ajpiano

I think it's worth noting the timing of this post, which is that it came out a day after this article on the LA Times tech blog: http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-2048-hit...

The article, without even so much as mentioning Threes, credited Cirulli with designing 2048 over a weekend, which rather blatantly missed the point that it was only possible to put together 2048 in a weekend in a world where Threes and then 1024 already existed. The article has since been corrected/updated, but I saw Asher tweet about it, and I imagine that their choice to put together this essay is meant to provide a comprehensive counterpoint to that school of thought.

Confirm. Woke up this morning to limited connectivity, realised I was getting to some sites and not others. While on hold with TWC (where they said there was an 'outage affecting service in your area'), loaded HN to see if, well, HN would load, and this was the #3 story. Thanks HN, GFY TWC!

After a bit of back and forth, here's a working one with a persistent image link and the proper proportions http://jsbin.com/amunug/17 :)

I wanted to see where in the spectrogram the sound was as it was playing, so I threw together this quickie jsbin to make it happen: http://jsbin.com/amunug/10

Useful for anyone else who wants to be able to match the sounds and pictures, I hope!

Sorry about the trouble - there are some errors in your manifest file that need to be corrected before it can push to the site successfully. We have been manually triaging invalid pushes and reporting the errors back to authors, as we're still in the process of rolling out better error-reporting to users. Thanks for bearing with us!

https://github.com/jbrooksuk/jQueryLocalStorage/commit/4eca4...

https://github.com/jquery/plugins.jquery.com/issues/11

Even in feminist circles, the the idea that "douchebag" is definitely sexist and denigrating is far from a settled argument: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/11/16/in-defense-... http://mooretoons.com/2008/08/20/is-douchebag-sexist/

At the core of this argument is the idea that the "popularization" of act of douching itself was itself anti-woman, insofar as it categorised normal women's bodies and actions as unclean and shameful, and in turn advocated an unhealthy "solution" to a problem largely invented by the patriarchy.

Nevertheless, I cringed ever-so-slightly when Jake gave this talk at JSConf and again when I saw it here on HN, because I knew that in recent months, among all the other salient gender issues that have been floating about, a bunch of people also "heard douchebag was sexist," and so would lodge this reservation.

Leaving the gender-stereotypes, etc. etc. aspect of it aside, git is quite literally "my daddy's version control." I used to work for my family (writing software) and one of the last things I did a few months before leaving was get the entire company onto Git from our "existing" "version control system." He completely loves it! And he internalised something quickly that I still see in this very thread - Git makes it harder, not easier, to screw things up and lose changes.

I just don't buy the conclusion here. There are a lot of things where "the universe" of people who are in some way associated with X is much larger than "the X community," but that doesn't mean that the community doesn't exist.

There are lots of people who have used a radial saw, downloaded a torrent, seen a ballet, or given someone else flowers. That doesn't preclude people who enjoy hanging out with other carpenters, filesharers, dancers, or florists from believing in and participating in a community around their individual passions, even if that doesn't attract anyone who's ever put up a piece of sheetrock or put together a bouquet.

I don't dispute for a minute the notion that those communities in turn will have elements of tribalism, in-groups, customs and common beliefs that perhaps, in turn, affect who ends up participating in it.

However, the logic at the end of David's post seems to me to dismiss the notion that people who are passionate about anything should want associate with each other and deepen their connection to extend beyond it, so long as there exist people who don't want to.

Part of NYC culture is having strongly held opinions about pizza, so I think it's a perfectly reasonable statement to make. Moreover, I recently had the slice from this very 2 Bros the other day at a meetup, and was vastly underwhelmed. The sauce was meh, the cheese was gummy, but the worst part of the experience was that the slice was just undercooked - the crust simply wasn't crisp. It's super popular, and for 99 cents, a good value and still better pizza than you can get anywhere else in the world, but quality-wise, Abitino's and Famiglia both blow it out of the water, and that's saying nothing of your average independent neighbourhood pizzeria.

I don't think anyone in particular tried to make a furor, more that this was just a particularly egregious and dumb case, where it was easy for everyone to pile on and apparent to everyone what the proper resolution was. It snowballed quickly because unlike more pervasive gender issues in the tech community, this was an easy one to solve, if not avoid in the first place.

Looks like they got that straightened out.

I was super pumped to see this headline, as just a couple of weeks ago I was browsing the wikipedia articles for the original series of games, and considered getting on some old school action, so I'm psyched that there's gonna be a new Sim City. I'm not psyched that the official site with the video links and new features, etc., is a gigantic mess of Drupal errors :(

http://www.simcity.com/en_US/game/overview

This post completely misses the point that clothing can be an enjoyable form of self-expression, and that picking out what you're going to wear need not be some onerous chore. Instead of acting like it's completely unreasonable of "society," writ large, to judge you by your outward appearance, consider taking ownership of it. Strapping on the most boring thing you can possibly find and wearing it until it disintegrates isn't going to solve the problem that people aren't judging you by your "intellect, actions, or humour."

Distilling clothing down to its original "purpose" and saying "don't use it for anything else" is naïve and dismissive of the human experience. I suppose the author also doesn't keep any art on on the walls of his shelter and eats nothing but flavourless meat and vegetables?

I realise that a lot of people, and programmers especially, just aren't that into clothes, and that's fine. But that doesn't mean you /have/ to be bland. I love how the piece ends by essentially saying "wear the same uninteresting clothes every day, blend into the crowd, and THEN enjoy as the mundanity of your life somehow decreases." I hope I'm not alone in thinking, "Wat?"

If this is the solution to a problem people are having, it sure is a depressing one.

> They're banned because they created an army of sockpuppets to vote up their posts.

I too am interested in some sort of substantiation for this claim.

I like the idea that 'the people' who called the police and 'the people' who got diveintohtml5.info up and running are obviously the same people, cause they like, use the internet and stuff.

All the jQuery UI plugins allow you to fetch cached references to the widget's proxy elements by grabbing the instance from the jQuery data cache.

var tabs = $("#mytabs").data("tabs"); tabs.lis.append("<button>Add A Button To All your Tabs</button>");

You can use this to avoid doing crazy DOM traversals to work with and customise widget components.

----

That said, we are aware that the perception you share here is not uncommon and that we need to work to document the shared API of our widgets, and that is something we are planning to address in the near term.

"Is it reference? No - they don't claim to be."

They don't? http://gyazo.com/61a797188fa6045b23e6f5cf22006e1c.png

I wrote the "why don't you build a better version" text as a response to "Internet Culture," which mandates that if you want to point out that something is bad, you actually have to build a better alternative yourself.

If I ride on a boring, crappy rollercoaster, I don't need to open up my own theme park in order to air my frustrations.

A lot of the people who worked on w3fools spend a lot of time helping actual other human beings who need support in building websites, and encounter the errors from w3schools regularly, and we invest our time in those and other endeavours. W3schools said "we're going to spend OUR time on building an entry-level reference that everyone can use," and we want

a) the community to be well-aware of its caveats b) it to improve

or a good rhyme...

"Sure, the information may be imprecise or just plain wrong, but we have to remember that this is for absolute beginners. Merely having errors does not make w3schools worthless, and a lack of errors does not make alternatives better."

This is the biggest problem. When you're an absolute beginner, you don't know what's right and what's wrong, and if wrong things are being presented in the middle of right things, it's impossible to discern the difference. Accuracy should be of the utmost concern for people who are providing information to people who are at the beginning of their learning journey.

"Just think what kind of HTML tutorial could have been created with the time and effort it took to build w3fools.com."

Not a very good one. w3fools came together in about a week of on-and-off collaboration after several months of having an etherpad where people were dumping errors they came across. The effort to create a comprehensive HTML tutorial and then position it in a place where it could counter w3schools is many orders of magnitude larger.

OTOH, TaylorSwift.com was also hotlinking, which is pretty awesome.

We did a lot of analysis of the sites that were actually hotlinking, and are planning to reach out to those that are above board and should know better. By and large, however, most of the sites that were hotlinking were porn/phishing/generally nefarious, which weighed heavily into our decision to pull the plug relatively soon. Serving people who need jQuery and jQuery UI documentation, etc., is a higher priority than not-pulling-the-rug-out-from-under networks of porn sites - people who have more than adequate access to their own hosting and distribution resources.