Is it just me, or is anyone else seeing what looks like the mouse pointer of everyone else reading the page, like 1,000 little ants on the screen
I really enjoyed the tongue in cheek design. I think every modern browser either allows you to turn on reader mode (especially on mobile) or just turn off CSS. This particular article works excellently even in w3m.
:D
> I really enjoyed the tongue in cheek design. I think every modern browser either allows you to turn on reader mode (especially on mobile) or just turn off CSS. This particular article works excellently even in w3m.
Firefox Focus on mobile does not have Reader Mode.
I should also add that the night mode won't be as fun on mobile either, just checked and I don't think it works with pointer events for the effect
The decision to design a serious (read: not-tongue-in-cheek) topic with these "quirky" tricks sucks, JMHO.
I can not imagine manually approving JS for every site. And again doing the inverse and have noscript installed to deny one website a year does not seem to be worth it for me. In this case I can also just use a adblock rule to block that specific script or all .js files from the domain I guess. So I really no not need NoScript.
For those sites that do need JS, NoScript's whitelist feature makes it quick & easy to fix. The first time I visit a new site, if it is obviously broken, then I whitelist the main domain. If that doesn't fix it, then I whitelist a couple likely-looking domains (often sites import JS from similar domains, or from common library domains). That's enough to get probably 90+% of websites working, while still leaving most garbage JS disabled. The remaining ~10% of websites that need a dozen domains whitelisted are probably not worth visiting anyway, so I just move on at that point. Or NoScript even lets you temp-whitelist everything for a given tab and just put up with the misery to get whatever I need from that one site. Since the whitelist persists forever, and I don't visit hundreds of different websites every day, after some time it becomes pretty rare that I need to whitelist more than one or two things per day.
You maintain an adblock blacklist, I maintain a NoScript whitelist. Not so different :)
As others have pointed out, reader mode works as expected.
2. I don't think it's a very good joke to post long-form content on your blog with the expectation that it's basically unreadable without a reader mode.
> The fact that people seem to take it seriously says something about the contemporary state of webdesign :)
Mind expanding and what it says exactly about contemporary web design?
Whether I take it seriously or not doesn't change the fact that it's still damn hard to read anything.
The same as when political satire is indistinguishable from actual politics. It means that the real things has sort of become a joke itself.
not even a proper flashlight. it updates when the mouse moves, so you're SOL if you scroll on desktop.
[0] WS connection is on `wss://tonsky.me/pointers?id=XXXXXX&page=/blog/unicode/&platform=XXX`
To each their own.
> It made me close the browser tab.
If you can't handle refreshing or merely clicking it again, that's you having a problem, not the site having a problem.
No, it's the site's problem. The contrast between the blinding radioactive yellow background and the font is eye straining and doesn't meet the WCAG standards for accessible text. And the dark mode is unusable. The joke would be funnier if there was a real dark mode or if the light mode was readable.
> doesn't meet the WCAG standards for accessible text.
Oh, which part of the standards? When I punch #000000 on #FDDB29 into contrast checkers I get good results.
The single quote isn't as good but all the rest has those colors.
eg https://www.npr.org/2023/05/02/1173418268/loneliness-connect...
Probably not the greatest during a hacker news hug of death, but if I read that article some other time and saw one of the moving pointers, I would think it was really cool.
.pointer.l {
background-color: green;
}