HN user

mundizzle

213 karma
Posts6
Comments29
View on HN

i always found Chomsky's take on sports to be quite interesting...

"Take, say, sports -- that's another crucial example of the indoctrination system, in my view. For one thing because it -- you know, it offers people something to pay attention to that's of no importance. [audience laughs] That keeps them from worrying about -- [applause] keeps them from worrying about things that matter to their lives that they might have some idea of doing something about. And in fact it's striking to see the intelligence that's used by ordinary people in [discussions of] sports [as opposed to political and social issues]. I mean, you listen to radio stations where people call in -- they have the most exotic information [more laughter] and understanding about all kind of arcane issues. And the press undoubtedly does a lot with this.

You know, I remember in high school, already I was pretty old. I suddenly asked myself at one point, why do I care if my high school team wins the football game? [laughter] I mean, I don't know anybody on the team, you know? [audience roars] I mean, they have nothing to do with me, I mean, why I am cheering for my team? It doesn't mean any -- it doesn't make sense. But the point is, it does make sense: it's a way of building up irrational attitudes of submission to authority, and group cohesion behind leadership elements -- in fact, it's training in irrational jingoism. That's also a feature of competitive sports. I think if you look closely at these things, I think, typically, they do have functions, and that's why energy is devoted to supporting them and creating a basis for them and advertisers are willing to pay for them and so on."

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1992----02.htm

Show HN: Macdown 12 years ago

agree. i prefer to write anything (code, markdown, etc) in my own text editor - sublime

for live preview, i used Marked.app which also supports GitHub flavored markdown

thanks for the tips! i've also sampled all the coconut waters i can find. 2 things i've come to notice...

- coconut water from thailand has a better (sweeter?) taste than from brazil.

- drinking out of steel/aluminum vs plastic containers somehow makes a difference. that could just be in my head though.

Amy & Brian's is the brand i get around here that satisfies my criteria.

will have to checkout the raw stuff though :)

>>> Personally, I'm moving away from using frameworks.

if i'm not mistaken, that is the entire point of Flatiron. just a collection of independent modules. use as much or as little as you want.

from first paragraph...

"Philosophy No one agrees on frameworks. It's difficult to get consensus on how much or how little a framework should do. Flatiron's approach is to package simple to use yet full featured components and let developers subtract or add what they want."

i got 99 problems but recruiters spamming me with job opportunities ain't one.

given the economy and the unemployment rate, i'm thankful for what i've got.

just a bit of perspective

i generally avoid putting all properties of an object in one the same line in the name of readability and also to avoid the 80 char limit.

instead i do something like this. (incorrect trailing commas removed from the previous example)

  var infos = [
    {
      name: "red",
      value: [255, 0, 0, 255]
    },
    {
      name: "green",
      value: [0, 255, 0, 255]
    },
    {
      name: "blue",
      value: [0, 0, 255, 255]
    }
  ];

exactly. clarence is not a 4G hotspot. he's a human being who has a 4G hotspot. therein lies the rub.

i have no doubt that this was done with the best intentions and that the whole idea is a win/win for everyone involved. but the wording IS literally dehumanizing.

Sure, I can understand that.

My point is that most of the very best front-end developers I've met don't have CS degrees. So it seems unfair to penalize them for something they've never been exposed too. There are other ways to assess someones conceptual ability.

i hear stories like this a lot. serious question... why does Google ask standard comp sci questions when interviewing for front-end developers?

in over 10 years of front-end development for non-trivial business applications, i have yet to encounter a scenario where ignorance of bubble sort prevented me from doing my job well.

i can tell you what i value when interviewing a front-end developer - in depth knowledge of cross browser quirks and coding techniques to address said quirks (sans jQuery). someone who can tell me what OOCSS is and why it's beneficial. someone who values every pixel, http request, and div like it was their last and uses them wisely.

i don't discount the value of standard comp sci knowledge, but i get rage face if someone judges my skill as a front-end developer based on how well i answer those types of questions

lastly, ever view source of any Google app? that tells me all i need to know about their idea of a front-end development

1) By all means write about what you like or what helps you. But please don't tell me what I should do. Worse, don't imply I'm dumb if I don't.

2) In my experience, beginners are best served learning "pure" CSS first. After they get their bearings, I point them to resources like OOCSS or SMACSS. Once they demonstrate a solid appreciation of concepts like specificity, modularity, etc, I feel much better about their prospects using a pre-processor.

3) Power tools like pre-processors amplify bad code. Blanket statements that everyone should use them - particularly "non-experts and geniuses" - is dangerous advice.

disclaimer: I like and use pre-processors myself.

i'm sorry, i don't understand who is competing or how this hurts Path.

all i've seen are people being inspired by Path, saying as much, then cleverly recreating the effect for themselves. these same people turn around and share their own code with the rest of the world via blog post or GitHub.

if anything this has helped spread the word about Path. this was how i first heard of them. throw in a bunch of people sharing and learning code techniques and it's a win for everyone.

Short answer is build in HTML/JS/CSS/AJAX now. Feature detect and add HTML5 where you can. Polyfill with Flash where necessary. Think about the future.

It's true that HTML5 can't do everything that Flex can today. More important is the fact that the vast majority of enterprise apps don't require those things.

Developing an app in Flex just because it can do things today that HTML5 can't is short sighted. That rationale will not hold water 3 years from now when the boss is asking "what the hell is Flex?"

This article describes an outdated process.

"Adjusting round corners for a button in photoshop is easier then[sic] adjusting border-radius in css"

Actually, in CSS it couldn't be more simple... border-radius: 5px;

This makes me wonder if the author thinks we should be chopping images for rounded corners?

"This process is executed in a linear fashion starting with information and ending in code, but requires iteration loops at each step."

A good web design process is an active collaboration between designers and developers, not hand offs. I'm a firm believer that design should be coded early and often in order to uncover design issues that can't be detected on paper.

It's fine to break things out into steps, however, they should be iterated as a whole instead of individually. This way issues found in one step have a chance to feedback into previous steps.

what does this article have to do with jQuery? can we please stop with the fanboy <<myLib>> is better than <<urLib>>? it's short sighted and misleading.

i've used both libraries in many commercial projects for large corporations. both have their strengths and weaknesses. in many cases, directly comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges.

YUI is well suited to larger "kitchen sink" apps where you require many rich widgets working in unison. You know that if you use a YUI widget, it's professionally coded, well-documented, and works cross-browser. The same can't be said for all jQuery plugins. YUI 2 doesn't have the syntactic suger of jQuery, however, YUI3 fixes that. Finally, YUI is ANYTHING but monolithic. you only load in the files you want. jQuery is the lib that is all in one file - the very definition of monolithic.

jQuery is great for simplicity and ease of development. Great for a website that you want to add some DOM interactivity and/or AJAX. Perfect for "find something -> do something". While it has a huge amount of plugins, they vary dramatically in terms of quality. If you are building a large web app, things can start to break down with a mix of plugins from different authors and line upon line of chained methods.

in short, both are great libraries with excellent strengths. use the right tool for the job.