Thanks for pointing this out. Looks like it could be a bug in the static site generator we're using; I'll look into it more today.
141 karma · joined July 20, 2017
It's open source, so feel free to pull it and give it a try locally! We have installation instructions on our site[0] for the Docker image.
- AirBnb[1]: "We'd always recommend that you use Google Chrome to browse the site: we've optimised things for this browser. Thanks."
- Seamless[2]: "Safari is not a good browser to use with our website. Google Chrome work better with our website or you can download the app."
- DirecTV Now[3]
- IDAT solutions[4] (some random thing I found while searching)
- Countfire[5] (ditto)
Groupon said something similar as well but walked it back. Whatsapp's web app didn't support Firefox initially but does now.
Could browse through Web Compat[6] as well, though I'm not sure if this site is more about sites that should work in FF but don't, or Firefox bugs.
[0]: https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/4/16805216/google-chrome-onl...
[1]: https://twitter.com/AirbnbHelp/status/752829250198245376
[2]: https://twitter.com/Seamless_Care/status/942798540396474368
[3]: https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/7/15758274/directv-now-googl...
[4]: https://www.idatsolutions.com/faq/
Plus, "viable" might not only have been referring to the tech itself. Public opinion and existing regulations, for better or worse, are a part of viability.
The most interesting thing to come out of all of this: given that "satire" isn't a binary thing, how can you police it? What's to keep anyone from saying whatever and calling it satire, without hurting silly sites like the Babylon Bee or The Onion who are pretty clear about their silliness? Can such a thing be policed manually or algorithmically?
Tangentially, does Hustler Magazine v. Falwell ("the parody could not have been reasonably considered believable")[1] deserve re-evaluation in light of Poe's Law ("it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some...as a sincere expression of the parodied views")[2]? I ask this light-heartedly, more for discussion than out of any kind of strong conviction on the matter.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16503829
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell
A lot of gems in mine:
- "Gar Trek" shirt on a Star Wars site
- Phantom Menace my favorite Star Wars movie (ask me anything)
- Mamma and Dogpile, CDNow, and Pepsi World
- JavaScript Alert!
If you want to spice it up, check out Southern Airways Express[0]. You can fly between Pittsburgh and Lancaster for as little as $30 on a tiny little 8-to-10-seat plane, which is a really unique and scenic experience. Catch a ride to the Lancaster Amtrak where there are a lot more options for getting to NYC.
I've done Megabus and Greyhound on return trips. You get what you pay for. But if you happen to live in the North Hills, the bus depot for Megabus is in Ohio Township and if you ask nicely they'll let you ride up there.
How does this project compare to Mozilla's Coral Project[0]?
I like React because it's easier to set up and get working; you don't need some ridiculous dev environment just to say "Hello world". I think React does one thing and does it really well, and its flexibility makes it easier to mix and match packages to do what you need to do.
Angular is ridiculously opinionated, and very complete. But for big projects or for multiple projects with different people coming in and out of the project this can be a strong asset. We've had some big React projects where you have to go out and get Redux, then start thinking about observables, maybe you want TypeScript but maybe you want Flow, etc. Angular already thought about all of that, made decisions for you, and structured it in a standard way so that once you learn the conventions it's pretty easy to reason about any Angular project.
And as a front-end dev who got started on the Web in the Netscape days, I appreciate that Angular doesn't treat CSS as a bug to be fixed. React (and the kinds of people who work on React) seem to desire a pure JavaScript world, while Angular keeps a more familiar HTML/CSS convention on the template level.
It was really neat to see a uniquely Aussie car culture that felt really vibrant. I loved that El Caminos and Rancheros, long gone in the US, were alive and well as Holden and Ford Falcon Utes. It was neat that Toyota had its own Camry-ish car, called the Aurion, made in Australia. It was neat that Pontiac in the US was getting the Commodore, which was a great-looking car. Even though it was still Ford, GM, and Toyota on some corporate level, they had their own unique thing that I was able to discover while I was there.
There aren't always perfect solutions to problems. Sometimes futurologists are found waiting for the perfect, inexhaustible source of energy to power the world, but the practical consensus is that our renewable world be a mix of solar, wind, hydro, and some sort of more-advanced atom-splitting. Find multiple angles to chip away at the problem until you get where you want to go.
I don't think it's unreasonable to say "let's try to get all sidewalk cracks under an inch" and then say "let's get wheelchairs that can handle an inch-high crack", as an arbitrary example.
I mean, if we want to talk about unintended benefits - my most mobile stroller was purchased as a running stroller to be used on a rail-to-trail, then I found out it could handle bad sidewalks pretty well. Isn't that the same argument as my top-level post, just from the opposite side?
We'll never have perfect anything. But I think you're being more than a bit defeatist here. I'm in the US Northeast and the sidewalk in my house was installed in 2008. Still basically flawless today. As homeowners, we accept that we need a new roof every 25 years because the consequences are real and tangible to us. I have to think that sidewalks are just part of the cost of living in a walkable community, even if we don't walk that much.
A few communities down, they require sidewalk maintenance for residents if the pavers are uneven at all. It's a very affluent borough, but you'll see people grind down the edges of the sidewalk that stick up in order to meet the code. So you can maintain without replacing.
And besides, we don't have this logic for roads. I mean, SUVs can handle anything, so why bother with all of this even pavement with good drainage?
>Instead, we should be building better accessibility devices, ones that can navigate tough terrain.
You're being downvoted for the first paragraph, but I think your second paragraph is sensible. My running stroller is way better at handling broken sidewalks than the scissor stroller with tiny wheels that fits great in a small trunk and works well at the mall. Strollers aren't super expensive (at least not $30k like that wheelchair) so I can have more than one and use the best one for my situation.
We see concept robots that can handle rough terrain. Wouldn't it be great if that got integrated into wheelchairs somehow?
When I had kids and started walking them around in a stroller, you learn really quickly where the sidewalks with ramps are, and you (and your toddler who likes to help!) come to appreciate the buttons that open doors automatically.
I run as well, and it's not fun to trip on uneven sidewalks. Sometimes at night I'd rather run on the road where I can count on a more even surface and no branches hitting me in the face. I think I'm more inclined to shovel my sidewalk in the winter because I don't like running on compressed snow that melted in the sun and refroze overnight.
So...yeah! Fix this stuff for disabled people, and other people get to benefit. Sidewalks are for everyone.
But I think your main thrust here is that it comes off as Mozilla acting aimless? It's a fair point, and it makes me a bit sad to think that Fira Sans has completely gone off of their radar now.
For those who don't notice consciously it'll do something on a subconscious level. For those who do notice the difference between Arial and Helvetica, it can make a world of difference.
I've been working on the marketing a bit, and the sense I get in this space is that, like home security, password security is a series of trade-offs. One size doesn't fit all; different situations require different needs, and everyone tries to balance the safety they want to feel with convenience that they desire.
So, in our case, there are a couple of good options. You could operate on a hosted service and get the cloud-based benefits without needing to worry about infrastructure or updates, or you could self-host and trade a bit of hassle in exchange for trusting the host and verifying that the updates will do what they say they're going to do.
[0]: http://passit.io