catapart

26 ms·

361.
by catapart 2y ago
Yeah, this is the frustrating part. I've worked with retailers on in-store displays, so I know that you can get high-quality, cheap panels that are "dumb" in that they don't have apps, but they do have full local-only op
362.
by catapart 2y ago
I'm suddenly reminded to ask this community whom I assume might know: Are there any good "dumb tv" solutions out there? I'm thinking 1-4 HDMI ports, and a maximum of RF tuning and input-switching on the firmware. Product
363.
by catapart 2y ago
Okay, gotcha. That makes sense! I was getting stuck on where I should send the end result, but I'm guessing if I were doing financial work, I would already have an endpoint from my partner financial institution that would expect this k
364.
by catapart 2y ago
This looks pretty interesting, but my only experience with payments are black-box payment processors that expose an API, and services like Stripe that handle all of the institutional interconnection. Could you help me understand who the tar
365.
by catapart 2y ago
Awesome! I hadn't heard of this. Obviously not something that seems reasonable for government implementation, but this seems like it would be great for soliciting a specific kind of feedback about a project or business. Board elections
366.
by catapart 2y ago
Hi HN! I made a custom html element ("web component") that renders it's child content inside a mockup of a browser window. I wanted to use it for demoing a feature of another project that made changes to a browser's url,
367.
Show HN: Browser-mockup> custom HTML element(github.com)
2 points by catapart 2y ago|1 comments
368.
by catapart 2y ago
Thank you for this! I knew this shit was done by someone already and I've spent two years resisting the urge to re-invent this wheel. p2pt is exactly what I knew was possible and have been looking for!
369.
by catapart 2y ago
There's a tangible difference between shitting on a person who chooses to share an experience, and shitting on a person who is shitting on a person who shared an experience. If you choose to read irony or hypocrisy in it, that's y
370.
by catapart 2y ago
> Blaming Yelp and making a drama out of it seems a bit much. Don't read it if you don't like it. Some of us actually give a fuck how badly companies are treating people, even if you don't.
371.
by catapart 2y ago
Right on. And if someone made a "bear" emoji as an image of a gummy bear, I wouldn't accuse them of being out of spec. I would just find it personally misleading. Things that might be appropriate to say with a bear emoji migh
372.
by catapart 2y ago
It fits the Webster definition: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gun If I ask you to bring me a gun, and there is a water gun right next to you and you argue that "I might have meant water pistol" (
373.
by catapart 2y ago
Are you implying that a water pistol is not a "handgun"? Or that you could not make a water pistol that could also be a "revolver"? Does "revolver" include revolver action rifles, so long as you can use them wi
374.
by catapart 2y ago
Lots to dismiss in this, but I was pretty impressed by the bit about psuedo selectors! I had no idea this could be done, and it's pretty awesome! Can't think of when I would use it, given that you have to publish your implementati
375.
by catapart 2y ago
Oh, one quick note about your markdown from someone stupid enough to have tried to write his own markdown flavor: those slashes are a nightmare for handling urls/paths. Trying to programmatically distinguish between "my/path
376.
by catapart 2y ago
None of the svg subtags, either. path/g/etc.
377.
by catapart 2y ago
"bold" is a style, and perfectly fine to use for any word that you want to apply that style to. "strong" is an intention and allows other things to define what style(s) that intention should be represented with. It'
378.
by catapart 2y ago
This is really great! Thanks for making it! I will say, personally, my problems with grid are usually centered around getting them to do the expected dynamic rearrangement, rather than just setting up the grids in the first place. It's
379.
by catapart 2y ago
Alright, so if I pull this into WASM, I can finally have a fully featured rich text editor on the web? If so, I'm sold!
380.
by catapart 2y ago
From the article: it was tested only to 100 cycles. So this is experimental and a product version won't be available for a year or (likely) longer. And as products naturally niche into longevity, weight, capacity, and other categories,
381.
by catapart 2y ago
I've been waiting for an embedable, rust-based, browser library broken down into modules like "rendering", "scripting", "network", "encoding", etc, for over a decade now. At certain points, it fe
382.
by catapart 2y ago
The article is saying "this ecosystem should change because it doesn't do specific things that make sense for it to do". JSR says "here's a way to leave the original ecosystem alone, but have a better-fitting ecosys
383.
by catapart 2y ago
Hm? This is news to me. As far as I know, you can just publish pure javascript. I know that it's going to give you a worse 'score' if you don't have types, and it may require explicit typing of TS (but, strictly, so does
384.
by catapart 2y ago
Just use JSR[0] and only deal with npm when a project forces you to do things backwards. Since JSR packages are available on npm, there's nothing lost. [0] https://jsr.io/
385.
by catapart 2y ago
Exactly. Squeaky wheel gets the grease. If it were my business, I wouldn't make shitty decisions and then force an army of phone operators to run my customers around so that no customer could ever have an effect on my company, while on
386.
by catapart 2y ago
Awesome project! I've been very excited about stuff like this cropping up - where people take model-builders and then load those models into first/third-person 3d scenes. I know someone trying to do a similar kind of thing with Ci
387.
by catapart 2y ago
just to be clear, for posterity: > Err... Noo? It was not what I meant. Yes it absolutely is what you meant, which is proven by your insisteneces here: > [...]common sense should do? > Yes I see that we require common sense[...]
388.
by catapart 2y ago
i'm happy your meritocracy is working out for you. sorry you can't figure out how to outline one in logical terms because of "worth" reasons, or whatever. maybe in your next meritocracy, you can raise someone to the top
389.
by catapart 2y ago
When you say not "worth" expliciting... worth it to whom? All I see is someone saying "don't worry, it's obvious . When the time comes, we'll make decisions based on what we believe to be metrics, but we will
390.
by catapart 2y ago
While also providing no actual metrics for their so-called "merit"-based system. Oh, you prefer "smart" people, you say?! What a concept! It's like the screechers about "meritocracy" never get the memo t

More ›