Main » Discussion » Dear modern UXtards... » New reply
    Alert
    You are about to bump an old thread. This is usually a very bad idea. Please think about what you are about to do before you press the Post button.
    New reply
    Post help

    Presentation

    [b]…[/b] — bold type
    [i]…[/i] — italic
    [u]…[/u] — underlined
    [s]…[/s] — strikethrough
    [code]…[/code] — code block
    [spoiler]…[/spoiler] — spoiler block
    [spoiler=…]…[/spoiler]
    [source]…[/source] — colorcoded block, assuming C#
    [source=…]…[/source] — colorcoded block, specific language[which?]
    [abbr=…]…[/abbr] — abbreviation
    [color=…]…[/color] — set text color
    [jest]…[/jest] — you're kidding
    [sarcasm]…[/sarcasm] — you're not kidding

    Links

    [img]http://…[/img] — insert image
    [url]http://…[/url]
    [url=http://…]…[/url]
    >>… — link to post by ID
    [user=##] — link to user's profile by ID

    Quotations

    [quote]…[/quote] — untitled quote
    [quote=…]…[/quote] — "Posted by …"
    [quote="…" id="…"]…[/quote] — ""Post by …" with link by post ID

    Embeds

    [youtube]…[/youtube] — video ID only please
    Thread review
    Kawaoneechan Skreeonk!

    No wait that's Godzilla.
    tomman CLOSED WORKSFORME WONTFIX YOUREDOINGITWRONG NOLONGERWELCOMEHERE

    Jeff Asswood thinks you're a dinosaur.
    ‮strfry("emanresu") Man, I hate discourse.

    Today, I wanted to do a fairly simple action: find all posts by user in this thread.

    On a reasonable forum, how would it be done?

    CTRL-F "username", done.

    However, with the "new technology" of treating the browser as an obstacle you want to get rid of and using JavaScript+XHR+JSON to build the page this flies out of the window.

    To "fix" this, discourse graciously pops up the "search in forum" box instead. Which might work fine if you were looking for what they wrote, but not for their usernames.

    You might try opening the regular CTRL-F box. Which you can do. But you can only search in the tiny fraction of the page that's currently visible, for some reason.

    Why would anyone possibly want to do this? Just keep the page loaded when you scroll somewhere else, it would both be better and less development work.

    They have all the UI primitives right there, but they choose to discard them and then re-implement them as poor hacks, breaking any niche functionalities and introducing whole new classes of issues that weren't there before, like loading times WHILE SCROLLING, or how about LAG becomes an issue for a bloody forum software.

    Man, I hate discourse.

    /rant
    CaptainJistuce
    Posted by tomman
    I. Am. Not. Going. To. Install. Browser. Addons.

    End of story.

    I'm also not interested into those idealist hardcore nerd "read only computer" model. I'm happy with my current setup, and would change nothing of it.
    Gotta admit, it was a lot harder to hack the OS when we ran out of ROM.
    tomman I. Am. Not. Going. To. Install. Browser. Addons.

    End of story.

    I'm also not interested into those idealist hardcore nerd "read only computer" model. I'm happy with my current setup, and would change nothing of it.
    ‮strfry("emanresu")
    Posted by tomman

    What I meant to say: I refuse to install browser addons, period.

    Ad blocking should be done at the NETWORK level, communism-style. I have several devices at home, most of them running multiple OS, some of them that I don't manage, so maintaining an adblocking solution that requires client setup is not something I'm willing to do. I get that adblockers, script blockers and user scripts do allow more fine grained control for those pests, but once again, life is too short for spend your time meddling with web browsers and addons.

    But why? I definitely hate configuration and tinkering too (the ideal system would have / as read-only with a tmpfs overlay and only /home persistent, with any log files I didn't explicitly request wiped on shutdown), but installing uBlock and applying whatever default lists seem pertinent takes something like five minutes. Just how often do you install software anyway?

    I suppose a solution might be to install a new root certificate, then MITM all traffic going to these domains to either serve up empty files with 200 OK. If it's to be done without any configuration at all, a simpler approach might be to have them resolve to an IP where nothing is listening on port 80, leaving the connection connecting forever, instead of giving NXDOMAIN. But neither of these approaches would work for any of the examples in this thread.

    Or, there is one solution, but you'd probably hate it: Firefox Sync. Log in once whenever you've installed Firefox/Seamonkey (I believe it even prompts you), then you're done.
    tomman
    Posted by sureanem
    >Slashdot infoboxes scrolling break if you adblock, making impossible to participate in polls from the front page.

    Works fine on my machine. What ad blocker and lists are you using?

    This, to generate a custom BIND RPZ zone file for my routerbox. The used blocklists are detailed on the README (additional suggestions welcome!)

    Posted by creaothceann
    Posted by tomman
    I refuse to install more browser addons like Greasemonkey

    ?

    What I meant to say: I refuse to install browser addons, period.

    Ad blocking should be done at the NETWORK level, communism-style. I have several devices at home, most of them running multiple OS, some of them that I don't manage, so maintaining an adblocking solution that requires client setup is not something I'm willing to do. I get that adblockers, script blockers and user scripts do allow more fine grained control for those pests, but once again, life is too short for spend your time meddling with web browsers and addons.
    ‮strfry("emanresu") >Slashdot infoboxes scrolling break if you adblock, making impossible to participate in polls from the front page.

    Works fine on my machine. What ad blocker and lists are you using?
    creaothceann
    Posted by tomman
    I refuse to install more browser addons like Greasemonkey

    ?
    tomman Slashdot infoboxes scrolling break if you adblock, making impossible to participate in polls from the front page.

    They use some jQuery fuckery to set "position:fixed" or something on that container DIV if some ad DIVs can't be found, tied to the onscroll event. Dealing with that from the developer tools is a PITA because jQuery (and because I refuse to install more browser addons like Greasemonkey). Therefore I no longer participate in polls.

    WHAT THE FUCK, VA Software Dice BIZX!?!

    But hey, this is not as evil as the whole #FuckBeta fiasco.
    StapleButter and atleast the adblock-cockblocking code is plain obvious


    with more high-profile websites you'll be looking at multi-kilobyte 'minified' (read: obfuscated) JS blobs instead, so good luck finding out what's going on

    (if your assets are so big that minifying gives a significant size change, you're doing it wrong anyway)


    I recall someone having similar code in their website, and I even came up with a GreaseMonkey script to counter it

    but a while later they were confronted on GBAtemp for this, and, after throwing a fit, finally removed the cockblocker
    ‮strfry("emanresu") And for the next episode of "poorly implemented adblock blockers":
    Websites that don't allow you to select text with JavaScript disabled
    If you have to open the source and CTRL-F "adblock" to find out what's wrong, it's not working very well. Especially not if nothing happens when you enable JS but keep the adblocker on, other than that you now can select text.
    And why is that? Why isn't there any information on what's going on?

    Right, they dummied out that part. Nothing like the reassuring old "commented out code blocks" and "ASD," the seal of quality in one string.

    It otherwise seems relatively competently made, it looks nice and loads fast.

    It's amazing. In fact, one could relatively easily develop an unblockable adblock blocker, but web developers are too stupid to actually do it. Well, I guess that's some consolation. If they'd be smart people following orders we'd all have been doomed far sooner.
    ‮strfry("emanresu")
    Posted by Screwtape
    document.querySelectorAll() is a thing that works much like the most common use of jQuery, and jQuery will use that method instead of its own CSS selector query engine if the method is available. Most of the cool things jQuery did have standard DOM APIs these days... perhaps not as convenient and monadic as jQuery, but jQuery was always a bit too magical to get standardised as-is.

    Not standardized, just implemented. SpiderMonkey isn't implemented with JavaScript, so why should jQuery be? Doesn't even have to be official, could just be SpiderMonkey applying some very specific optimizations based on the hash of a loaded file, such as replacing approximately 100% of functions with native ones. It ought to make the websites go much faster, and I can't see any downsides short of the implementation costs.
    tomman Also: "IE8 does not support it" was a reason of why everybody stuck to jQuery.

    IE is now dead, and nobody has reasons to keep support for IE8 nowadays. I've been using querySelectorAll since I learned the only IE8 user I had was a unfortunate accident (it only happened once, and it was due to a faulty 3G stick, it seems)

    I've never had a reason to use jQuery, really. Even despite being the default StackOverflow choice for every JS question, no matter how trivial is it. Sure, some stuff require quite verbose JS snippets, and for very sophisticated applications you kinda need to bring 3rd-party libs, but think about it for a moment: if you're not coding the next Silly Valley "instant messaging" platform which brings an octa-core PC to its knees, why in the hell you do need too elaborate scripts? You only need AJAX (I admit you simply can't live without it nowadays - it's a complete waste to reload the entire page just for updating data in a label) and basic DOM manipulation - not hijacking core UI features for fancy animations and other UXtarded junk!
    Screwtape
    Posted by sureanem
    It is a mystery though, why doesn't Firefox implement jQuery as a part of their JS engine instead of having to import 84kb of code?

    document.querySelectorAll() is a thing that works much like the most common use of jQuery, and jQuery will use that method instead of its own CSS selector query engine if the method is available. Most of the cool things jQuery did have standard DOM APIs these days... perhaps not as convenient and monadic as jQuery, but jQuery was always a bit too magical to get standardised as-is.
    ‮strfry("emanresu") Don't worry, there's a native API for it.

    When you start calling JavaScript native, that's when you know things have gone too far. It is a mystery though, why doesn't Firefox implement jQuery as a part of their JS engine instead of having to import 84kb of code? They did it with asm.js, which is a far more obscure technology. At this point, why bother trying to fight it?
    tomman jQuery abuse that way should be condemned by the United Nations as a war crime.
    ‮strfry("emanresu")
    Posted by neologix
    I've also seen sites use JS to hijack scrolling to do stuff like make vertical scrolling scroll horizontally instead for nonsense like "portfolio sites."
    But then there's at least a method to the madness. This is completely counterintuitive.
    Posted by Covarr
    It's to make sure you aren't blocking ads. The Asshole Way™.
    It works fine on my machine, and I use an ad blocker. Furthermore, it does a piss poor job of it. There's no indication that I should disable my adblocker, like one of those annoying banners, only that the website is broken. And if I resize the website to mobile size, I can scroll just fine.
    Man, what were they thinking? It would have taken like five seconds to put in a "you're blocking ads" banner, so people at least would understand they are to disable adblock. It doesn't serve its purpose in the slightest if you need to open the website source to understand what it's supposed to do or ask random people on the Internet about it.

    Maybe, just maybe, it's to prevent the old "click somewhere, ad loads while you're clicking, you click on ad" issue, but I somehow doubt these geniuses would implement that kind of feature.
    Nicholas Steel
    > What possible purpose could this serve?

    It's to make sure you aren't blocking ads. The Asshole Way™.
    I can confirm this, the page won't scroll unless I load it without my adblocker active.
    Covarr > What possible purpose could this serve?



    It's to make sure you aren't blocking ads. The Asshole Way™.
      Main » Discussion » Dear modern UXtards... » New reply
      Yes, it's an ad.