venning

Data warning: this page is 37-40 MB (depending on the cache) even with an adblocker.

> [When] at Mach 2.2, the air feels like Jello.

I know that's a metaphor, but it got me thinking. Can someone more learned help me out: does air behave in a non-Newtonian manner at supersonic speed?

For me, the best articulation of why coding is so hard comes from a 2000 Joel Spolsky article [1]:

It’s harder to read code than to write it.

I continue to use that line to explain coding to non-coder friends. This article's author seems to understand that as well, but it's worth making explicit.

[1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-...

Also `NaN`.

Truthy on MDN: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Truthy

Thoughts:

I like the look. Very clean. I like how fast it's responding; better than archive.org (though, obviously, they have different scaling problems).

"Your own internet archive" might be overselling it, as other commenters have pointed out; the "Your" feels a bit misleading. I think "Save a copy of any webpage." gives a better impression, which you use on the site itself.

The "Archive!" link probably shouldn't work if there's nothing in the URL box. It just gives me an archive link that errors. Example: [1]

Using it on news.YC as a test gave me errors with the CSS & JS [2]. This might be due to the fact that HN uses query parameters in their CSS and JS, which repeat in the tesoro URL, which you may not be parsing correctly.

Maybe have something in addition to an email link for submitting error reports like the above, just cause I'd be more likely to file a GitHub issue (even if the repo is empty) than send a stranger an email.

As other commenters have pointed out, archive.is also does this, and their longevity helps me feel confident that they'll still be around. Perhaps, if you wish to differentiate, offer some way for me to "own" the copy of the page, like downloading it or emailing it to myself or sharing it with another site (like Google Docs or Imgur) to leverage redundancy, or something like that. Just a thought.

All in all, nice Show HN.

EDIT: You also may want to adjust the header to work properly on mobile devices. Still though, nice job. Sorry if I'm sounding critical.

[1] https://archive.tesoro.io/320b55cc9b78e271c94716ee23554da8

[2] https://archive.tesoro.io/a7bf03e247224bc3b4e5a7c1f2ad42b1

My guess is that this is similar to StackOverflow switching to HTTPS [1]. Once you get to a certain size, something seemingly simple like turning on HTTPS or detecting desktops and redirecting comes with non-trivial problems. I can only imagine all the nuances that have to be addressed when you're serving the fifth largest site in the world [2].

[1] https://nickcraver.com/blog/2017/05/22/https-on-stack-overfl...

[2] http://www.alexa.com/topsites

I find problems with both the author's methodology and hypothesis.

Counting unique declarations doesn't really tell me anything. CSS isn't simply a declarative language. CSS rules are ordered. Sometimes (and oftentimes within webapps) you need to repeat a declaration because you're using it to overwrite an earlier declaration but only when the second selector is valid. For example, it's very common to have lots of `display` declarations that turn on or off elements by overwriting earlier rules. Because of this, you're going to have lots of "repeat" declarations, but they're not repeated in their location within the order. With complex pages, you're going to wind up twisting yourself in knots trying to keep everything logically ordered if you also want to minimize declarations.

Additionally, from my naive understanding of browser engines, the performance cost of multiple rules applying to an element is greater than the cost of multiple declarations within a rule. Why minimize them?

But my largest concern is the mental overhead of trying to simplify rules in code. Co-locating declarations affecting a logical unit is extremely helpful. The tool we have to accomplish this is called a selector. Minimizing declarations increases selector count, which kind of defeats their purpose. Pre-processors can't solve this for you either, due to CSS rules being ordered. If all you're building is a static page then, sure, I can see minimizing declarations being some kind of goal. But CSS gets used for a lot more than static pages.

As other commenters have noted, if the author's concern is overly-large CSS files, run-length encoding alleviates a lot of that, at least if the declarations are in the same file (a reason to not use http2 as a silver bullet and use concatenation instead, if that's a concern).

EDITS: Added a couple sentences.

I kind of expected something like that, based on the generic-ness of the domain. Hopefully you can leverage that generic-ness into solving other problems under the same name.

Nice service, lots of luck.

Off-topic, but how expensive are five-letter, English word .com domains right now? I don't see new companies with domains that are small-ish words very often.

I see this link mentioned all the time, but every time I try it I can't get it to work.

Specifically, the "GO TO THE HACKER NEWS DATASET" big blue button on that page. It kicks me over to a Google Cloud console link, which spins for a few seconds, and then brings up a "Welcome to BigQuery!" modal. The only thing I can do then is click "Create a Project", which then kicks me over to the generic console with a listing of all APIs.

Am I missing something?

Not sure if you're implying that PayPal "made Braintree" or just that someone made it, but PayPal didn't acquire Braintree until 2013, after being founded in 2007 [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braintree_(company)

Since Lightsail is mentioned, it's probably worth including Digital Ocean since they offer almost identical network transfer for the money [1].

[1] https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/

The "S:" means "Status": https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/3c2993b8c6143d8a57937...

Needs a "(2015)" label.

With respect to the TechEmpower benchmarks, if you look at Round 13 [1] they note that ASP.NET got 859 times faster in their benchmarks since Microsoft dedicated effort to improving it.

[1] https://www.techempower.com/blog/2016/11/16/framework-benchm...

Yes. Works quite well and can handle quite a bit of load. Some native support within Route 53 helps make setting it up easy.

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/WebsiteHostin...

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/user-guide/static...

You might be the wrong person to ask, but I can't really find anything about this elsewhere:

As an App/Integration, is your interaction with the GitHub interface itself limited to only those things that you can do via API calls, such as creating new issues? Or do you have some capacity to modify or add on to the existing interface?

Original: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11652159

Also, this should probably have a "[2016]" tag in the title.

Is that time a typo? Are you saying that there is only a 5 hour block of the day when you eat? (From 3pm to 8pm.)

The only times I've seen high-to-low transfer was through physical media, primarily optical disc. I wasn't aware that there was any wire between them.

SIPRNet is probably an order of magnitude larger with over four million users [1]. Even more impressive considering it isn't connected to the Internet.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIPRNet

> "news...has always been subsidized by the advertising dollars his company now commands"

Is this true? Have there been times when news was funded by other means than advertising?

Apparently the presence of an apostrophe in the possessive "it's" is not an OCR or transcription mistake but actually the original spelling.

A reference: http://english.stackexchange.com/a/68653

A lot of real-world usage of flexbox is broken that has nothing to do with IE/Edge. Follow the "Known issues" tab on your caniuse link. Also see Flexbugs [1] for more. I get bitten by #11 and/or #14 on almost every project, which work fine in IE/Edge.

[1] https://github.com/philipwalton/flexbugs

I do agree. Neither the HN Guidelines [1] nor the FAQ [2] are clear about what expectations they have for downvotes (unless I'm missing something). I never saw the original comment when it was, I assume, greyed out, prompting the second poster to ask about the downvotes. It is second-highest ranked now, so I assume the downvotes are a minor component to its rank.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

My guess is the commenter's use of the word "unsafe" in reference to the antibacterial compounds. I don't believe they have been proven unsafe, rather that they have not been proven safe. There's a difference, and "unsafe" borders on misinformation which often merits downvotes on HN.

Edit: Think of the difference between "lack of safety" and "lack of proof of safety".

AMP is of most use on mobile (possibly the only place it works?) where ad blockers don't normally exist. So, they will likely have an impact there.

I know that I have personally opened search results to AMP pages that I would not normally have opened because I knew the price of doing so would be small. But, then again, I know what the AMP symbol means. How this affects normal users remains to be seen.

For some sites, I seek out the AMP URL explicitly. For example, adding "/amp" to the end of TechCrunch URLs change them from frustrating to usable.

This should have a (2014) label. It's an old story and an old theory that was always dubious and was quickly disproven.

A better, more recent story: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-01-04/millennia...

Edit: The earlier version of my comment was wrong.