9 ms·
Motherfucking Website
- reinhardt 13y agoFrom view source: <!-- FOR THE CURIOUS: This site was made by @thebarrytone. Don't tell my mom. --> So it's not Zed Shaw?
- yaph 13y agoThey both play the Guitar.
- vezzy-fnord 13y agoI guess it's better than the millionth blatantly obvious Bootstrap layout.
- yashodhan 13y agoEvery time I see another metoostrap site, I die a little inside.
- mordae 13y agoAnd there he goes and spoils it with the GA script. Point taken.
- ehynds 13y agoand by disabling pinch zoom on mobile.
- skeletonjelly 13y agoAnd one finger zoom on Chrome mobile. Any zoom really.
- kibibu 13y agoAbsolutely. Takes the most simple-to-render website and makes it unusable for an entire class of device, just by adding: <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, maximum-scale=1, user-scalable=no"> (wrapped for your viewing pleasure) Why would you ever do this on a page designed for readability?
- hawkharris 13y agoThe one thing I remember from economics class is the concept of marginal utility. It basically says — if I remember correctly — that the perceived value of a good declines as a consumer accumulates more of it. One cookie? Delicious. Ten cookies? Each one doesn't taste quite as good. I mention this because I think that fucks are like cookies....The first one: well, that's something special. It's funny. It makes a statement. The 70th one? Well, I'm not sure what to do with all these fucks. In other words, I can tell that there's a potentially poignant idea about web design in this post, but it was a little drowned out because of the way it was presented.
- greyfade 13y agoAre you saying that with each fuck, you have less fucks to give?
- sneak 13y agoFewer fucks to give. Fucks are numerable.
- hkmurakami 13y agoSome have argued that their fucks are innumerable. :)
- toni47 13y agono fucks are given at the moment
- krapp 13y agoDon't be a fucking pedant.
- thomasz 13y ago> In other words, I can tell that there's a potentially poignant idea about web design in this post, but it was a little drowned out because of the way it was presented. I think it would be difficult to find an idea in this post that hasn't already been more poignantly formulated on [0] or more funny and even less respectfully on [1]. I really don't see the point. [0]http://www.useit.com http://www.useit.com [1]http://maddox.xmission.com http://maddox.xmission.com
- Link- 13y agoThis is one motherfucking 'extremist' message, but funny as hell!
- runn1ng 13y agoIt would look better with Bootstrap though.
- ender7 13y agoI can certainly relate, but please don't try to pretend that this is a pleasant reading experience on a desktop. Lines of text should be about 45–90 characters long (including spaces) in order to create a pleasant reading experience. Do not make me resize my browser window to do this for you.
- abritishguy 13y ago^ totally agree. I'm a Computer Science student and not a designer at all and I think that has actually helped keep my websites nice and simple: http://www.danielchatfield.com/articles/gay-marriage/ http://www.danielchatfield.com/articles/gay-marriage/ https://www.volcanicpixels.com/terms https://www.volcanicpixels.com/terms https://www.volcanicpixels.com/ssl/buy https://www.volcanicpixels.com/ssl/buy
- tomphoolery 13y agoYou can also just hit Ctrl-+ to zoom in and out to make the text larger, therefore easier to read. Alternatively, since most websites reset CSS anyway, you can change your browser defaults to make it a more "pleasurable reading experience". If you're into that. I'm just saying, these problems aren't really problems. The web was created for desktop viewing...
- ender7 13y agoThe issue is not the size of the text (which is small but still legible) but the line length -- that is, how wide the lines are. If lines are too long, then reading becomes an exhausting experience as you sweep your eyes back and forth across the page like a lighthouse. It's not really possible to enforce line-length with a user stylesheet (increasing the point size doesn't solve the problem, it just balloons the letters up to goofy proportions). This page just needs max-width set somewhere on the text container.
- cjubb39 13y agoGizoogling commence: http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=http://motherfuckingwebsite.com http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=http://motherfuckingwe...
- krapp 13y agohttp://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6791297 http://www.gizoogle.net/xfer.php?link=https://news.ycombinat...
- dsego 13y agoBut does it scale?
- officemonkey 13y agoIt scales like a motherfucker.
- bjourne 13y agoFucking anyone can pretend they have a fucking insightful fucking idea by using the fucking fuck word enough times. It doesn't fucking prove that you fucking know what you're talking about. Tt fucking only makes you look retarded because you fucking can't express your angry ideas using more fucking varied language. You motherfucker.
- hash9 13y agoThis is EXREME advertising. I very much doubt he is angry. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/extreme-advertising http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/extreme-advertising http://extremeadvertisements.com/popular/advertising http://extremeadvertisements.com/popular/advertising
- moocowduckquack 13y agoHas De Niro recently started coding HTML?
- r0ash 13y agoFunny but true. I believe that German was a Linux programmer :) May be not designers but hardcore programmers feel the same, why all the bells and whistles while the sole purpose is merely to inform your audience. There are people who still like the Linux black screen, instead of moving mouse or fingering the mobile devices, they love to key-punch the commands.
- fumigatecvg 13y agoagree to some extent. not just programmers there are people who dont like fancy things, like my grandma dont like smartphones, she is still using those pesky telephones.
- undershirt 13y agoThis is basically the Web Site Guidelines for the GNU Project [1]: - Our goal is to get information to people. Keeping the site design simple helps accomplish that. - The use of graphics should be minimized, so pages load fast over slow links, especially animations. The GNU Project is for everyone, even those with slow Internet access and/or text-only WWW browsers. [1]: http://www.gnu.org/server/fsf-html-style-sheet.html http://www.gnu.org/server/fsf-html-style-sheet.html
- DigitalSea 13y agoYeah, it might be responsive and nice, but the line lengths on my resolution are so ridiculously long, they're unreadable... How about setting a 550px/600px width on the body element to make the lines of satire actually readable, motherfucker? There are some very valid points here, especially the last part about browser problems being created by us developers and designers. It's all true, but honestly, I would rather put the effort in for a website that looks nice, has nice line lengths and heck, if the designers was gimmicky animated background colours, they can have them. One widespread problem I've noticed since the early 00's is the lack of hierarchy. Designers are trying desperately to break the mould of a conventional webpage design but forget to distinguish between headings and page content all too often. I don't remember the last time I saw a website that wasn't a blog that had proper content hierarchy (H1, H2, H3, etc). Internet connections are so fast nowadays that it doesn't even matter if your website is 1mb, even 3G mobile connections can load a page that big in a few seconds. The real problem with modern development is not page weight, it's the abuse of Javascript. Reflows and repaints are the real problem because people have a lack of understanding when it comes to Javascript, not 1mb of Javascript and CSS on a website.
- abritishguy 13y agoI disagree about the thing about page sizes, my internet connection is not "so fast it doesn't matter".
- ghayes 13y agoWhile page sizes do matter (esp. when it's JavaScript and needs to be parsed & run), remember that things like "establishing an SSL handshake" or "resolving a DNS query" can very much be slower than downloading say 10KB of compressed assets. We should be smart about reducing the amount of junk you download when you goto a webpage, but make sure you don't save a penny and lose a pound.
- DigitalSea 13y agoWhat kind of Internet connection do you have and average speed?
- gabemart 13y agobody { max-width: 600px; margin: 0 auto; } Improves readability by an order of magnitude in my opinion.
- bjeanes 13y agoI went with: body { -webkit-column-count: 3; -moz-column-count: 3; column-count: 3; }
- dredmorbius 13y agoIf you want to go for cross-platform compatibility, you'll specify your dimensions in ems. Especially line lengths.
- Adrock 13y ago"Good design is as little design as possible." - Dieter Rams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams
- aabalkan 13y agoThere was a similar article on HN a few months back. It was saying, there's no fancy javascript, css and yet you are still reading... Does anyone remember that? It is closely related to this.
- pshin45 13y agoI remember that as well and would love to read it again in light of this post. Tried searching for it but to no avail, though.
- MarcScott 13y agohttp://justinjackson.ca/words.html http://justinjackson.ca/words.html https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5913381 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5913381
- rikacomet 13y agoI don't find this post funny, I agree with the points raised.. and the manner of satire. But its too much over the top. This is a good opportunity to say what I have been holding down for long. I usually substitute words like "FUCK" with "FREAK" .. "WHAT THE FUCK" with "WHAT THE HELL" .. or as Prof. Eric Grimson likes.. instead of "Pain in the ass" .. use "Pain in some part of anatomy" I'm talking about refraining from overexpression. JUST LIKE RIGHT NOW I'M WRITING IN CAPS, THIS WHOLE SENTENCE, IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE I'M EXTREMELY ELATED TO TELL YOU SOMETHING YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED, BUT THAT DOESN'T DO AWAY WITH THE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE JUST HATE CAPS BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE SHOUTING TO THEM. Yes we all are pretty much very smart[SELECT * FROM DB BODY PARTS] to know that yeah.. use of swears is just a way of expression and not in this way---> a oh soo.. "COOL AWESOME!!!!!! WOAH~!!" type of thing these days.. specially with advent of english and its spreading acceptability as language of choice over [include <tim berners lee creation.h>] .. they are well at the end of the day still insults. So my point is that, yes its okay to use it sometimes to show how psychologically simulated you are.. but eventually its going to hurt someone out there. What disturbs me, is that use of insults have become too common these days. For example, A friend showing up late might already be crumbling over inside about keeping the other guy waiting, but upon late arrival.. if he just DUDE TALKS you and say "What the fuck were you at man?!!!" .. it may sound normal to the speaker.. but more than a few times it does hurt to be on the receiving end, try putting yourself in his shoes. No one makes a point out of it because life is too short to make the discussion about this, and not just get on with the day.. but as you see: #substituting insults with similar sounding words won't make you uncool! #but it might on that rare occasion save you from hurting someone you cherish.
- Myrmornis 13y ago> What disturbs me, is that use of insults have become too common these days. It doesn't disturb you that, for example, the USA and its allies have been carrying out or supporting unnecessary military action resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in south-western Asia and the Middle East for the last 13 years? It doesn't disturb you that those countries have granted vastly increased power to the state, greatly reduced personal freedoms, and reintroduced torture as an acceptable procedure, in the course of doing so? It doesn't disturb you that they think it is okay to kill people, away from the battlefield, along with any family members that might be nearby, by remote control from the other side of the world? No, apparently what has been disturbing you is that people are using vulgar language in ways which could be perceived as offensive. If you don't like it, then don't have them as your friends, and/or don't read the things they write. No one cares about your prudishness. EDIT: I see your profile says you live in New Delhi so you're probably not paying taxes to directly fund the last decades butchery. Still, I imagine that New Delhi is not short of phenomena more disturbing than vulgar language.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- julespitt 13y agoJust the other day I was wondering to myself: does anyone A/B test against no-nonsense simple 90s HTML? Because I bet there are some particularly unexpected cases where it would win out.
- dictum 13y agoYou know what's amazing? Every website made with HTML, CSS, JS and images can look like that and get all the listed benefits! You can choose to have your JS and your CSS, or you can choose to have only the JS or the CSS, or only have the HTML! "Wait, so you're telling me I don't have to try hard to be unimpressed with new web technologies to make my website look like that?" Yes! You can disable JS, CSS or images on your browser. > Did you seriously load 100kb of jQuery UI just so you could animate the fucking background color of a div? You loaded all 7 fontfaces of a shitty webfont just so you could say "Hi." at 100px height at the beginning of your site? You piece of shit. I try every front end optimization technique I can, and I hate when developers don't even try to optimize their sites, but honestly, I don't subscribe to a fast [1] connection and have a fast, capable computer just to see pages with the default user agent styling. I want the parallax scrolling, the animations, the typefaces, etc. I just want the right to turn them off when I need to, but when I'm just browsing the web, I want websites to look as crazy as they can. That's the beauty of progressive enhancement. [1]: You can hardly call low end DSL fast these days, but I don't have trouble with most websites. Maybe I'm just browsing well-optimized websites most of the time.
- jamesk14022 13y agoSource motherfucker, "<!-- FOR THE CURIOUS: This site was made by @thebarrytone. Don't tell my mom. -->".
- Houshalter 13y agoSerious question because I am not a web developer at all, is it possible to make a website that looks decent with just raw HTML? And not have it look like this or like it's from 1999.
- krapp 13y agoI think that depends on what you mean by "decent." If you exclude css entirely, you're left with tables for complex layouts, basic colors (font color, border color, etc) and imagemaps. Not terribly exciting but not necessarily ugly either.
- plorkyeran 13y agoOnly by creating pages as if it was 1999 (but with better taste). Removing all styling functionality from HTML in favor of using HTML for structure only and CSS for styling has been an explicit goal over the last decade.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- bane 13y agoI said it recently [1] and I'll say it again, there's nothing wrong with sites that look and function like this. I agree completely that most of the problems we have with web design today are ones we've made. 1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6786902 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6786902
- lispylol 13y agothis is motherfucking funny
- anon4 13y agoAnd yet there is javascript on the site. And it's not even in the head section. Now that's what I call humour.
- websitescenes 13y agoThere's no rule that js has to go in the head. It's more common for it not be these days.
- nullgeo 13y agoI use a handful of JS libraries in my website because I need to add stuff like equations (MathJax) and syntax highlighting (prism.js). His premise is wrong because he thinks sites only convey message using plain text and nothing else. Imagine how unreadable equations and code can be if they are presented as plain text.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- prab97 13y agoYou could create images for equations and put them on the site.
- brianbarker 13y agoNow just make some t-shirts, maybe put up some google ads for the traffic your site could get, and make $$ off your rant. Just like http://programming-motherfucker.com/ http://programming-motherfucker.com/.
- jbeja 13y agoI wouldn't make a similar thing to my clients XD.
- dlsym 13y agoIt just works. Btw.: Here is a very popular blog, that has always had this style: http://blog.fefe.de/ http://blog.fefe.de/ [german]
- amerika_blog 13y agoI love it. The original idea of the web was, like gopher, to detach content from presentation and universalize it. Custom design especially flash has gotten away from that. Then again, it was also fun to play with. http://www.anus.com/etc/prozakhistan/autoexec.htm http://www.anus.com/etc/prozakhistan/autoexec.htm
- Aardwolf 13y ago"This site doesn't care if you're on an iMac or a motherfucking Tamagotchi." Ha ha, best quote imho :)
- johngrefe 13y ago"Load this motherfucker in IE6. I fucking dare you." -Always looking out for the PRC when I design.
- cheeaun 13y agoNot relevant but I almost thought this is one of those Mother Effing websites :) http://mothereff.in/ http://mothereff.in/
- markdown 13y ago> Yes, this is fucking satire, you fuck No. Not it isn't. I don't think you know what satire is. Satire would be if took a jab at the ridiculous 80MB TeehanLax page by making an 800MB one and pretending it was a serious endeavor. > Yes, this is fucking satire, you fuck Whatever it was, you ruined it by trying to explain it.
- hablahaha 13y agoYeah, it's a joke, not satire. It could have been satire if he had incorporated all the bad web practices that he was making fun of, like add jQuery UI just for giggles and have items that were hidden at different resolutions - that sounds like the start of satire...
- wrongc0ntinent 13y agoReminds me of this, only not as funny : http://gradientsmotherfucker.com/ http://gradientsmotherfucker.com/
- etler 13y agoLittering an unfunny writeup with profanity doesn't make it funny, it just makes you sound like a middle schooler.
- pirateking 13y agoMy home page is currently 11 KB (no stylesheets or scripts), and any work on it can be done with one-liner scripts. I don't feel like coming back to the "modern" web again. I would rather continue experimenting with alternative hypertext systems.
- Pfiffer 13y agoI agree, I find websites like tarsnap[0] to be a welcome break from all of these landing pages with complex scrolling. [0] http://www.tarsnap.com/ http://www.tarsnap.com/
- Gertig 13y agoThis looks like it was inspired by mijustin's post "This is a web page." http://justinjackson.ca/words.html http://justinjackson.ca/words.html
- dredmorbius 13y agoOh dear sweet good so much this. Not that the site is beautiful as specified (I prefer margins, a slightly narrower text width, and slightly different color schemes). But if the motherfucking idiot designer doesn't overload the sites' CSS in the first place I can simply drop my default style on the page. If the page is overdesigned, then I've got to tear it down and figure out what elements to re-style first. Worst: those Microsoft auto-converted pages with embedded styles. On. Every. Fucking. Element. And for the people saying "but it should be XXX px wide". Don't specify line widths in px -- you almost certainly* mean to use ems. In fact, you probably want pt and ems for _most_ of your dimensions.
- lupinglade 13y agoWhile we're at it, why don't we just switch to fax? But seriously, this article does have a bit of a point.
- wowaname 13y agoOh my god. To everyone complaining about the overuse of crude language: so what? This is the Internet, not meant to be taken seriously. So put your judgment aside and read the damn article for once without making a snide remark about it.
- jonobird1 13y agoDefinitely agree with some of the points in here and I understand that this is the extreme. One thing I would definitely say is that there is minimal structure besides for heading/paragraph and if I was selling something, this website wouldn't work. You need a basic structure through brand recognition > wtf the websites is doing > convince > call to action. Or something along those lines. Again, I understand this is an extreme so the straight up headings & paragraphs are there but I think a nice middle ground would work as long as people THINK about what damn content they put on their site instead of stupid parallax sites for the sake of it. /end rant
- cgcardona 13y agoIf you view source: `<!-- FOR THE CURIOUS: This site was made by @thebarrytone. Don't tell my mom. -->` And then at the bottom in the quote: > "Good design is as little design as possible." > - some German motherfucker There is the following cite: `<blockquote cite="https://www.vitsoe.com/us/about/good-design">` https://www.vitsoe.com/us/about/good-design">` Which cites this article: Dieter Rams: ten principles for good design
- Lockal 13y ago5 KB of html, and 22 KB of Google Analytics JS + 1 gif. It's 2013 and website owners still can't parse theirs motherfuckingwebserver's logs, extract browser info and apply GeoIP database for visitor counting. They speak about privacy, but prefer to send all the data about theirs 5KB motherfuckingpages to motherfuckinggoogle.
- websitescenes 13y agoSure, this is a website but what the author fails to realize is that while this may work for the Hacker news crowd, it will not be affective if you are trying to target other groups. The general public likes pretty things and in most cases are willing to give up function for looks. Just look at fashion, I'm sure women wear heals because they function better than typical shoes. There's a bigger picture here.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- DustinCalim 13y agoThe comments here are very typical HN... Too much semantics and nit-picking - and I think a lot of people missed the point the site was trying to make. Maybe that means the site failed by being too distracting...\
- Kluny 13y agoI felt inspired and updated my own site. rocketships.ca/
- Kluny 13y agoI felt inspired and updated my own site. rocketships.ca/