Notices by Stuart Langridge (sil@mastodon.social), page 3

@nolan yup! Notice that part of the contribution to that score of 27 in the Lighthouse checks is a specific audit which checks whether you have any content without JS, which I honestly didn't think would actually catch anybody in this day and age. Just goes to show how wrong you can be, I suppose 🙂

@deejoe why would I switch?

@nolan Thank you @SuricrasiaOnline ! It is much improved :)

@nolan totally. The new Captain Marvel site drove me nuts. It's not just a pastiche of terrible old 90s sites, it's a pastiche of terrible old 90s sites and built WORSE than them because the body is completely empty until the JS all loads. I mean, aaaaaaaaaaargh

@nolan in completely other news, big kiss for you for making it much easier to switch instances now :)

@nolan obviously that's unreasonable and wrong and I'm just being bad-tempered about it, of course. I mean, pinafore itself which I'm using right now makes more sense as a client side app. It's that half the time the discussion was never even had: question 1 isn't "does this thing need to be built on the client side" because the answer is seen to always be "yes". So new devs won't even get told that that's a question, and if they ask it they'll get told to be more "modern".

@nolan I don't see why CSR is a decision that gets picked, hardly ever. When I've asked people, what does this do that _requires_ it to work on the client-side only, I never get an answer. I feel like someone said once "page loads are bad for the user experience", which is a reasonable argument to make, but we've now built -- and demand that people use -- a huge inverted pyramid of tools and confusion balanced solely on that one tiny point, which wasn't that good a point to begin with.

@nolan I think that kicks in _once_ you've pushed a bunch of people out. Certainly I have no trouble imagining a bitter war between different framework developers about how much easier to use their tooling is than those other guys, while someone stands on the sidelines saying "but I just wrote an HTML page in notepad in 8 minutes and it does everything your page does and it works and I didn't need any tools at all" and goes completely unheard in the conversation.

@nolan I think a lot of it is subconscious elitism. If you don't need to set up a complicated build chain with lots of tools you've installed from github, and instead you just need to open Notepad and write some things, then the thing you made can't really be good because it was too easy to do.
What I wish I could get people to understand is: suffering is not noble. A thing isn't better because it was harder to achieve.

@scottjenson brilliant, isn't it? I have it wired right into my desktop search tool so I can see icons from it for every search I do :)

@korruptor huh. That's a terrible idea for game devs. I'm sure it's fine for a store runner, who isn't paying for it, and for youtubers, who are getting it!

@korruptor um, youtubers demand a cut of royalties for a game for reviews? (Also, twenty percent???)

@si report them? the ICO has a form for doing so, I believe. @Edent will know :)

@thamesynne yeah. The GDPR says "you can't do this"; companies went "but we want to do this, so we'll make everything waaay more annoying so we can continue to do so despite the law specifically trying to prevent it".

@pezzoDiPeco @switchingsocial there is unlikely to be one. The fingerprinting technology exists -- see The Echo Nest's Echoprint, although it's unmaintained -- but what's missing is the database of fingerprints for every song ever, and it's hard to legally create such a thing since nobody who has access to a full song library will free the fingerprints for it. It might be possible to crowdsource, but there are problems with that. https://community.badvoltage.org/t/open-shazam-doable/8297 is a discussion I had a few years back.

@nolan I wish barton808 and djdmngz on Twitter could see this and fix it so you didn't need to buy the Windows one. Unsure of the ethics of "crossposting", though.

Stuff that's fun can't be scaled.
Stuff made for scale can't be fun.

So if you want to keep the fun, don't get big. If you want to get big, don't try to be fun.

@korruptor I think it does, and Thunderbird is actually spec-compliant here but other stuff handwaves it ;)

@korruptor have poked it. I was using // without a scheme for URLs, and I think Thunderbird might not like that, so I've just set everything to be https now, and that ought to fix it.