Hacker News Reader

And here I am, upvoting the thread because I thought it's a statement about how ridiculous all the 'X in pure CSS' posts have gotten, while everyone else in this thread seems to be genuinely impressed.

View on HN

It's even more ridiculous once you realise that data: URLs work in CSS.

Thus, I hereby present to you, the Mona Lisa in pure css (!!), using even fewer bytes!

http://codepen.io/anon/pen/gnqlc

Why not go oldschool?

Behold: Mona Lisa in pure html (!!), because more bytes is better.

http://codepen.io/anon/pen/lJxAe (may crash browsers)

At least it's better than X in pure HTML5.

And that is better than the X in pure javascript posts, with X being something which was impressive 10 years ago in other languages

...doing the same in a more restrictive environment (in this case, browser) is always an accomplishment.

Conflating positive fruition with positive value is just a positivistic error. That would mean that any fruition is beneficial by default. Unless someone made "logic in css". It doesn't stop others from having a valid pov because a made b in a more restrictive c env.

Having said that, I like all the Mr Doob stuff and most openGL demo stuff coming out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com