kshay

> Imagine how frustrated you’d be if every now and then, an application simply refused to add items to your cart, navigate to a certain page, or charge your credit card

Sort of interesting that this is framed as a wouldn’t-it-be-awful-if hypothetical; I feel like on the contrary, and for some value of “every now and then,” this is most people’s daily experience of interacting with most commerce websites.

> The truth is, these minor refusals happen surprisingly often, but users never know because of systems dedicated to intercepting those errors and running the erroneous code again.

...Or users do know, and just try again? Fault tolerance has been outsourced to the customer.

After you've read this, read the annotated version: Elon Green's interview with Gay Talese about the piece, interspersed into the text. http://niemanstoryboard.org/stories/annotation-tuesday-gay-t...

Yes, nice nod to Mark Pilgrim. (Although his sites are now 200 GoDaddy.)

This is not better.

The first thing that came to mind when I read "Wouldn’t it be convenient if the documentation... already had an answer for someone with the same problem?" was "Oh, like the comments on the PHP docs?"

It's a clunky mechanism and there's years' worth of cruft in there, but interspersed with years' worth of knowledge, and I've often wished other languages had a similar canonical repository of user-contributed information. I seldom touch PHP at the moment, but reflecting on how many times I found a quick solution to something simply by perusing the comments on a function's page makes me think this approach could have huge potential if implemented in a more elegant way.

For combining more than 2-3 commits prior to pushing, in cases where you only want to end up with one commit, I find `git fetch; git reset --soft origin/master; git commit` to be quicker than interactive rebase.

This looks very nice. The only thing that's a little confusing is that you provide a "Typeahead" component, but that was removed from Bootstrap 3 in favor of Twitter's standalone library which is also called Typeahead. I think it's great to provide the functionality (and clever to do it with Tooltip), but wonder if it should be called something else. (Autocomplete? Tipahead?)

Also, it would be nice if you used the inline annotation syntax (['foo', function (foo) {}]) to make the code minifiable.

This may just be the cache headers. Most sites have caching that tells browsers either "never cache this site" or "cache for a short time, but after that you must fetch a fresh version and can't use the cached version." HN's say "always try to fetch a fresh version, but if that fails, it's fine to show the user the cached version." So if your connection is actually down (vs. just slow), your browser's old cache of HN may still display, unlike most other sites.

I saw this too... It looks like when you opt-click above the current line, it jumps back in your history by... the same number of lines as your cursor is above the current line? Sort of an unusual feature. Nevertheless, when I'm careful to actually click on the current line, it works as described.

Shouldn't "Justin Bieber All Bad Lyrics" just show you all Justin Bieber lyrics?

403 I Didn't Buy a Domain

I thought this would be about a fan (mechanical air-blowing device)... like, so effective that you could wildly overclock your machine or something. Disappointed.

Actually, my dislike of PHP is entirely based on using it. If I hadn't had to "build projects" in it, I wouldn't care one way or the other.

The funkiness is really that []["filter"]["constructor"] is a function that behaves like eval(), or rather, it returns a function that when called executes the string that was passed to the constructor function. That's how they're actually running the code.

> []["filter"]["constructor"]("alert(1)")()