What is Digg?96 Comments
- Ikioi, on 10/12/2007, -5/+71Image maps? Image maps?!?
I think someone needs to tell the author what a "hacker" is. Hackers were writing the back-end Perl/cgi to make dynamic pages, forums, and the like. I think what is referred to here is "Webmaster". There were many "webmasters" but no self respecting hacker resorted to image maps for the WHOLE site.
From TFA: A hacker could throw together a website in a few minutes, filled with the latest possibilities that the web offered: animated gifs, scrolling marquee text and blinking red text for the really important stuff.
That person was NOT a hacker. Let me repeat, NOT A HACKER. Scrolling marquees and blinking text may have been fun, at least back then. And I'm not talking down to any "webmaster" who used them. God knows I fell prey to their siren call a few times as well.
Hacker - Writes software and addons for things like Wordpress.
Webmaster - Makes pretty templates for Wordpress.
Hacker - Writes their own forum software or modifies existing forum software.
Webmaster - Administrates a forum, can change some settings, but doesn't touch code.
But, to make it very clear:
Hacker != OMG!!! Ponies!!!
Someone didn't get that it was just an April Fools Joke: http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=120972005&size=o
I could continue the rant, but I'm sure I've already said enough to get flamed by thousands of Webmasters who think they are l33t hackers because they know how to use an ip ban script on their site. - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+37It wasn't retarted back when there weren't any alternatives.
- FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28@theone
fair enough, but to use them now (unless you must) IS retarded. - ModernGeek, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19As someone who developed web apps and a few sites in the mid 90s, I can tell you that frames were considered lame. Most sites had clunky inconsistent interfaces that would give you the option of NO FRAME or FRAMES and the no frame option would include a jab at AOL saying that their browser sucked. Back in my day, I thought AOL was pretty cool, I used to download Duke Nukem and other game demos from it, and would chat with other gamers (not all AOL chat sucked). But then all design was about tables tables and more tables. Nested tables, widths, heights, and margins. No style-sheets, everything was embedded in the table tag. CSS still hasn't matched what you can do with tables though, due to the need of all those hacks. Hopefully CSS3 will be properly implemented and help catchup because right now things are a sick mess.
- brandizzle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14"A hacker could throw together a website in a few minutes, filled with the latest possibilities that the web offered: animated gifs, scrolling marquee text and blinking red text for the really important stuff."
So the l33t myspace emo kids are hackers now? - rocjoe71, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Real Hackers don't call themselves "Real Hackers".
- dhasenan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Real hackers don't use Wordpress; they develop a custom server OS.
- billisdog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11The word hacker is henceforth banned forever. Nobody seems to be able to use it responsibly.
- Khlept0, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Real webapp hackers use XSS and SQL injection, not CSS. =]
- KageKonjou, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Kekekekekeke...
Also: http://www.duggmirror.com/programming/Real_Hackers_Dont_Use_CSS/ - Grimdotdotdot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8That would be a 'cracker'.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Regardless of whether you agree with the term "hacker" being used, I still think the story was entertaining.
- artur.ventura, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7real hackers as if MIT hackers or 1995 motion picture Hackers?
- corbanbrook, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Real hackers use WordPress
- nysus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Agree with post above. Hackers, if they made a web site at all, make very sparse looking sites. Witness: http://www.catb.org/esr/
And it was rare to see entire pages made out of images. In fact, I don't think I ever ran across such a site, and definitely not a professional one. - spyrral, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7It's pretty clear from the article that he's calling those people "hackers" in a very tongue in cheek way.
- Midas7g, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I am sorry you are old.
- memebag, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Real hackers don't fart around with web sites.
- kflasch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Do people not understand jokes here? Good lord.
- rabiddogma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I prefer fixed width layouts. They conform to good readability standards.
- puredemo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Real hackers get errors establishing database connections...
- p4r0l3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5if (hungry == "true")
microwave.cook("Ramen"); - MegaSilver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The author was using the word 'hacker' as a method of saying how back in the 90's, anyone who knew anything about a computer was considered a 'hacker' to regular folk. It's a joke everybody! Get with it!
- stupidStan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3they prefer 'ninjas'
- pile0nades, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Try this, it makes digg use a fluid width. I only tested it in Firefox though.
http://userstyles.org/style/show/546 - munkt0n, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6what a massive load of bollocks.
- Flooq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Note the use of XHTML & CSS in the above example.
- jkronz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11WOW another CSS flame article from yet another *fixed-width* site. I've yet to see great CSS fluid site design. Granted it does exist but it's usually full of hacks for all the different browsers. Until CSS matures to the point of allowing fluid site design, I'll be sticking with tables.
I think its very ironic that one of the main CSS arguments is that it is web standards compliant yet 99% of CSS sites are fixed width and therefore break one of the largest and oldest web standards: being client agnostic.
Take Digg V3 for example. It looks like crap on my 24" lcd *and* like crap on my old 800x600 laptop running DSL (I just love the new horizontal scrollbars).
I'm all for replacing table layouts (they have thier quirks too), but until you can perform good fluid design I'll be using tables.
Btw, that doesn't mean I don't use CSS. I use it for every site I design. But if it's a fluid site the structure is almost always table based.
- technique, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Real hackers don't use a mouse. Hell really good hackers barely speak "natural" languages as their brain has supplanted that memory allocation with constructed languages, like C, Perl, assembler, etc.
- Doogie125, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Not sure what the message is. The article is posted using CSS and no tables.
In the end, who cares? If tables fit the bill or your workflow have at 'em. If CSS fits the bill why hurt yourself doing something else?
It's a free web... sort of... - KicktheDonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I believe you mean "cracker".
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3A hacker *cough*webmaster*cough* removed it!
- zedj, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Hilarious article
- yokat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2check this out I just "stumled upon" this.
http://blog.alsacreations.com/images/camembert.png - samster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2God damn WordPress is a piece of crap, almost everything posted on Digg using WordPress breaks. Bah.
- unclewormwood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Sorry. Hacking and web design have nothing to do with each other. Any 6 year old can learn HTML, JavaScript, CSS, etc. Hacking has become a catch-all term like "geek" or "cool" that have subjective meanings. Funny script kiddies.
- dobesov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I for one am one of those annoyed old fashioned webdesigner/hackers who doesnt like all these new fangled CSS/XML/blaa blaa blaa crap. Has anyone considered how insane it is to have like 5 differnt syntax bases reqired to create a web page. Most everything that we need all these new web addons for could have been handled by expanding out a few more HTML tags and making browsers more intelligent. Fluid web pages through CSS coding... Why cant the browser just take the website from its target resolution and up or down scale it to make it fit my screen??!
- pfister_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nobody seems to have noticed, but the author of the article is siding with the designers, not the hackers.
Don't worry, it's still stupid. - stupidStan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2that is awesome
- zapada, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2stray: You missed the point.
- cmiller1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Oh wow, I remember discovering HTML 4, scrolling marquees and animated gifs! I sure was one hell of a hacker back then, when I was ten years old /me rolls eyes
- spyrral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Apparently not.
- KicktheDonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2We like databases...
- Peepsalot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I couldn't finish reading this article. The author sounds more like HACK than a HACKER.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I remember when HTML/HTTP/WWW started taking off. I took one look at the embedded picture capability and said, "There goes the neighborhood." The Internet used to be an exclusive domain. These "hackers" are just noobs to me. Real hackers kermit their files over telnet...or something.
- Flooq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've seen plenty of fixed-width table-based layouts and plenty of nice fluid CSS designs. I don't think it's an issue that's really all that closely connected to web standards vs tables. While narrow fixed width sites are often used to increase readability by using narrower columns I find the most annoying fixed width sites are usually made that way to give the designer more control over the look of that site. It tends to be much easier to use make a fixed width site look better, especially if you're thinking like a print designer.
As for CSS not being client agnostic, it's worth remembering that with a properly designed web standards site your client should be able to ignore the stylesheet making the content readable on any client, With the use of mobiles and other unusual clients growing this is only going to become more useful in the years to come. - vajra918, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Google Cache:
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:http://friendlybit.com/css/real-hackers-dont-use-css/ - stupidStan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2if (1 == 1)
{
download("porn");
} - spyrral, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2... or the author is using a tongue in cheek tone to make his point. By the way, you don't know *****.
- brianjlowry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All of these insane syntax bases were formed to make our lives easier. I can develop a website much quicker using CSS, Javascript, and XHTML and the beauty is that when I need to go back and redesign it, it won't be difficult. Try redesigning a 100+ page site with a table based layout.
-
Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 