nsmartt

15 ms·

91.
by nsmartt 13y ago
My reasoning is this: - It would be ironic to complain about a less famously terrible social network on said social network - It wouldn't be ironic with Facebook because it's popular opinion that Facebook is terrible and that its
92.
by nsmartt 13y ago
This article didn't really clear up the definition for me. What are the factors that determine the expected result? Is it ironic that complaining about Facebook on Facebook is not ironic?
93.
by nsmartt 13y ago
This reminds me of another article from a while back which advocated 6 items in decreasing priority. 1 -> big item 2 -> medium item 2 -> medium item 3 -> small item 3 -> small item 3 -> small item
94.
by nsmartt 13y ago
The following works without issues, for whatever reason: 'select *'
95.
by nsmartt 13y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc
96.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I use NoScript and Ghostery to prevent tracking. There are certainly legitimate use-cases. Your comment is difficult to comprehend, and low on information. Why should the year have any effect on whether users should use NoScript? In the fut
97.
by nsmartt 13y ago
Disclaimer: The following isn't accusatory in any way. "Genuinely curious", as some are apt to say. Can you explain why Chattanooga is more expensive? [This]( http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=cost+of+l
98.
by nsmartt 13y ago
Yes, of course you can. Why couldn't you?
99.
by nsmartt 13y ago
> It's more secure. If identifying session data is not accessible to JavaScript, it makes a site more secure from XSS attacks. HTTPOnly should take care of this.
100.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I'm not entirely convinced this was misogynist. Right now, I'm trying to think of jobs for a news provider that wouldn't require tech savvy. "Secretary" is the only one that comes to mind. Secretaries are stereotypi
101.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I used to argue that well-written code needed no documentation, but I read various articles about documentation anyway. The takeaway was this: Even if my code is clear, neither I nor anyone else should have to read through a function in ord
102.
by nsmartt 13y ago
> We're proud of them, and we want to show them off -- aesthetic parallels to OS X or not. This is completely understandable. I appreciate taking pride in your work,—we all do—but it's detrimental to adoption. You're sacr
103.
by nsmartt 13y ago
There is a key difference between making a feature seem different and actually re-engineering it. I assume you meant the latter, so I just thought I'd offer some advice on word choice.
104.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I can agree with this to some extent, and I don't have a solid answer as far as a different approach. However, knock-offs feel cheap, and because elementary feels like a knock-off, it's having trouble gaining some mindshare. T
105.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I doubt anyone thinks this is technically copying OS X but the design is similar enough that it's clearly meant to be reminiscent of OS X.
106.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I've seen a lot of interesting tools they're building (e.g. https://launchpad.net/scratch , https://launchpad.net/geary ), so I almost want to use it, but the OS X mimicry is a huge deterrent. I hav
107.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I really like a lot of the stuff Elementary is doing, but I loathe the way they're mimicking OS X. It's a complete deal breaker for me. It feels like a knock-off.
108.
by nsmartt 13y ago
> A good user experience can be achieved by providing users with an efficient way to understand and fix problems that they encounter. Agreed. > De-featuring a product If I were building a browser today, I wouldn't want the opti
109.
by nsmartt 13y ago
It's true that users should not break things without some mind as to how to fix them, but it's also irrelevant. If a user breaks your product, it makes no difference to him or her who broke it. It's still broken. Users will h
110.
by nsmartt 13y ago
The idea is that non-technical users shouldn't have options in preferences that will break the web for them, and that technical users will use about:config or an add-on (e.g. NoScript). I find it difficult to argue with that. edit: cla
111.
by nsmartt 13y ago
On the contrary, it seems that OP was going out of his way to explain that it's acceptable to have initially hated CS. If CS is actually terrible, why don't we talk about what actually makes it terrible? I can't comprehend th
112.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I can't fault you for that, and I could probably learn a thing or two from writing more freely.
113.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I mostly enjoyed the slides, and I'm interested in CoffeeScript, especially since I'm going to be working a little in Node in the near future. This post is a critique on the blog post, rather than on the slide content, which was m
114.
by nsmartt 13y ago
It is, or was, 500 points.
115.
by nsmartt 13y ago
For a long time, I avoided capitals in exactly this way. It wasn't as negative as the reasons you've suggested. I figured that capitals were unnecessary for parsing because I didn't have difficulty reading my own writing with
116.
by nsmartt 13y ago
As mentioned by one of the other replies, it comes from "to prick" in Old French, so the usage you're seeing—Profoundly moving; touching—seems to align with that fairly well, at a glance.
117.
by nsmartt 13y ago
This isn't snark. I legitimately tried explaining in my own words. I wasn't satisfied, so: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/poignant
118.
by nsmartt 13y ago
No. Google supports Chromium, and Chrome has proprietary additions. I do wish Chrome didn't exist, but I'm not convinced that this comparison works.
119.
by nsmartt 13y ago
The parent seems more like a comment on the reaction to the study rather than on the validity of the study.
120.
by nsmartt 13y ago
I don't think he means that it's rarely used so much as it's done rarely by the user. When visiting a project page, users likely won't need to clone as often as they'll need to do various other things on a page.

More ›