What Is React.js? (Webbed Briefs)
Its proponents can be weird, it takes itself far too seriously, and its documentation is interminable. These are some ways that some people have described Christianity. This video is about React.js.
Its proponents can be weird, it takes itself far too seriously, and its documentation is interminable. These are some ways that some people have described Christianity. This video is about React.js.
This is kind of about art direction and kind of about design systems.
There is beauty in trying to express something specific; there is beauty too in finding compromises to create something epic and collective.
My only concern is whether we are considering the question at all.
I really like the newly-launched website for this year’s XOXO festival. I like that the design is pretty much the same for really small screens, really large screens, and everything in between because everything just scales. It’s simultaneously a flyer, a poster, and a billboard.
Trys has written about the websites he’s noticed using fluid type and spacing: There it is again, that fluid feeling.
I know what he means. I get a similar feeling when I’m on a site that adjusts fluidly to any browser window—it feels very …webby.
When responsive design was on the rise, it was a real treat to come across a responsive site. After a while, it stopped being remarkable. Now if I come across a site that isn’t responsive, it feels broken.
And now it’s a treat to come across a site that uses fluid type. But how long will it be until it feels unremarkable? How will it be until a website that doesn’t use fluid type feels broken?
This is a terrificly entertaining level-headed in-depth explanation of AI safety. By the end of this year, all three parts will be published; right now the first part is ready for you to read and enjoy.
This 3-part series is your one-stop-shop to understand the core ideas of AI & AI Safety — explained in a friendly, accessible, and slightly opinionated way!
( Related phrases: AI Risk, AI X-Risk, AI Alignment, AI Ethics, AI Not-Kill-Everyone-ism. There is no consensus on what these phrases do & don’t mean, so I’m just using “AI Safety” as a catch-all.)
Another terrific interactive tutorial from Ahmad, this time on container queries.
You are not creative and then create something, you become creative by working on something, creativity is a byproduct of work.
In this way “AI” is deeply dehumanizing: Making the spaces and opportunities for people to grow and be human smaller and smaller. Applying a straitjacket of past mediocrity to our minds and spirits.
And that is what is being booed: The salespeople of mediocrity who’ve made it their mission to speak lies from power. The lie that only tech can and will save us. The lie that a bit of statistics and colonial, mostly white, mostly western data is gonna create a brilliant future. The lie that we have no choice, no alternatives.
This isn’t just a great explanation of :has()
, it’s an excellent way of understanding selectors in general. I love how the examples are interactive!
I’ve been enjoying Richard’s trip down memory lane with his memoirs of the Web2.0 years. Imagine my surprise when I showed up in this one!
I remember that fun panel from the Web2.0 Expo …Jesus! Seventeen years ago!
Everyone is quite rightly linking to this great interactive explainer on colour. It does a great job of describing complex concepts in a clear accessible way.
Tammy takes a deep dive into our brains to examine the psychology of web performance. It opens with this:
If you don’t consider time a crucial usability factor, you’re missing a fundamental aspect of the user experience.
I wish that more UX designers understood that!
One of the first ever personal websites—long before the word “blog” was a mischievous gleam in Peter’s eye—was Justin Hall’s links.net. Linking was right there in the domain name.
I really enjoy sharing links on my website. It feels good to point to something and say, “Hey, check this out!”
Other people are doing it too.
Then there are some relatively new additions to the linking gang:
There are more out there for you to discover and add to your feed reader of choice. Good link hunting!
Ever wondered why you’re always being encouraged to download the app?
But zero percent of app users have installed an ad-blocker, because they don’t exist, because you’d go to prison if you made one. An app is just a web-page wrapped in enough IP to make it a felony to add an ad-blocker to it.
This is a wonderfully in-depth interactive explainer on touch target sizes, with plenty of examples.
This is an interesting idea from Scott—a templating language that doesn’t just replace variables with values, but keeps the original variable names in there too.
Not sure how I feel about using data-
attributes for this though; as far as I know, they’re intended to be site-specific, not for cross-site solutions like this.
The fascinating pre-history of steam power, illustrated with interactive widgets.
I love the analogies Matt uses to describe the vibes of different kinds of coding:
When I’m deep in multiple nested parentheses in a C-like language, even Python, I feel precarious, like I’m walking a high wire or balancing things in my hands and picking my way down steep stairs.
I haven’t done much Haskell but what I did felt like crawling underground through caves and tunnels.
Opening a terminal window to a distant server is like reaching through a hatch with my arm, but a long way; ssh tunnel is well named.
Writing code with GitHub Copilot and Typescript in full flight feels like, well, flying, or at least great bounding leaps like being on the Moon.
This is a really interesting proposal, and I have thoughts.
A fun variable font with three axes: inktrap, balloon, and curve.
The hard part of programming is building and maintaining a useful mental model of a complex system. The easy part is writing code. They’re positioning this tool as a universal solution, but it’s only capable of doing the easy part. And even then, it’s not able to do that part reliably. Human engineers will still have to evaluate and review the code that an AI writes. But they’ll now have to do it without the benefit of having anyone who understands it. No one can explain it. No one can explain what they were thinking when they wrote it. No one can explain what they expect it to do. Every choice made in writing software is a choice not to do things in a different way. And there will be no one who can explain why they made this choice, and not those others. In part because it wasn’t even a decision that was made. It was a probability that was realized.
This post also has a really good explanation of how large language models work.
There may be real, productive uses for these kinds of tools. There may be ways to build and deploy them ethically and sustainably. But that’s not the situation with the instances we have. AI, as it’s been built today, is a tool to sell out our collective futures in order to enrich already wealthy people. They like to frame it as being akin to nuclear science. But we should really see it as being more like fossil fuels.