skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tell HN: Responsive layout broken on some devices
Greetings HN audience and admins

The attempt to improve the mobile layout for this site seems to be underway but, like the previous aborted attempt, it doesn't seem to have started well.

In the images [1] and [2] below are the screenshots (taken on an iPhone 5 with the latest iOS) of HN homepage (where the changes seems to have been published) and article page (where it seems to be unchanged) to illustrate the problems:

1. There is a padding in the body (the white space around the content) that wastes precious screen real state.

2. The font size in relation to the screen width was increased without the proper adjustments in the layout. That caused:

a. The top links to become cluttered and disorganized

b. Both the top and bottom links to span multiple lines without the proper spacing between then, making it easier to click the wrong link

c. The article links and other information to reach the end of the line more often and, associated with the lack of right padding in that area, makes it touch and sometimes spill over the right margin over the white background.

It is very important to have a better layout for mobile devices on HN specially because it is very hard to interact with the site (upvote, click articles or submit) but IMO it should be properly designed, implemented and tested in multiple devices and OS before deployment.

This last point is the most important of all. It is very tempting to implement responsive design via media queries and to neglect tests in the bottom and top range causing screens too wide or too narrow to fail.

Apologies for the long and public post. Hope it helps

[1] http://imgur.com/4uPlzPB

[2] http://imgur.com/18mp2TH
Android 6.0 has the functionality you describe - there's a warning if you try to disable it for certain apps (presumably for older API levels) though that it may cause them to crash. I imagine this'll go away with time.
Do you, or someone, have any data to back this up?

Honest question, I don't use Facebook so I can't tell from experience.
You just called the woman that you were harassing a coward.
Definitely keep, makes use on mobile much easier.
Does it have any authority, then?
Phone - meet soldering gun. I am becoming more serious about installing physical breaker behind the mic and camera on whatever device I get my hands on.
I am currently running Android 6 (Marshmallow), the official version pushed to my phone as an OTA update, and I am able to turn on and off individual permissions for apps. When installing a new app, it initially has zero permissions enabled.

Let's see how this works in practice, but so far I am hopeful that this is in fact solved in Android. (Modulo actually disseminating the fix)
I'm talking about inequality between humans - I care nothing about inequality between countries. I have lived in India, and I can state based on extensive experience that Indians are also humans.

Piketty's entire case is looking at stats in the US, UK and France, ignoring the east and the world as a whole. He mentions Balzac more frequently than India and China, which is ridiculously myopic in a book on inequality.

Ignoring his other flaws (which I've discussed at length) global data does invalidate him.
I don't believe the programmers at Facebook have evil intentions - I think they're just trying to build something that's technically cool. The problem is the MBAs will trying to build something businessy out of it and won't care whether it requires evil if it might possible make them some money.

There can also be a temporal factor. Today there might be no evil intentions but in a couple years someone might find that "we have this whole data set we could do X with".
Superoptimization is not the same thing as supercompilation.
It reminds me a bit of http://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Leonard_of_Quirm from the Discworld series by Terry Pratchett. A brilliant engineer who is absolutely naive as to the harm that could be wrought using his inventions. So I'd agree the engineers in Facebook aren't rubbing their hands and laughing but this doesn't mean they aren't part of a larger more ominous trend of technological advancement and privacy invasion.
This is in Android Marshmallow (6.0). Unfortunately, it will take a couple of years before the majority of Android users has this :/.
really, hacker news?... Can I help?
I wonder whether the reaction to this differs based on location of the user. Are European users more worried about this than US-based users?
I'm still waiting on LFTR.
Our team is not 24/7 on Hackernews. As you read, currently on different time zone, thus the delay to response
"Designed in hell" low class.
Why: https://github.com/LMAX-Exchange/disruptor/wiki/Blogs-And-Ar...

Java: https://lmax-exchange.github.io/disruptor/

.NET: https://github.com/disruptor-net/Disruptor-net
They introduced similar feature with football (soccer) this weekend, or earlier and I didn't notice.

When one of the teams I like is playing a match, the placeholder for post status is replaced with something asking my opinion about the match and a football icon is added.

Which is a decent idea to get more people updating their statuses and posting more.

Regarding privacy, etc. Eh, damn, it gets boring when so many comments are about how facebook is stealing your data and what not for every post like this. Yes, we all know that and no need to remind about it every time.
What are you talking about? My LinkedIn profile and contact details are on the website this thread is linking to, not to mention you plastered my full name all over my Livecoding profile last night, so it's not exactly a secret. Or did you think you were replying to some other comment?
They're removed the encryption option because it's horribly broken in vim, and vim is a text editor not an encryption tool.
Not so. Politicians lie far more often than the average person. It is easy to see why: a politician's job is to get re-elected, and the best way to do that is to please their campaign donors while simultaneously lying through their teeth to tell the voters what they want to hear.
> globalization drastically reduces inequality

Maybe it reduces inequality between countries, but does it reduce inequality between people (different social classes within countries)?

> some people (e.g. American auto workers) held extremely privileged positions by virtue of threats of violence against economic competitors - particularly those overseas

Really? I thought they produced cars mainly for the internal market.. I don't see much evidence of any "threats of violence" coming from auto workers to the rest of the world.

To make myself more clear, I am willing to accept the globalization (or capitalism) reducing inequality globally as a positive thing, if it wouldn't increase inequality inside the developed countries. But that's not what really happened (profits of Western corporations are all-time high) and that's why it's a cause for concern.
"You seem to enjoy this whole thread, but very coward that you hide your real identity. Can you at least post your Linkedin profile url as comment so people understand how to take your comments in this thread?"

Michael, you really need to stop harassing the OP. You're destroying your company.

Edit: I guess by this point it's clear you don't care about your company. But you've tormented the OP constantly -- have some human decency.
"The culture of any organisation is shaped by the worst behaviour the leader is prepared to tolerate".

By stating that rules breaking is desirable, but not stating clearly where the lines are, companies are not given clear enough guidance to avoid scumbag behaviour.
They did not conform to the official specification for an audio CD and therefore were not allowed to carry the logo for Compact Disc Digital Audio.
Facebook Messenger vs the main Facebook iOS app, for example?
Feedback link in the upper band does not work.

Putting in real project offers instead of lorem ipsum certainly would help. Most people are using websites like this to look for work. So why would they visit if there's no work in there, regardless of the features they find?

Good luck w/ your project!
Men account for 76% of suicides in 2014
Flu shots do not work
Uh-huh.

Typically GUI work is instantiated with the GUI toolkit on the call stack. It calls foo.onClick(), etc. Now, if one particular onClick starts long-running task, then there are three possible designs:

Either that particular onClick() starts a worker thread and returns before the worker is done.

Or the GUI toolkit delivers the onClick() in a thread of its own, e.g. from a pool of workers.

Or everything is done in one thread, and the UI blocks.

The last one seems sucky, but the insidiously sucky one is the one in the middle. That's where every user's implementation of onFocusOut() must take care to lock because all of bar.onFocusOut(), foo.onFocusIn(), foo.onMouseUp() and foo.onClick() are called concurrently in four different worker threads. The tail wags the dog.
A lot of the people posting here are from competiting sites or users we had to warn or ban on Livecoding.tv for one reason or the other. Please see the comments below. Most of the usernames in this thread are familiar to us.
I actually think it's pretty cool that they can identify what you're watching on TV
>foreigners don't know about our puzzle hunts (it's a purely local custom)

I'm Czech and I've never heard of such thing, but again, I've never heard of escape rooms either. I had no idea this was so big here.
It's not pronounced that universally either.

I say "5 multiplied by 3", which informs my interpretation of which value is repeated by which. Another commenter uses the phrase "5 into 3".

When you use an less formal (and inherently ambiguous) language (English) to state a condition in a formal language (used to define multiplication), you're gonna have problems of this nature.
Subpopulations can be physically and temporally distributed amongst the greater population. As long as breeding is not statistically independent of intelligence, there will be a tendency for intelligence-related genes to clump together.
Please send me a personal message and I'll track your case and see what happened.
It reduces inequality between people, such as an American auto worker and a Chinese auto worker.

I don't see much evidence of any "threats of violence" coming from auto workers to the rest of the world.

Think about what happens when a Mexican attempts to walk to Detroit and apply for a job at GM. Violence will be used against him, and against GM, if they voluntarily transact.

Or think of what happens today when a Brazilian sugar manufacturer attempts to sell sugar to willing purchasers in the US.

If you care so much about inequality within political boundaries, why not just move the boundaries to reduce inequality?
It's less ambiguous than this even. "Do you record my conversations?" "No, but we do listen to them sometimes"
Google is particularly insidious: gmail will happily throw away email (not just mark as spam) to "new" recipients, while your own account, which will usually already have a "relationship" with your domain, might receive email just fine.

I just recently had an issue where I tried to send an email to a someone I'd just met. The cc-part that went to my gmail-account got through fine. He didn't even receive spam. After I set up spf, I successfully sent an email to the exact same gmail address.

If gmail had rejected the mail, there'd be no problem -- then I'd know that I'd have to take action. Quietly eating the mail... not cool.

I wonder how long until the only way to send email into gmail/outlook is to set up routing rules that send email to gmail/outlook addresses by logging in to those respective services, and sending directly, bypassing traditional unauthenticated smtp... presumably setting up one "major" delivery would be enough, as gmail can't ignore outlook.com and vice-versa...
Modern single-threaded UI frameworks don't go into a loop while you're interacting with something. Say you click on a button and drag. This enters the UI framework as a "mouse down" event followed by several "mouse dragged" events. After handling each event (or between events), the framework can decide to do other work, like updating a spinner.
Gephi 0.9 announced, coming this December
I'm not saying I'm comfortable with this either way, but I do see a difference between recording a conversation with the intent to keep that recording and extract the spoken content, and processing the audio "on the fly" for certain parameters to identify a limited set of things.

Of course the problem is you can't control or check which of the two was done with the audio that got uploaded, and that is the scary part and reason enough not to allow anyone to record audio. But you can't just claim that facebook does in fact "listen" to your _conversation_ in any way we would understand as listening.
I guess I still don't follow. Allow me to better specify the threat model I have in mind:

Consumer wants one computer system that he trusts.
Consumer should be able to get one without having to trust any of the manufacturers or integrators. They should not be able to subvert the security of the system, assuming the published code and specs contain no errors. There should be no black boxes to trust.

Design team wants to make and provide open hardware. They want to service Consumer, and they want to do it in a way that Consumer does not need to trust any blackbox processes.

How does this happen? Note that I'm not asking about keeping the VHDL code secure, how to physically secure the shipment to the fab company, etc. I'm asking how Consumer, who gets one IC, can verify that the IC matches exactly with the published VHDL code and contains no backdoors.

It seems you mainly focus on how the design team can minimise the chances of subversion. That's a much lower bar and not really sufficient in my mind. There's still too many places to subvert, and the end consumer still needs to trust his vendor, which is the same situation we have today.

The bit about multiple independent implementations with voting (NASA-style) sounds extremely expensive and inefficient, but also very interesting for high-security systems. Are you aware of any projects implementing it for a general-purpose computer, specifically to prevent hardware backdooring (as opposed to for reliability)?

UPDATE: To clarify, as wording is important in these kinds of discussions: When something is described as 'trusted', that's a negative to me, as a 'trusted' component by definition can break the security of the system. We need a way to do this without 'trusted' components. So when you say 'Use a trusted process to make the FPGA, ASIC, or both.', that sounds like exactly what we have today - the consumer gets a black box, and no way to verify that it does what it's claimed to do. The black box must be 'trusted' because there's no other way. Me knowing that the UPS shipment containing the mask had an armed guard does not make me more likely to want to trust the chip.
I'm glad that Germany now has the option of stellarating the monsters they capture.

EDIT: On reading further, it turns out I may have misinterpreted the article.
As a person with two very talkative and aggressive Siamese cats, this rings a bit too true as well. Before I got together with my wife (she chooses cats over children) I had continuous sleep quite regularly in my life and now I can hardly have a night anymore where I'm not woken at some ungodly hour of the night by a hungry cat. Nowadays, I'm significantly more irritable and foggy headed than I've been in my life (granted, it's not just the sleep irregularity I'd guess but it's quite significant to casual observers like friends it seems). When I go on vacation or business trips I'm in so much in better control of my mood (week long trips are much more productive than a month at home) I'd rather have two red eye flights in a week than stay at home for a few days.

I liken having these cats to having perpetual toddlers - they're cute and affectionate but they're incredibly nasty and can be exhausting to keep up. Sometimes I wonder if having children would be aggregately in my less taxing.
How is this relevant to what I posted?
for c in `git log --oneline --reverse | awk '{print $1}'`
do
clear; echo "$c"; git --no-pager show $c:README; sleep 1;
done

is what one could use on a terminal
Depends on the human. I know people who value truth over what's in their best interest (economically), or what feels "right".

As I understand it, science is in some form seeking truth. As such, a scientist who lies relentlessly in the face of evidence wouldn't very effective.

A quote from John Maynard Keynes:
"When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do, sir?".

How would you characterise how JMK acts in the face of evidence?

Unless you can be more specific(?), I can't find your generalisation in any way convincing.

What you've done just looks like a lazy rhetorical tool to me. Am I wrong?
I'd love to see data on that. Maybe their lies are just more public. They're all humans, after all.
For those on mobile, it's a Flash "emulation" of a paper-and-dice dungeon crawl game published by Gary Gygax in Dungeons & Dragons magazine in 1979.
No one believes this, but even if it were true it would not excuse your behaviour. It is not a defence.
I always go to comments before clicking on the article link. While I'm reading, post can go away from current HN page and it is hard to locate it again.

Ps. iPhone4 is not compatible with new layout at all.
I see your point, it's just.... Sometimes people do things simply to add a nice convenient feature.

People distrust big corporations, and that makes sense to a degree. But if I imagine a team of programmers that work on that stuff, when I visualise actual human beings that make the decisions, I have very hard time believing that this is the kind of thoughts that go through they heads.

Sure, maybe there's some manager somewhere who literally thinks "lets decrease people's privacy so we could squeeze extra few cents out of our users", I just believe that in 95% of cases it's just people like you and me, trying to do good things and build a new fun feature.

I understand your concern about the remaining 5%, but it seems unlikely to me in this case.

People who work at facebook probably have enough money to not be desperate about earning more, and to be free to focus on just making cool things. I think it's bad when everything google/apple/facebook/etc does is met with hostility, and in this particular case that reaction seems to be the result of group think, it isn't warranted by the information that we have.
There's a difference, though: you explicitly told Facebook what you like, and it's acting on it. You pressed "like" on your team, and Facebook can check if it's playing right now. However, this is different: you didn't tell Facebook "hey search what show I'm watching".

Regarding the "it gets boring": yes, it's boring, but until it changes we will continue pointing it out. Because if you don't do it, people forget. We end up taking it for granted. Tell me how many people on Facebook know "Facebook steals their data" and how many of them actually act on it. What actually happens is that people have a vague idea of the privacy issues but, because "we all know it" and "it's boring" it doesn't get discussed and we end up accepting it.
Spoodle: A mass subdomain and poodle vulnerability scanner
How do you think pseudo-doxxing someone on a message board helps you at this point? This is just creepy.
The major flaw in WebAssembly is the byte code itself. We will end up in a compatibility hell, because of course the specification will change. And there will be several implementations of WebAssembly, which will have their own quirks and flaws.

So the WebAssembly future will look like this: You will compile into WebAssembly multiple times, for different versions and implementations and you will need to deliver the correct artifacts to the clients.

The reason, the web still works is that everything is shipped to the client in source. And the client will then interpret and compile everything according to its capabilities.

WebAssembly will probably never gain traction because of this reality.
I hate crowds. If everybody went to the left, I'd go to the right. I'm a natural contrarian.

But you are asking for some really heavy lifting here. You're positing that we have two choices: assume ill intent on the part of Facebook or assume it's all good.

These are not the only choices, and they're not opposites of each other. Most likely is that FB folks are actively trying to help posters as much as they can. Most likely is that the average poster enjoys all this cool stuff. Most likely is that this is a terrible feature that should have never seen the light of day because of where it's taking the industry -- deeper down a pit of the surveillance/security state. Most likely a lot of folks complain about it simply because it's trendy.

All of these things can be true at the same time.

So I'm not really sure what to say. Sucks to work at Facebook, I guess. Too many developers and a mission to own the planet. Maybe they should have just stuck to "pictures of people you know and what they've been doing lately"
Keep - but dang et. al. can you make the comments link target touch area slightly bigger somehow? It's way to easy to launch the article link when you're trying to tap the comments link.
And people wonder why I use the browser version!
Wendelstein 7-X - from concept to reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyqt6u5_sHA

Im Zeitraffer: Zusammenbau von Wendelstein 7-X: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJpSrqitSMQ (best @ 0.56x)

Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10437075

More: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAx243-m51RI-k_4lsAqidA/fee...
Airbnb Spends $8M Lobbying Against San Francisco Ballot Initiative
For anyone who doesn't know, as a non-binding resolution this means any/all of the member states can ignore it without consequence.
George Boole: Five things you didn’t know the man behind today's Google Doodle
Really enjoy these but the quality varies immensely. In some they fail to setup the equipment properly or have weird clues and it ruins the whole thing. They are reasonably expensive (here 80-140EUR for an hour between 4-8 people).

It's been a massive fad for a year or more in Europe, seems like they have to capitalise on as many TripAdvisor reviews as possible before it loses popularity.
The issue on Chrome's bug tracker [0] that he's linking to appears to return a 403 error. Perhaps they changed their mind on WontFixing it?

[0] https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=543078
Is that because of the people themselves, or because you had a reason to interact socially? I think given reasons to interact, people in denser areas have just as healthy relationships. But many of us don't create those opportunities by default on the street or in the apartment lift. But provide a little catalyst (street parade, removalist trying to reverse down a tight lane, lost dog, etc) and people come together.
Are you just copying and pasting these replies now without looking at which comments you are replying to? My name is literally on the website this thread links to, and my LinkedIn profile is on the Contact page. Of course it was also up for hours last night on the Livecoding profile you vandalized. I think you're confused.
My generalization is as convincing as "all politicians are liars". All humans lie relentlessly, but I never said they only lie. A physicist might not lie when talking about physics, but might tell a white lie to make her husband or a friend happy.

We all lie, and all the time. We notice politicians' lies more simply because they're public.
Programmer at Facebook? No. Investors and advertising partners and government surveillance agents? Maybe.
Diabetes Care Devices Market Worth 2.3B USD by 2020
Let’s Build a Simple Interpreter. Part 6
I would love do see any data/evidence from you.

> Maybe their lies are just more public. They're all humans, after all.

...your evidence is your previous, unproven argument.