• 1 Post
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle

  • Ditto on the no text part. That is an accessibility failure that’s way too widespread.
    Sometimes I’m afraid to even push a button: does this delete my thing, or does it do some other irreversible change? Will I be able to tell what it did? Maybe it does something completely different, or maybe I’m lucky and it does in fact perform the action I’m looking for and which in my mind is a no-brainer to include?

    And it’s infected interpersonal communication too - people peppering their messages with emojis, even professional communications. It not only looks goofy, but is either redundant (when people just add the emoji together with the word it’s meant to represent - such a bizarre practice) or, worse, ambiguous when the pictogram replaces the word and the recipient(s) can’t make out what it depicts.
    The most fun is when it’s a mix - the message contains some emojis with accompanying translation, some without.


  • Me every time I see one of these pretty much.
    Feels like these are from another timeline. Guess the name is fitting.

    If I had to guess, I think this might be poking fun at overprotective parents who unwittingly do more harm than good by controlling their kids’ environment to an unhealthy degree.
    Trying to read more into it, perhaps it’s also pointing at the propagation of bad childrearing practices across generations - parent cows grew up on a farm, constrained by an electric fence. Though presumably more independent now, this is what they knew growing up, so they apply (a bizarre perversion of) these same practices to their own children.

    I’m probably way off though, because that interpretation barely elicits a half smile from me.
    Curious for an explanation from someone who actually gets it too.


  • I don’t share the hate for flat design.
    It’s cleaner than the others, simpler and less distracting. Easier on the eyes, too. It takes itself seriously and does so successfully imo (nice try, aero). It feels professional in a way all the previous eras don’t - they seem almost child-like by comparison.

    Modern design cultivates recognizable interactions by following conventions and common design language instead of goofy icons and high contrast colors. To me, modern software interfaces look like tools; the further you go back in time, the more they look like toys.

    Old designs can be charming if executed well and in the right context. But I’m glad most things don’t look like they did 30 years ago.

    I’m guessing many people associate older designs with the era they belonged to and the internet culture at the time. Perhaps rosy memories of younger days. Contrasting that with the overbearing corporate atmosphere of today and a general sense of a lack of authenticity in digital spaces everywhere, it’s not unreasonable to see flat design as sterile and soulless. But to me it just looks sleek and efficient.
    I used to spend hours trying to customize UIs to my liking, nowadays pretty much everything just looks good out of the box.

    The one major gripe I have is with the tendency of modern designs to hide interactions behind deeply nested menu hopping. That one feels like an over-correction from the excessively cluttered menus of the past.
    That and the fact that there’s way too many “settings” sections and you can never figure out which one has the thing you’re looking for.

    P S. The picture did flat design dirty by putting it on white background - we’re living in the era of dark mode!




  • I think they meant the only language we transpile to for the express reason that working with it directly is so unpleasant.

    Java is not transpiled to another language intended for human use, it’s compiled to JVM bytecode.

    People don’t usually develop software directly in the IR of LLVM. They do develop software using vanilla JavaScript.


  • You don’t need to correct something everyone already knows is an exaggeration (and I agree it doesn’t seem very socially aware to do so) but this is a political discussion on the internet, so

    1. Everyone does not know the original figure is an exaggeration, especially by how much
    2. Providing the actual information ads value to the conversation and in this context this is more important than whether the commenter comes off as smarmy or socially inept

    What if they said “Hey I know you’re being hyperbolic, but for anyone who’s interested, here’s the number estimated by experts…”?
    The only difference here is tone.
     

    I’m not sure why they only shared numbers for minke whales, as these don’t seem to be hunted anymore in Iceland in contrast to fin whales, whom the article was about.

    Global fin whale population was estimated in 2018 by IUCN to have been around 100000.
    https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/2478/50349982#population