12 ms·
If you "view source", there's a JSON blob that has this: ,"datePublished":"2012-09-30T23:48:21+00:00","dateModified":"2019-06-06T01:20:40+00:00", Looking at
by jasode 6y ago
If you "view source", there's a JSON blob that has this:
,"datePublished":"2012-09-30T23:48:21+00:00","dateModified":"2019-06-06T01:20:40+00:00",
Looking at raw html source isn't always a reliable indicator but the older date looks legit in this case.
[Can someone explain the downvotes? I'd like to know if my information is incorrect.]
- nicoburns 6y agoI've no idea why you're getting downvoted. This seems correct and useful to me.
- khamba 6y ago> Can someone explain the downvotes? Someone may have taken your comment as a defense of the article not publishing year (which is a ridiculous defense) and hence the downvotes. It is definitely really bad UX if you have to "view source" to find information.
- jansan 6y agoNice hack, but this should not be the preferred way to find the year of an article, even for a nerd.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mxfh 6y agoIf you need more confirmation: It's also possibe to just go to some "unoptimized" part of the blog. The whole wordpress theme seems to be trimmed to be "timeless", including URLs. https://daedtech.com/?s=%22Rise+of+the+Expert+Beginner%22 https://daedtech.com/?s=%22Rise+of+the+Expert+Beginner%22 shows: Sep 30, 2012, since it's feed by the same database. WordPress dates are no authorative sourcem since they can by changed at any time to anything. But the story has about a dozen submits including pre https times: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=rise-of-the-expert-beginner&sort=byDate&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... With the first one in april 2013, about half a year later.
- wondringaloud 6y agoBe less concerned with internet points.
- JohnL4 6y agoNice bit of detective work. As for the downvotes, I guess the nail that sticks up gets hammered down?