"Internet Roadtrip" is an interactive online experience where users collectively navigate a journey across a map of interconnected websites. Each turn presents a choice of several linked sites, and the majority vote determines the next destination. This crowdsourced exploration of the web offers a unique way to discover new and interesting online content, revisiting the early internet's sense of shared discovery and serendipitous browsing. The roadtrip unfolds in real-time, fostering a sense of community as users collectively chart their course through the vast online landscape.
TikZJax is a JavaScript library that renders LaTeX-generated TikZ graphics directly within web pages. It eliminates the need for pre-rendering images and allows for dynamic, interactive diagrams. By leveraging the power of a browser's JavaScript engine and a server-side LaTeX compiler, TikZJax processes TikZ code on demand, offering flexibility and avoiding the limitations of static images. This enables features like responsive scaling, tooltips, and hyperlinks within the graphics, making it ideal for incorporating complex, mathematical, and scientific visualizations directly into HTML content.
Hacker News users generally praised TikZJax for its ability to render LaTeX drawings directly in the browser, eliminating the need for pre-rendering images. Several commenters highlighted its usefulness for dynamic diagrams and interactive elements, particularly in educational contexts. Some expressed concern about performance, especially with complex diagrams, and questioned its accessibility compared to SVG. Others discussed potential alternatives like MathJax and KaTeX, pointing out their different strengths and weaknesses regarding rendering speed and feature support. A few users offered specific suggestions for improvement, including better documentation and the ability to copy rendered diagrams as SVG. Overall, the reception was positive, with many commenters appreciating the convenience and potential of TikZJax for web-based LaTeX diagrams.
WEIRD is a decentralized and encrypted platform for building and hosting websites. It prioritizes user autonomy and data ownership by allowing users to control their content and identity without relying on centralized servers or third-party providers. Websites are built using simple markdown and HTML, and can be accessed via a unique .weird domain. The project emphasizes privacy and security, using end-to-end encryption and distributed storage to protect user data from surveillance and censorship. It aims to be a resilient and accessible alternative to the traditional web.
Hacker News users discussed the privacy implications of WEIRD, questioning its reliance on a single server and the potential for data leaks or misuse. Some expressed skepticism about its practicality and long-term viability, particularly regarding scaling and maintenance. Others were interested in the technical details, inquiring about the specific technologies used and the possibility of self-hosting. The novel approach to web browsing was acknowledged, but concerns about censorship resistance and the centralized nature of the platform dominated the conversation. Several commenters compared WEIRD to other decentralized platforms and explored alternative approaches to achieving similar goals. There was also a discussion about the project's name and its potential to hinder wider adoption.
The dataset linked lists every active .gov domain name, providing a comprehensive view of US federal, state, local, and tribal government online presence. Each entry includes the domain name itself, the organization's name, city, state, and relevant contact information including email and phone number. This data offers a valuable resource for researchers, journalists, and the public seeking to understand and interact with government entities online.
Hacker News users discussed the potential usefulness and limitations of the linked .gov domain list. Some highlighted its value for security research, identifying potential phishing targets, and understanding government agency organization. Others pointed out the incompleteness of the list, noting the absence of many subdomains and the inclusion of defunct domains. The discussion also touched on the challenges of maintaining such a list, with suggestions for improving its accuracy and completeness through crowdsourcing or automated updates. Some users expressed interest in using the data for various projects, including DNS analysis and website monitoring. A few comments focused on the technical aspects of the data format and its potential integration with other tools.
The author argues that Knuth's vision of literate programming, where code is written for humans within a narrative explaining its logic, hasn't achieved mainstream adoption because it fundamentally misunderstands the nature of programming. Rather than a linear, top-down process suitable for narrative explanation, programming is inherently exploratory and iterative, involving frequent refactoring and restructuring. Literate programming tools force a rigid structure onto this fluid process, making it cumbersome and ultimately counterproductive. The author proposes "exploratory programming" as a more realistic approach, emphasizing tools that facilitate quick exploration, refactoring, and visualization of code relationships, allowing understanding to emerge organically from the code itself.
Hacker News users discuss the merits and flaws of Knuth's literate programming style. Some argue that his approach, while elegant, prioritizes code as literature over practicality, making it difficult to navigate and modify, particularly in larger projects. Others counter that the core concept of intertwining code and explanation remains valuable, but modern tooling like Jupyter notebooks and embedded documentation offer better solutions. The thread also explores alternative approaches like docstrings and the use of comments to generate documentation, emphasizing the importance of clear and concise explanations within the codebase itself. Several commenters highlight the benefits of separating documentation from code for maintainability and flexibility, suggesting that the ideal approach depends on the project's scale and complexity. The original post is criticized for misrepresenting Knuth's views and focusing too heavily on superficial aspects like tool choice rather than the underlying philosophy.
Summary of Comments ( 32 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43912618
HN users generally enjoyed the Internet Roadtrip concept, praising its creativity and nostalgic feel. Several commenters reminisced about early internet experiences and the sense of community it fostered. Some suggested improvements like adding a "random" button, incorporating older protocols like Gopher, or expanding the selection of sites. A few expressed concern about the potential for manipulation or brigading of the voting system, while others debated the merits of including modern sites versus focusing solely on older content. There was also discussion about the technical implementation, specifically the use of iframes and potential security implications. Several users shared alternative projects with similar aims, showcasing a broader interest in preserving and exploring internet history.
The Hacker News post "Internet Roadtrip: Vote to steer," linking to neal.fun/internet-roadtrip/, has generated a modest number of comments, primarily focusing on the technical aspects of the project and its potential pitfalls.
One commenter questions the wisdom of allowing the audience to directly control navigation, expressing concern that the "mob" will invariably steer the experience towards unsavory or illegal content. They anticipate the project quickly devolving into a chaotic mess, illustrating their point with a hypothetical scenario involving a prompt to visit a site like "goatse.cx" (a shock site). This concern is echoed by another user who humorously predicts the inevitable journey to sites like 4chan and other similarly controversial corners of the internet.
Another line of discussion revolves around the technical implementation of the project. One commenter questions how the creator handles the diversity of websites and their differing structures. They wonder how the system determines the "next page" on a website that isn't explicitly paginated, like a blog or a forum. This leads to a discussion about the potential use of website maps, link extraction algorithms, and the challenges posed by dynamic content and infinite scrolling.
A further technical comment delves into the use of iframes and the associated security implications. The commenter notes the potential for clickjacking and XSS vulnerabilities if the project isn't carefully implemented. They suggest that a more secure approach would involve rendering website content server-side and displaying only a sanitized version to the users, thus mitigating the risks associated with directly embedding external content.
Beyond the technical discussion, there are a few comments appreciating the novelty and creativity of the project. One commenter simply expresses enjoyment, calling it "pretty cool." Another lauds the interactive nature of the experience.
In essence, the comments section reveals a mixture of apprehension about the potential for misuse, curiosity about the technical underpinnings, and appreciation for the innovative concept. The most compelling comments are those that delve into the technical challenges and security risks, offering insightful perspectives on how such a project could be implemented responsibly. The concerns about user behavior and content moderation are also significant, as they highlight the inherent difficulties of crowd-sourced navigation on the open internet.