4 ms·

Kudos to Emily Stark for letting the real data guide her decision. It's hard to let go of something you've invested a lot of effort in, and it seems like this

Kudos to Emily Stark for letting the real data guide her decision. It's hard to let go of something you've invested a lot of effort in, and it seems like this was something she had strong feelings about. Doing the right thing even when it's not what you were hoping for deserves to be applauded.

rektide 5y ago
Treating users like idiots who must be veiled from reality is, I hope, something we can continue to find good data against.
- dsign 5y ago
  +1 to this.
- m463 5y ago
  The maddening thing is that there is data that will always be ignored. Like the % of users who will opt IN to cookies or tracking or similar.
  - devenblake 5y ago
    And how many opt in just because the choices are "Manage site permissions... / Allow all"
- camgunz 5y ago
  IDK if "veiled from reality" is helpful here. Our job as software engineers is to build abstractions so like, glass houses and all that.
  - rektide 5y ago
    engineers & companies break the compact, but the truest, most compelling heart of the web is about viewing named things, and those names are urls. to erode away at the name of things is to erode away the bedrock that holds this all up. it is to make the clear and the district muddled. there's no proposed new abstraction here, no new alternative: to hide the url would be to cloak the truth that makes the web so much better than all other computing: that this is an online space, where things have universal names[1], & that by using the name we can get to that thing. [1] https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
    - camgunz 5y ago
      > the truest, most compelling heart of the web is about viewing named things, and those names are urls I love your passion here, but I think this is pretty subjective. Like that model is mostly only useful for the document model of the web. So many things are apps now, where "URLs" only make nominal sense. Even in Electron apps where you can share URLs, it's basically just a bit of serialized state--you could use any format you wanted for this, but it's not at all universal: it's not like I could ever open a shared Spotify URL in VS Code. But more broadly, I think we should maybe start giving up on the web (and by web, I mean what most people mean which is HTTP/HTML/JS). It is waaaaay too corporatized and saddled with legacy and politics. Let the ad people and the man get http(s).
      - rektide 5y ago
        there are many many tools for making sure that url routing works within an app. there are exceptions to be sure, deviations from the ideal, but I continue to see the url as the defining characteristic & a radically ennobling core to the web. if you want to do other things, don't see value in the expedition, so be it go else where, do other things. I continue to see this as a shared, mutual platform, one accessible to all, embued with ever more power, but yes, sometimes the entities not so far orable to us also make use of that power. this is not a defect to me.
        camgunz 5y ago
        Yeah, I think we agree fundamentally. My favorite version of the web is the "web of documents": URLs, hypertext, user agents, etc. I would guess that our divergence is where the web is and is going. It's hard for me to imagine we'll ever get back to that pre-JS-apps model, and if we do, I have to believe it'll be an entirely separate application stack. Like, at the bottom of it, I guess I'm just not willing to go bonkers on Google every time they try to push us further away from web of documents. It feels easier to just build a different thing at this point.
thar327 5y ago
Irrespective of what data says its a very bad idea. Data says lots of users visit porn sites. Now what?
- Bjartr 5y ago
  Let them enjoy it?

rektide 5y ago

Treating users like idiots who must be veiled from reality is, I hope, something we can continue to find good data against.

dsign 5y ago
+1 to this.
m463 5y ago
The maddening thing is that there is data that will always be ignored. Like the % of users who will opt IN to cookies or tracking or similar.
- devenblake 5y ago
  And how many opt in just because the choices are "Manage site permissions... / Allow all"
camgunz 5y ago
IDK if "veiled from reality" is helpful here. Our job as software engineers is to build abstractions so like, glass houses and all that.
- rektide 5y ago
  engineers & companies break the compact, but the truest, most compelling heart of the web is about viewing named things, and those names are urls. to erode away at the name of things is to erode away the bedrock that holds this all up. it is to make the clear and the district muddled. there's no proposed new abstraction here, no new alternative: to hide the url would be to cloak the truth that makes the web so much better than all other computing: that this is an online space, where things have universal names[1], & that by using the name we can get to that thing. [1] https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
  - camgunz 5y ago
    > the truest, most compelling heart of the web is about viewing named things, and those names are urls I love your passion here, but I think this is pretty subjective. Like that model is mostly only useful for the document model of the web. So many things are apps now, where "URLs" only make nominal sense. Even in Electron apps where you can share URLs, it's basically just a bit of serialized state--you could use any format you wanted for this, but it's not at all universal: it's not like I could ever open a shared Spotify URL in VS Code. But more broadly, I think we should maybe start giving up on the web (and by web, I mean what most people mean which is HTTP/HTML/JS). It is waaaaay too corporatized and saddled with legacy and politics. Let the ad people and the man get http(s).
    - rektide 5y ago
      there are many many tools for making sure that url routing works within an app. there are exceptions to be sure, deviations from the ideal, but I continue to see the url as the defining characteristic & a radically ennobling core to the web. if you want to do other things, don't see value in the expedition, so be it go else where, do other things. I continue to see this as a shared, mutual platform, one accessible to all, embued with ever more power, but yes, sometimes the entities not so far orable to us also make use of that power. this is not a defect to me.
      - camgunz 5y ago
        Yeah, I think we agree fundamentally. My favorite version of the web is the "web of documents": URLs, hypertext, user agents, etc. I would guess that our divergence is where the web is and is going. It's hard for me to imagine we'll ever get back to that pre-JS-apps model, and if we do, I have to believe it'll be an entirely separate application stack. Like, at the bottom of it, I guess I'm just not willing to go bonkers on Google every time they try to push us further away from web of documents. It feels easier to just build a different thing at this point.

thar327 5y ago

Irrespective of what data says its a very bad idea. Data says lots of users visit porn sites. Now what?

Bjartr 5y ago
Let them enjoy it?