Links nov 4, 2016

https://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/calls

http://kottke.org/16/11/kottkeorg-memberships
https://mobile.twitter.com/gknauss/status/793623856250441729
http://kottke.org/16/10/www-the-way-we-were

https://www.ft.com/content/e7113970-a06b-11e6-891e-abe238dee8e2

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became-a-global-hub-for-pro-trump-misinfo?utm_term=.dg22jrzkP#.nl5w8R3J0
http://mediagazer.com/161103/p16#a161103p16

http://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.851/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12871234

http://meowni.ca/posts/web-fonts/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12865998

https://blog.intercom.com/browsers-not-apps-are-the-future-of-mobile/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12863565

https://turkeyblocks.org/2016/11/04/social-media-shutdown-turkey/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12869142

http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/ai-makes-yet-another-remarkable-prediction-2172570.htm
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12863779

http://www.craigkerstiens.com/2016/01/08/writing-better-sql/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12861305

about the web font debate, my new wren-based websites use default fonts, such as arial, verdana, and georgia, although my desktop linux didn't support even those, i think, therefore i simply fell back to serif and sans-serif in my css. on my desktop ubuntu linux, i installed basic fonts. maybe it was the courier that my linux didn't support.

top hn comment:

I have had the exact experience in the last month. Being on a slow connection, I've come to loath web fonts. There is nothing wrong with them in general but it's just that they've come to symbolise over-indulgence and a myopia towards the users actual task-focused needs as opposed to aesthetics.
Part of the issue is dealing with progressive enhancement as far as slow internet connections go. How do you solve that problem? There is no native browser API to my knowledge that does not depend on using JS which isn't ideal imo.
Would love an attribute on script and link tags that could be conditional based on connection speeds.
P.S Would also encourage those who have the choice to use system fonts (https://medium.design/system-shock-6b1dc6d6596f) instead of web fonts. Seems more in-line with the spirit of the web and these fonts are very well tested in general.

number 2 hn comment:

As much as I believe font matters, I really think people should just use system fonts in general. No content is definitely more annoying than ugly content, but I have a seething hatred for webpages who jump around as content loads. "Let's click on this link... ah, not that link, let's go back. Yes, this link... NO! STOP MOVING!"
Besides, I'm used to my fonts. I know your fonts are a deliberate design choice, but I'm here for content. Maybe I'm just a neophyte, because I think a smaller cleaner website is better than a reactive design that has to constantly change to cram everything in. I don't care though, it's stupid when I have to wait 10 seconds for a page to load on my home connection because you've got so much crap going on, and all the while the content is jumping around like a frog with it's butt on fire.
If your site sucks, I'm not going to whine about it on twitter, I'm just going to stop visiting.

hn:

Didn't this start on the desktop and now because companies think it was successful on desktops, they need to extend it to mobile since they think everyone has 4G service?
I remember when your mobile experience was supposed to be a stripped down faster version of your desktop version. Now, they're both insanely hard to navigate and use.
So much for we dev progression, huh?

hn:

I used to get the mobile versions of pages on the desktop. Not because I was on a slow connection, just because the text is the meat for most things on the Internet. Now there's less of a point in doing that.

hn:

I always set
browser.display.use_document_fonts = 0
in Firefox.
Surfing the web is a more pleasant experience without WebFonts.
reply

hn:

> I know your fonts are a deliberate design choice, but I'm here for content.
Categorizing type as "a design choice" dismisses it as fashion rather than function, which I don't think is the case. Type can put fashion over function, but it can also enhance function by making text more readable, or perform a mix of both functions by expressing a point visually that reinforces the point the page is making textually. It is possible to remove meaning from a document by stripping away design.
> Maybe I'm just a neophyte, because I think a smaller cleaner website is better than a reactive design that has to constantly change to cram everything in
Responsive design and web fonts are different issues; you can use Web fonts on a page without any responsive design elements, and vice versa.
> I don't care though, it's stupid when I have to wait 10 seconds for a page to load on my home connection because you've got so much crap going on, and all the while the content is jumping around like a frog with it's butt on fire.
This is a real problem, but it has much less to do with either responsive design or Web fonts than with the absolute crap-ton of JavaScript sites lard themselves down with these days to do things like load ads (which is what causes all that jumping around, as slow-loading ad units pop into place and the document has to re-flow everything else to accommodate them). Try turning JavaScript off in your browser some time and you will see this immediately.
Here's an example: I was just on Rotten Tomatoes (which uses Web fonts), and was getting annoyed by precisely the kind of spastic layout you rightly decry. As an experiment, I tried loading the home page from a cold cache with JavaScript on, and then again with it off. With scripts on, it took more than 12 seconds for the page to finish loading. Without scripts: under 1 second.