Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
lolsal
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
62 ms
·
631.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Why is it so awful? Collapsing, threaded comments seem to be a great way to organize organic discussions. How would you do it differently? 'Awful' implies that it is very far from your preferred format.
632.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I honestly can't think of any.
633.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I intentionally used 'basically perfect' because I feel like it's perfect for me, but I am really hesitant to use that qualifier. However, I don't seem to have the same workflow/expectations as you do and I am tot
634.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Why would I? Native HN suits me and I don't need or want anything else. Seems silly to use some other site that adds no value and becomes another step further away from the source of truth (the HN page itself).
635.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
No. I use Safari for both desktop and mobile, if that matters. I never search. I don't need custom styles to increase readability. I don't need more space around headlines, or article preview thumbnails, or any other superfluous t
636.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I had no idea there were people that needed to view HN differently - let alone 21+ ways. I find the "native" presentation basically perfect for both desktop and mobile browsing.
637.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
'user hostile' is too ambiguous to be useful. I would argue that some of the perceived 'hostility' is a Necessary Evil® for improved UX elsewhere - specifically implementing DRM paved the way for Apple users to be able t
638.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I worry about not being able to get refunds for poor content. I clicked around a bit on the domain and there were a couple articles that had click-baity titles - an interesting premise, but I was turned off from the nature of the presentati
639.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Why? I am not terribly upset if someone has my username, but I would be very concerned if they had reproducible biometrics of mine (fingerprints, facial, etc).
640.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
You left out an important part which requires trading capital for labor. It's not exploitation.
641.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I guess we disagree on fundamental principals. Governments require humans to exist. Humans do not require governments to exist. Rights exist for humans regardless of whether or not they are being governed (or in spite of being governed!).
642.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I think the difference is that you have a right to procure food and a right to create your own shelter. You don't have a right that requires someone to give you food or give you shelter.
643.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
The biggest lesson I've learned is that working remotely is a skill that is practiced and improved over time. Working remotely full time is very different from commuters that 'WFH' periodically.
644.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
> Says who? Says the burden of proof. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
645.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Here's your data, a single sample size: - I live in a US city with a population over 1M. - I have about 0.5 BTC - I have never - ever - seen a place in the Real World where I can spend it. - I cannot be sure of this assertion, but it&#
646.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
> You mean like cash? I would guess that the OP means 'yes like cash, but cash is also used for other things whereas crypto currencies are not practically used for anything else.'
647.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
> What? That's a minority of my use. I said functionality, not usage. If we're having a discussion and not caring about being imprecise or inaccurate then we should all just stop wasting our time on this discussion. Cheers
648.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
To say "I don't use a smartphone" in order to qualify how disconnected you choose to be is dishonest if what you really mean is, "I don't use a smartphone for [some really specific context]." or perhaps "I
649.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
This is a great example of the daily minor enrichment we get from being connected.
650.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
This seems a bit disingenuous - you definitely still use a smartphone, you just claim to not directly own one. You essentially said this: > My wife has a smart phone which is great for when [I want to use a smartphone]. If you don't
651.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
You can option-click the notifications menu to enable DND for the rest of the day.
652.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I think you're saying there is some subset of people out there that consider their phones to be some non-trivial public statement about who they 'are' and what they 'stand for'. I agree with that. I find it ridiculo
653.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
I don't like the marketing appeal to some sort of deep emotional instinct that the advertisement is making. I think it's ridiculous that consumer goods represent who I am and what I might stand for. That's silliness and hyper
654.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Sorry! I quoted from the homepage of the device (poor use of quote indentation, shame on me): https://www.essential.com
655.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
> I think I can safely say that offering a variety of colors would not be an appealing feature to you. I also feel safe guessing battery life is a bigger factor in your purchasing decision than the brand of the phone. You're probabl
656.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
You could hazard that guess, but you could be wrong or at the very best case you're making an assertion that you cannot prove true or false in which case it seems pointless to try to draw further conclusions from it. edit: Actually you
657.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. edit to clarify: What statements can you (anyone, not just personally you) make about the expression I'm making with any degree of accuracy or confidence?
658.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
> Your phone is your personal property. It’s a public expression of who you are and what you stand for. No, it's really not. It's literally just a tool I use for communication.
659.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Could you elaborate on why you think it's entirely a choice? You seem to be implying that the choice to be (or not be) car dependent in Texas and the choice to be (or not be) car dependent in a state like Pennsylvania (for example) are
660.
▲
by
lolsal
9y ago
Why is the idea eventually going to be a reality? I don't see any data proving your assertion.
More ›