HN user

tobico

28 karma
Posts0
Comments22
View on HN
No posts found.

This is ridiculous, air travel is expensive because planes are giant expensive machines, consume a significant amount of rare fossil fuel to fly, and can only be safely flown by highly trained experts. No kind of app is going to solve any of those problems.

I use ad blockers for distracting image and popup ads, but I fairly frequently click on Google text ads in search results. When there's a product category that's very crowded, if a company is willing to pony up some money to get my attention, that's often one indicator that a particular product might be worth my time to investigate.

Seems like this article makes quite a leap from the study results to their suggestion that everyone reads paper books. Study results:

1. People reading on a screen are more likely to skim

2. Skimming reduces comprehension of the material

3. Reading on paper correlates with better reconstruction of plot

It seems like 1 and 2 taken together are as good an explanation as any for 3. Given that, I feel like it would be at least worth an experiment to see if making a conscious effort to avoid skimming would be just as effective as switching to reading on paper. If so, I think that would be a cheaper and easier solution to the issue.

The funny thing about talking of tabs for piano, is that sheet music is already that. By representing music on a diatonic staff, with a key signature, it's shown in a perfect format to translate it to keys on the piano, at the expense of some other kinds of instruments, vocals, and general understanding of the music, where it would be more helpful to see the music on a chromatic staff.

"Fly is a build system for Node based in ES6 generators and promises that aims to be simple and elegant to write and extend"

If an objective is for it to be simple to write and extend, why use two shiny new features that most programmers will be unfamiliar or inexperienced with?

Firefox Hello 11 years ago

Mozilla are clearly becoming desperate to find any distinguishing factors to market Firefox. Sadly, this feels like the beginning of the end for this browser.

I don't really know enough about the maths here to interpret the background to this project, but going on the way it's written, I'm concerned the author may be suffering from schizophrenia. I'd recommend seeking advice from a mental health professional.

"The company generates revenue by selling virtual items to a small fraction of its players who wish to enhance their playing experience" should read "The company generates revenue by psychologically manipulating players into spending money in order to progress through the game"

I think this is often a problem of dividing responsibilities.

In order to turn a design into correct CSS, the size and position of each element needs to be measured precisely. If the Photoshop-using designer can't or won't do this themselves, and send through clearly specified requirements, it falls to devs who probably aren't Photoshop experts, don't know what the designer was thinking, and might not even have Photoshop.

A nice side effect of having clear requirements is that everyone in the team can easily refer back to them to spot design bugs, not just the designer.