thitcanh

Just as a side-note since their example uses CloudFlare: I think that host-rewriting is disabled on CloudFlare as a security or spam-avoidance feature.

If you want to have CF change the host to something else, like censored.com, this domain must also be part of your controlled domains, which means CF can’t be used for this purpose.

This at least was the case last time I looked into this (12 months ago)

It’s also possible that this feature is enabled for paying users, which I wasn’t.

I'm 23 buckets tall and half a periwinkle.

For now?

What’s the advantage? I don’t think it’s likely to cost less as a service, especially directly from Apple. If you get the same performance per dollar you might as well keep using what you have.

Heat and energy savings only apply to the direct user (in this case Apple Hosting) and unlikely to be passed onto you (since it’s Apple).

We’ve already seen this with M1 computers which are simpler and less expensive but did not have a lower retail price.

You know what’s getting old? My 2020 computer having the same RAM as my 2013 computer.

This is not acceptable for a $2000+ machine.

Apple really skimps on RAM and my new iPhone can’t take a photo without purging every single other app.

What a feature to introduce in 2020. This has been a core part of the UI of OS X for… ever? For every app.

In a honest non-secure version, just like in the old times.

You’re missing the point. Why buy something if you don’t have to? That’s the reasoning here. You don’t spend money, your product doesn’t depreciate, you always have a brand new product. You only have to deal with your guilt and ethics or lack thereof.

I think the answer is not “not”

It’s abuse because people buy it with the intent to return it. Buying it and then honestly changing your mind is fine, but Amazon probably determined that wasn’t the case here.

It’s kinda ridiculous that this happens. It’s not like it’s graphic intensive. Why would it warm up any GPU of this decade?

To be fair, that always refers to the LOC I wrote.

If I can write monaLisa() and get a nice painting on canvas then that really was 1 LOC.

What line count doesn’t include is the weight of the dependency, which may or may not matter.

It’s an interesting product but it’s very barebones. Netlify is a whole company vested in making the same thing as this “side project” by CloudFlare and therefore has a lot more interesting features than just serving static files.

Yeah that sounds reasonable. I don’t know if I’ll ever get around to rewriting the templates.

By the way you could just use the images served from WordPress.com I assume… unless the ToS don’t allow that.

Maintenance is certainly useful even if there are no new features. I doubt the project is bug-free so no updates means no bugfixes either.

Do you still have a regular WordPress host though? Do you use WordPress.com?

I always wanted to do this but every solution requires some non-free PHP hosting alongside the static host. WordPress.com doesn’t let you customize it unless you pay and if you want to use it headlessly you have to build a non-WordPress template elsewhere.

I have a low-traffic low-edit WordPress site I want to staticize, but no solution is server-free.

Semi-related: Do you think we’ll ever see a substantial reduction of pre-flight times? Why can’t we go through check-in and board directly, after an immediate security check? (Needless to say, this requires a brand new type of airport)

Some airports are in a good position to implement this already: Singapore airport has security checks right at the gate so you go through them and wait a short time in the seating area. When the plane is available, boarding happens immediately. What’s missing here is that the check-in desk is still way before this point.

Indeed this change has several drawbacks:

- less competition for the affected routes

- harder transfers between modes of transportation (physically)

- harder bookings across modes of transportation

- disappearance of entire routes made possible by hubs from flight-only OTAs (the vast majority of them)

I agree with the sentiment, but I suppose they should just be taxed higher and somehow forced to include a note like:

“A train/bus transfer between CDG and XYZ is also available with <third party>. Wanna book just up to CDG?”

This is true. Most of these comparisons are between a well-used system with a brand-new one. “Of course Firefox feels snappier than Chrome, you haven’t installed your 20 extensions yet.” A so on.

I wouldn’t use it either, for the same reason. Choosing a movie now takes 1 second for each card since they’re displayed one at a time and I have to do something to say NO.

How about you just show me a list where I can mark what I like and then get a list at the end. Then just switch phones and see each other’s list. Instead of an exact match, you limit each other’s choice to 10 movies you just picked.

Maybe, but why aren’t more girls interested in computing in the first place? If it was just a workplace issue we’d see a lot more college admissions of women in CS programs, who then would drop out or change career later due to those issues.

I don’t think computing is seen strictly as a gender-restricted job like, say, mining and teaching, I wouldn’t expect much friction in the way of a young girl to be potentially interested in it and begin a career.

It just doesn’t happen that often, however. Does it have to be someone’s fault?

I don’t disagree with you, but that will make advertising less effective. A nursing job shown to me and a programming job shown to my sister will both be ignored and wasted. The opposite wouldn’t be true.

Likewise showing me a car shop job would also be wasted, not because of my gender, but because I have no interest in cars, as my Facebook profile clearly shows.

In other news, 12% of nurses are men. Is it because the nursing industry isn’t welcoming to men or is it because men aren’t attracted to nursing jobs?

You can see bias anywhere you look, but if you look well you’ll see that it’s just a natural consequence of the real world.

If a user joined a car shop group, said user is likely to be interested in car-related jobs. It happens to be that most of these users are men. The algorithm is working as intended.

In some fields this difference isn’t as clear or obvious, so we end up with these articles.

Why would it be a bad idea? Is styling your site a bad idea?

Let your ship sink, mine will have one fewer hole.

Kinda, but there’s no way a “Contact us” call-to-action in the middle of a hero is going to look acceptable as a plain underlined blue text. Some links need to be boxed and that makes them look like buttons. Not a lot of wiggle room there.

The other 10% is from people giving up unstyling buttons. If I remember correctly they need more than 10 lines of CSS to undo all kinds of weird specific CSS that <button> has. Maybe nowadays it can be done with `all: initial`

Not an excuse, but it can be frustrating.

So you do care since only links follow your browsers’ behavior. Nothing else can be right-clicked to show “Copy link address” in the dropdown for example.

The golden rule is that if a button opens a link to a page that has its own URL, it should be a plain anchor tag.

You can apply whatever JavaScript on top of it to “ajaxify” it, as long as you ignore altered clicks (ctrl, cmd, shift, etc)

<button> is not commonly mis-used as a link. I do agree that <div onclick="goTo('/contacts')"> and its equivalents are too damn common and just show complete lack of knowledge of the platform. <a> is the core element of the World Wide Web, without which there wouldn’t be a web.

You’re missing the point of the article entirely.

The author argues to NOT use fake anchor tags like <a href="#"> and then add functionality to it via JavaScript. Instead you should use <button type="button">.

Either way, JavaScript is required.

What you’re suggesting means your link is actually a link to another page, which works without JavaScript and that’s not the point of the article.

If anyone is looking for alternatives, try fd

https://github.com/sharkdp/fd