-code version makes the text code in `pre` unreadable.
fyfy18 8y ago
Up until maybe 10 years ago basically all forums were just HTML, CSS, a tonne of emoji images, and a light sprinkling of JavaScript to implement a rich text editor. All the heavy lifting was done server side. And it usually scaled pretty well, considering if you needed to upgrade to a bigger machine you physically had to have someone switch out hardware.

by psim1 8y ago

okl 8y ago

Correct, here are some tips for content creators how a website can look like without all the bloat: https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/

Ultramanoid 8y ago
I have no idea how I could ever repay you for those precious links -- you made my night. ( Or how I haven't ever encountered those until now. )
testplzignore 8y ago
I was loving these until they said they were satire. Is it taboo to actually be serious about minimal design?
- okl 8y ago
  satire != comedy
rdiddly 8y ago
Hadn't seen the last two. There's a slippery slope effect going on.
- runeb 8y ago
  Really, I feel like its showing 0.01% of the process that got us to where we are today.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
subless 8y ago
You're missing two: https://bestmotherfucking.website https://bestmotherfucking.website https://evenbettermotherfucking.website https://evenbettermotherfucking.website
dredmorbius 8y ago
https://codepen.io/dredmorbius/pen/KpMqqB https://codepen.io/dredmorbius/pen/KpMqqB

fouc 8y ago

Instead of fixing the protocol, maybe the solution is to come up with a modern browser that doesn't support javascript at all. If there's widespread adoption of such a browser, then that would change the trend. I think the USP could have to be something about "reading friendly" or "consistent reading experience" etc.

krapp 8y ago
It's already possible to block javascript in modern browsers, why do we need browsers that can't support javascript in any case? Javascript is just a general purpose programming language. It has uses besides tracking and advertising.
- planktonite 8y ago
  Because mother fucker JS sucks and it’s a huge security problem. Fuck JavaScript. You don’t need a Turing complete, garbage heap language to watch fucking YouTube. You don’t need it for 99 percent of shit on the web and the only time you need it is so some ass hole can make a shitty rube-Goldberg website with dumb functionality that nobody likes. And also because html only sucks. You need more than text and images to do most of the stuff that’s on the web. You need lots of stuff baked in like forums, form handling and whatever. If you had a browser/protocol that had image, text, video, forum, comment tree/collapsing, etc baked in rather than re-implemented by every fucking individual website in shitty horrible broken JS then it would be more secure, more uniform and higher performance. It would also have the astounding effect of lowering the complexity of browsers massively since they don’t have to do Js, which would mean we would have more than two fucking browsers and all those new browsers would compete with each other to best serve the interests of the users. As opposed to what we have now which is a bunch of fucking bullshit. Don’t you ever say “derp derp derp html” again you dumb mother fucker
pmlnr 8y ago
> a modern browser that doesn't support javascript Modern-ish: https://www.dillo.org/ https://www.dillo.org/ (it's very far from a lot of CSS features, but it works)

planktonite 8y ago

It’s not a problem of content creators. Assuming people are using ff/chrome, html mode only supports basic functions. If you had a new protocol/browser then you could have lots of style and functionally baked in. How are you going to do html only forums? Html isn’t enoug. And html sucks anyway. Expecting people to make html only content and view html only content is rediculous.

ken 8y ago

Well, Gopher is one solution to the problem -- a technical one. Getting web content creators to knock it off is another solution -- a social one. The problem with that is that it requires restraint, and I just don't see much of that in web content creators. In an environment where everyone is competing for attention and clicks and tracking, how do you expect people to willingly do less? The only approach I could possibly see working is picking some subset of web browser functionality, and branding it as the Next Cool Thing, somehow. Maybe some way to badge or advertise pages, like "JS-free", or "KB-fast" (all content < 1.0MB). You can still do some pretty amazing designs in a million bytes of HTML+CSS.

pmlnr 8y ago
something like 'works without JS'. The only things I'm now using JS for on my site: - dark/light auto or manual theme switching - syntax highlighting ( https://prismjs.com/ https://prismjs.com/ ), because in-code version makes the text code in `pre` unreadable.

fyfy18 8y ago

Up until maybe 10 years ago basically all forums were just HTML, CSS, a tonne of emoji images, and a light sprinkling of JavaScript to implement a rich text editor. All the heavy lifting was done server side. And it usually scaled pretty well, considering if you needed to upgrade to a bigger machine you physically had to have someone switch out hardware.