Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rehashed's commentslogin

Maybe he just wanted to follow jQuery convention for a jQuery plugin?

http://contribute.jquery.org/style-guide/js/

> Indentation with tabs.


The story thats not being told is how those "hundreds of hours" spent building "snow fall" included direction, videography, 3d and 2d modelling and animation, photography, content-writing, design, coordination, and frontend development.

Scrollkit took just one aspect of that (frontend development) and stated "The NYT spent hundreds of hours hand-coding ‘Snow Fall.’ We made a replica in an hour."

Its outright dishonest, and devalues the great effort that others spent on it. I can understand why they are pissed.


This is Cody here from scroll kit.

You misunderstand how much time the Times spent making "Snow Fall." They spent six months and of those tens of thousands of hours in those six months, hundreds of it was spent hand coding the layout.

The experience involved in hand-coding the layout is painful and awkward and can be improved dramatically. Getting those hundred hours down to an hour is something we think everyone can get behind.


What it sounds like is that many of those hours were spent editing, re-arranging and designing the content, and you didn't account for any of that. It feels like saying "it took Neal Stephenson hundreds of hours to arrange the words for Reamde , and I've typed it out in six!"


I know right. Is like saying, it took so and so this much time to compose this song but I was able to replicate it in a few hours.


Hopefully there wont be the same issues as with posterous:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1441997


Socialsync meets the definition of synchronization in the assemblance of a synchronism. I don't see how them failing to meet the authors rather loose choice of definition justifies them being called liars.


When I think of sync, I think of Dropbox's or any other cloud storages "all files are exactly the same in every location". LiveFyre's implementation is essentially Facebook crossposting.


synchronization has to work both ways or otherwise it is only an one sided "update"


Stonehenge is clearly the outside of the asylum.


Some further clarification:

Henges have a ditch with an outer bank. At Stonehenge it is reversed, with a ditch OUTSIDE the bank - effectively making the world around it the structure for which it is named.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henge


I have the same issue.


This is exactly one of the concerns I mentioned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5353171. It is already exhibited by other controllers of TLDs: http://ydal.de/a-records-on-top-level-domains/

I havent received a reply yet to my request to reopen the public discussion on the new gTLDs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5351335. I'll be chasing up on it today - I would appeal to the rest of you to do the same and help stop these gTLDs ever seeing the light of day.


http://AI/ has address 209.59.119.34

http://BO/ has address 166.114.1.28

http://CM/ has address 195.24.205.60

http://DK/ has address 193.163.102.24

http://GG/ has address 87.117.196.80

http://JE/ has address 87.117.196.80

http://KH/ has address 203.223.32.21

http://PN/ has address 80.68.93.100

http://TK/ has address 217.119.57.22

http://TO/ has address 216.74.32.107

http://UZ/ has address 91.212.89.8

http://VI/ has address 193.0.0.198

http://WS/ has address 64.70.19.33


It sounds to me like you are doing your standups wrong. The job of the facilitator (in your case, the team leader) should be to keep things moving, and ensure that you aren't taking 30 minutes.

The most important thing to get out of the meeting, IMHO, is challenges, as status should be evident by the location of your story tickets. The problem with providing an environment where "Others can skim-read or ignore." is that they often will, and peer challenges can easily go unresolved without adequate feedback.

You are standing for a reason - its uncomfortable (for those of us who sit all day). Your facilitator should be roping in the conversation (and if not you need to replace them - rotating among team members often works). If that doesn't work, then your teams are likely too large.


What benefit do these new TLDs bring to the table? If ICANN need additional revenue, why not fractionally increase the cost of the current gTLDs instead of introducing more?

All these new domains can possibly achieve, IMHO, is to confuse the consumer and allow corporations to control access to 'desirable' gTLDs.

If the domain space is so overcrowded, then by all means introduce a new gTLD - but keep it ICANN controlled. Either run a poll to choose, or allow the corporations to 'sponsor' their choice of TLDs incorporation into ICANN - but there is no way they should be commercially controlled!

UPDATE: Im really upset that I missed this - looks like ICANN opened up a discussion for public comment (which has now closed after only a month? Surely such a major change should be open to larger public debate..): http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-0...

UPDATE2: I have sent an email to karen.lentz@icann.org requesting that the discussion be reopened. I believe it is our duty as a community to publicise this discussion amongst web professionals and have a further chance to fight it. I would respectfully request that you do the same!


UPDATE3: The more I think about this, the more concerned I become. These new gTLDs, given the proliferation of combined search and location bars in modern browsers are tantamount to a direct keyword to those corporations with $185k to spend. Type in 'antivirus', and you will be directed to symantec - not the search results you would likely expect. This has to stop - NOW.


Searching from the URL bar has always been a bad idea, too bad Google adopted the practice.


That's hardly a reason to stop the new TLDs, you just need a rule that says you can't have A/AAAA records on the new TLDs.


There are many reasons. That is just one of them.

Please see parent and other posts in the thread, comments on the linked article, and discussions in the forums for others.


you already dont/wont have naked tld records because of local addressing: http://www/ becomes http://www.mydomain.com/ inside my os as directed by my dhcp server.


Does this require that my apps users each have a dropbox account?


Yes! From their "Getting Started" section - " you'll need to add snippets of code in the right places to successfully link a user's Dropbox account to your app"



yep, so you shouldnt rely on it but make it a feature of your app to sync the data to dropbox.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: