coderdude

Have you ever played an online game or seen a 40 minute old throwaway account used to attack someone? Fake email addresses to send hate mail. Twilio numbers used to call and harass people. If someone feels like they can deliver abuse anonymously then they're certainly more likely to do so. What I bet you haven't seen is a verified Twitter account used to torture poor souls.

I'm very surprised that HN moderators allowed this to stay on the front page for 10 hours. I know it would not have stayed on the front page if it was about Sony [YC S15]. I honestly don't know who they're trying to appeal to these days.

I don't think it's a topic we need to tiptoe around. This is one of the few places where it should be normal to write about it casually. Describing it as 'deteriorating mental health' makes it sound like something to be ashamed of. Like burning out means you've gone bonkers. That attitude probably deters many founders from wanting to talk about it.

The adblockers are mostly comprised of people who simply don't want to look at ads and aren't seeking to pay out of pocket, either. There is a vocal minority that speaks about privacy and (possibly a separate group) claims that they'd rather pay for content but the majority just plain doesn't want to be bothered with looking at ads. Maybe the next generation is ad blind. I doubt they're concerned with malware given what they'd download from The Pirate Bay. My guess: they just feel entitled or don't feel like their contribution (click/view-wise) impacts the publisher's bottom line. On the whole, not any more annoying than people who disable JavaScript.

Very successful people don't waste all their time on HN/slashdot/FB. If all you're doing is reading about those people on those sites, stop and focus your efforts on something constructive. Reading HN is fake work.

You might consider adding an option to display a QR code on the shirt instead of a URL. It would be really cool if you could also provide the ability to embed a logo/icon into the QR code (a la http://hackaday.com/2011/08/11/how-to-put-your-logo-in-a-qr-...). Would be good for companies.

I was a little disappointed that it isn't possible to order shirturl.com/1337 (minimum 5 characters).

The 'Home' link in the footer is a 404 (https://shirturl.com/home).

I think you should add a privacy policy.

That said, good luck!

I wonder if the lack of HTTPS during normal browsing is a deliberate choice (one motivated by testing) or if it's only like that out of legacy (preservation of URLs). It's difficult to imagine all of the possible issues they may know about that we don't, given their scale.

The author mentions that removing the ref parameter would be a solution to one of the problems discussed in the article but I put forward that they could also just encrypt the value for transmission and store the information in plain on the backend. If they won't move to HTTPS then that should solve at least one of the issues.

Thanks for clarifying.

There is value in a higher barrier to entry. That much is seen in almost every place that has such barriers. Nintendo games are typically high quality and App Store apps are usually not (and Play Store -- not picking on anyone). I've seen much higher quality from sites hosted by regular hosting companies (and paid-for domains) than I do from sites like mysite.site99.commish.ru (if you'll excuse the exaggerated example). Self-signed is even worse than my exaggerated example when it comes to trustworthiness because there are far too many bad actors who want to do bad things but also don't have $100USD to spend on a cert. I don't doubt that some kind of better system can exist but self-signed is definitely less trustworthy.

>it should be replaced with something more like bitcoin.

What does that even mean?

It's legit. https://regex101.com/r/qY0tO9/1

Because they have "rabbit" in the name, everything they're doing is called into question? Ridiculous.

I feel like both of you are arguing for the same point.

To the title's credit, it does say that the venture was unveiled, not the watch itself.

Great choice of license. Good luck with your project. Looks nice!

What license was this released under?

Quick note: You can't distribute any of the free stuff available from Pixeden: http://www.pixeden.com/license

You'd need to provide a link to the asset so that SkyBlue users can download the package.

I didn't configure DKIM for SES. I configured it for SendGrid right out the gate but it was made more obvious that it was an important next step. I wasn't even aware that SES supported DKIM at the time of testing. It's an important factor that I admittedly overlooked.

Amazon SES rocks from a pricing standpoint but deliverability isn't its strong suit. There are too many spammers using it. ISPs seem to barely trust mail sent from their servers and I get a lot of bounces. I stopped using it for critical email and rely on it only for bulk-type emails where missing that one email isn't the end of the world.

MailChimp for newsletters and SendGrid for everything else. That's a winning combo.

The post is an ad for their service and they kind of vaguely hate on Magic throughout. Not particularly valuable.

Font Awesome allows stacking: http://blog.fontawesome.io/2014/09/25/custom-file-types-with...

Here's their demo but with some color added: http://codepen.io/anon/pen/VYQMea

But yeah, you're typically stuck with one color. Here's a demo that shows off multi-color fonts (Firefox only): http://pixelambacht.nl/2014/compyx-a-multicolor-8bit-font/

That technique could be used to make multi-color font icons if it were cross-browser compatible. Maybe one day. But I think SVG icons are where things are headed.

As for compatibility issues, there's one listed on this page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9047846

Don't forget about compatibility. You can be reasonably sure that font icons will display the same everywhere. CSS-based icons are all over the map compatibility-wise (display issues across browsers).

> Give each process a FIFO to read URLs from. Then you choose which FIFO to add a URL to based on the address so that all URLs with the same address are assigned to the same process.

I wrote this in a reply to myself a moment after you posted your comment so I'll just move it here:

Regarding the last two issues I mentioned, you could sort the list of URLs by domain and split the list when the new list's length is >= n URLs and domain on the current line is different from the domain on the previous line. As long as wget can at least honor robots.txt directives between consecutive requests to a domain, it should all work out fine.

It looks like an easily solvable problem however you go about it.

> It really depends what you're trying to do here.

I was thinking about HTTP requests that respond with 4xx and 5xx errors. It would need to be possible to either remove those from the frontier and store them in a separate list or mark them with the error code so that it can be checked at some point being passed onto wget.

> Downloading files with wget will create files and directories as it proceeds. You can observe and count them to determine progress, or pass a shell script to xargs that writes whatever progress data you like to a file before/after calling wget.

Which means using wget as your HTTP module and a scripting language as the glue for the logic you'll ultimately need to implement to create a robust crawler (robust to failures and edge cases).

> wget has command line options to skip downloading files that already exist. Or you can use tail to skip the number of lines in the input file as there exist complete entries in the destination directory.

Is wget able to check whether a previously failed page exists on disk [in some kind of index] before making any new HTTP requests? It sounds like this would try fetching every failed URL until it reaches the point where it left off before the restart. If it's not possible to maintain an index of unfetchable URLs and reasons for the failures then this would be one reason why wget wouldn't work in place of software designed for the task of crawling (as opposed to just fetching).

This is one of those tasks that seems like you could glue together wget and some scripts and call it a day but you would ultimately discover the reasons why nobody does this in practice. At least not for anything but one-off crawl jobs.

Thought of another possible issue:

If you're trying to saturate your connection with multiple wget instances, how do you make sure that you're not fetching more than one page from a single server at once (being a friendly crawler)? Or how would you honor robots.txt's Crawl-delay with multiple instances?

Edit: `previously fetched` -> `previously failed`

It would probably be abused all the time and the claims would be for larger amounts than the difference between two similar plane tickets. There would be people claiming they had to buy a car for $2,000 more just because they missed some kind of window where the price was cheaper (even though that doesn't make sense). I don't think any bank would open themselves up to that kind of liability. Even if they would, I think they'd cap it to a low amount that was close to the cost of eating chargebacks.

I think the people you're talking about who don't know how much RAM their phone has are the same people who don't know much RAM their desktop has. At least if you're using phones as a benchmark there is the chance a reader will be awed.

> bugs showing the developers haven't bothered testing in other browsers.

I see this a lot and it's clear that most designers are building for Chrome and that they trust Firefox to render everything the same as Chrome will. The assumption that following the standards ensures a page will render the same in at least Chrome and Firefox has started to feel safe. That's a big improvement from the era that preceded, when you knew with certainty that cross-browser issues would exist. But it's not a completely safe assumption yet and may never be. Always test.

The dropdowns replacement is really useful all on its own. I wish Bootstrap had that built-in. You should request to have this added this to the Bootstrap Expo! http://expo.getbootstrap.com/about/#suggestions

Looks awesome! The spacing is very consistent and elements have plenty of room to breathe. The typography looks great. Really clean style.

Quick fix needed for Firefox: http://i.imgur.com/5RhWf2Y.png

Skrivdown? :)

You'd have to switch to Skriv's syntax for headers since Markdown's headers and Skriv's ordered lists use the same syntax. Another thing I'd change about Markdown would be to remove multiple syntaxes for writing the same element. For example, with Markdown you can use *, -, or + to create unordered lists. That might exist for some reason I don't know about but I don't like it.

I like how images are written:

{{/path/to/img.png}} vs. Markdown's 

List syntax is nice and reminds me of wiki syntax. I've always favored that style over Markdown's list syntax. Actually a lot of it reminds of wiki syntax. Tables also looks like a breeze to remember how to write.

I like this.

Don't the downvotes already handle that? I wouldn't touch that topic with a 10-foot pole at this point.