multi-dimensional erector set that we're going forever

We don’t want to invalidate the input if the user removes all text. They may need a moment to think, but the invalidated state sets off an unnecessary alarm.

It can also be included as individual modules, i.e. Hashie::Extensions::MethodReader, Hashie::Extensions::MethodWriter and Hashie::Extensions::MethodQuery.

I think one thing would have been a solution to basically everything here: Player created maps. As Im involved in many modding communities, I know for a fact that player created content can be vital in making games last so much longer, and the quality can shoot for the stars, Player created maps would have been fantastic for this game.

Feel free to pick and choose what you need for your applications.

What this means is: I better refrain from writing a new book and we rather focus on more and better docs.

The bare bones operation without any Trailblazery is implemented in the trailblazer-operation gem and can be used without our stack.

While Trailblazer offers you abstraction layers for all aspects of Ruby On Rails, it does not missionize you. Wherever you want, you may fall back to the "Rails Way" with fat models, monolithic controllers, global helpers, etc. This is not a bad thing, but allows you to step-wise introduce Trailblazer's encapsulation in your app without having to rewrite it.

Only use what you like.

you can pick which layers you want. Trailblazer doesn't impose technical implementations

$ nix-env --switch-profile /nix/var/nix/profiles/my-profile $ nix-env --switch-profile /nix/var/nix/profiles/default These commands switch to the my-profile and default profile, respectively. If the profile doesn’t exist, it will be created automatically.

Chapter 10. ProfilesProfiles and user environments are Nix’s mechanism for implementing the ability to allow different users to have different configurations, and to do atomic upgrades and rollbacks.

user environment

In Nix, different users can have different “views” on the set of installed applications. That is, there might be lots of applications present on the system (possibly in many different versions), but users can have a specific selection of those active — where “active” just means that it appears in a directory in the user’s PATH. Such a view on the set of installed applications is called a user environment, which is just a directory tree consisting of symlinks to the files of the active applications.

Have you ever been emailed something from a company and tried to reply only to be frustrated with a failed-to-send message response? A no-reply email frustrates your customers.Instead, use a dedicated email to send out your messages and to keep business emails in a central location so you can answer customer concerns quickly and decisively. This level of customer service will help develop your reputation as a company that cares about its customers.

Not to mention 80% of our sales are laptops and desktops running, you guessed it, a Linux desktop. So, unlike Red Hat and Canonical, we live or die based on how good that experience is.

Then recently I was shopping at the John Lewis website, and they brought up the Verified By Visa page in an iframe - wonderful! I'm still looking at the John Lewis site, and all that's happening is I'm being asked for my Verified By Visa password - no problem. Although as a web developer I know that there's no technical difference between that and a plain old redirect-there-redirect-back, the user experience is so much better!

Free software is a necessary but sometimes insufficient requirement to build domestication immunity. Two more measures include simplicity and open platforms.

WhatsApp rose by trapping previously-free beings in their corral and changing their habits to create dependence on masters. Over time, this made it difficult or impossible to return to their previous lifestyle. That process should sound familiar: it’s eerily similar to the domestication of animals. I call this type of vendor lock-in user domestication: the removal of user autonomy to trap users into serving vendors.

a class of businesses models I call “user domestication”. The domestication of users is high on my list of problems plaguing the human race, and is worth a detailed explanation.

Group Rules from the Admins1NO POSTING LINKS INSIDE OF POST - FOR ANY REASONWe've seen way too many groups become a glorified classified ad & members don't like that. We don't want the quality of our group negatively impacted because of endless links everywhere. NO LINKS2NO POST FROM FAN PAGES / ARTICLES / VIDEO LINKSOur mission is to cultivate the highest quality content inside the group. If we allowed videos, fan page shares, & outside websites, our group would turn into spam fest. Original written content only3NO SELF PROMOTION, RECRUITING, OR DM SPAMMINGMembers love our group because it's SAFE. We are very strict on banning members who blatantly self promote their product or services in the group OR secretly private message members to recruit them.4NO POSTING OR UPLOADING VIDEOS OF ANY KINDTo protect the quality of our group & prevent members from being solicited products & services - we don't allow any videos because we can't monitor what's being said word for word. Written post only.

There's a lot of advice online showing how to get rid of snap. (e.g.: https://cialu.net/how-to-disable-and-remove-completely-snaps-in-ubuntu-linux/ worked for me) so the only result (so far, a few months later) is that Chromium has lost a user, and having upgraded Ubuntu since the original Warty, if snap becomes obligatory I'll have to take a look at Mint, or Devuan.

It should be as simple to use as in the days of jQuery's tooltips.

We talked, for example, about how stores and governments were adding new rules and social distancing guidelines, often communicated through purely visual means, like stickers on the floor and printed signs. Mr. Johnston acknowledged that it was a tough new time for businesses, but shared that he faces new types of exclusion as a result.

While the very same software might be in a PPA and a snap, the fact that the snap is shown in Ubuntu Software is the point I’m making. Many people use that to install software. So making software appear there is beneficial for developers - their software is found, and beneficial for users - they discover new software.

In addition, PPAs are awful for software discovery. Average users have no idea what a PPA is, nor how to configure or install software from it. Part of the point of snap is to make software discovery easier. We can put new software in the “Editor’s Picks” in Ubuntu Software then people will discover and install it. Having software in a random PPA somewhere online is only usable by experts. Normal users have no visibility to it.

The benefits for developers do reflect on benefits for users, with more software delivered faster and more securely.

But now Chromium is no more available as deb, so what to expect ?

We must think of the users more than the technique itself

The download attribute can accept an optional value, allowing the author to create a custom, human-friendly name for the downloaded file.

Now they have what they need to make an informed decision, with a little intentional ambiguity to temper expectations.

For larger files, the wait time can be especially problematic. A standard download is an all-or-nothing affair—interruptions can corrupt them and render them useless. Worse, it can waste valuable data on a metered data plan, an unfortunately all-too-relevant concern.

It took faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long to signup at this site to reply to you. This site rejected the real address I use for amazon, username.place@cocaine.ninja so I created an email address that I'll never check again just to signup here. I have zero tolerance for spam.

no post edit, eh?Fine.

What the #$%@ is UX Design?

The aesthetics of underlying technologies have a way of leaking into the end user experience.

There's a huge area of seemingly obvious user-centric products that don't exist simply because there isn't a working business model to support it.

As was mentioned in the comments above, the material design spec for buttons specifies that the text should be uppercase, but you can easily override its CSS property: paper-button { text-transform: none; }

enables passive event listeners by default for some events (see list below). It basically will set { passive: true } automatically every time you declare a new event listener.

@use "@material/theme" with (  $primary: #FEDBD0,  $on-primary: #442C2E);

You could totally just write your own name and not use the name in package.json, this template is made so the users wouldn't need to think about the UMD build.

Include the ability to dismiss or decline the promotion. Remember the user's preference if they do this and only re-prompt if there's a change in the user's relationship with your content such as if they signed in or completed a purchase.

Keep promotions outside of the flow of your user journeys. For example, in a PWA login page, put the call to action below the login form and submit button. Disruptive use of promotional patterns reduces the usability of your PWA and negatively impacts your engagement metrics.

I wonder if it's worth archiving the repository (while leaving the site running) with a message that we're transitioning the content to MDN (so folks don't get the wrong idea and a bad experience when filing issues).

rickrolling

where some of the internet’s worst scandals have been fomented

Just coming here to voice my agreement that these warnings are annoying and exist in other libraries as well. For me this happened with svelma. I didn't write the library code, so I don't have complete control over it even though I agree there is an argument to be had around whether I should be notified anyway. In either case, these warnings should be easily disabled since libraries don't always get updated over night.

Maybe it's also a bug because every warning should be ignorable? Not sure.

I would like the compiler to add a property like canIgnore: false to the warning, if the warning cannot be disabled.

The Web needs to be accessible to everyone who wants to participate, who wants to share their knowledge with the world, who is not satisfied with the status quo and ready to change culture and society. Yet instead, we are currently building a Web of superficial distractions that is becoming less and less accessible to future generations.

We know children don’t get sick just during office hours. At our evening and weekend Urgent Care Clinic in Bellevue, your child’s minor illness or injury will be treated by our team of pediatric experts

Issue grooming: There appears to be a variety of different failure modes and user error/misconfiguration scenarios (all largely historic) described here.

If you want to implement a form with a superb User Experience, you have to take care of many variables:

Just let the user fill in some fields, submit it to the server and if there are any errors notify them and let the user start over again. Is that a good approach? The answer is no, you don't want users to get frustrated waiting for a server round trip to get some form validation result.

To silence circular dependencies warnings for let's say moment library use: // rollup.config.js import path from 'path' const onwarn = warning => { // Silence circular dependency warning for moment package if ( warning.code === 'CIRCULAR_DEPENDENCY' && !warning.importer.indexOf(path.normalize('node_modules/moment/src/lib/')) ) { return } console.warn(`(!) ${warning.message}`) }

Identify your user agents When deploying software that makes requests to other sites, you should set a custom User-Agent header to identify the software and provide a means to contact its maintainers. Many of the automated requests we receive have generic user-agent headers such as Java/1.6.0 or Python-urllib/2.1 which provide no information on the actual software responsible for making the requests.

Friendly UX

Since this issue seems to pop up periodically, it would be useful to turn this into a warning. It may not be elegant, but it prevents surprise blank screens due to a navigation error.

In '07, safety implied an unacceptable performance hit on slow single-core devices with 128MiB of RAM.

In my opinion, because Webpack was one of the first bundlers, is heavily packed with features, and has to support swathes of legacy code and legacy module systems, it can make configuring Webpack cumbersome and challenging to use. Over the years, I’ve written package managers, compilers, and bundlers, and I still find configuring Webpack to be messy and unintuitive.

User experience above all

balancing developer and user experience

What I believe should happen is the Svelte compiler should, when a promise is passed to onMount, realise that a promise has been passed, and await the result of the function to be used as the onDestroy function. i.e, it should behave the exact same way for an async function as it does for a non-async function (if this is possible)

Over the last year, we have gained a better understanding of the performance and correctness characteristics of the various rendering technologies available on the web, and have been experimenting with a second approach that uses CanvasKit. CanvasKit brings Skia to the web using WebAssembly and WebGL, enabling a hardware-accelerated drawing surface that improves our ability to render complex and intensive graphics efficiently.

WebAssembly is pretty great, but should web applications just be rendered to a canvas, and every application brings its own graphics toolkit? Do we really want anti-aliasing differences between web applications? Applications-in-containers is a thing - look at Qubes - but it’s not really something that users should want.

The idea of a web browser being something we can comprehend, of a web page being something that more people can make, feels exciting to me.

Thank you, but this answers the question and means I will be unable to use svelte.

Mais il ne songe pas aux causes

TBH It is a bit disheartening to see this issue closed when all proposed solutions do not sufficiently solve the issue at hand, I really like svelte but if this is how feature requests are handled I am probably not going to use it in the future.

So when we ask users to answer questions that deal with the future, we have to keep in mind the context in which they’re answering. They can tell us about a feature they think will make their lives better, but user val-idation will always be necessary to make sure that past user’s beliefs about future user are accurate.

In fact, developers often tend to forget a simple, almost elementary fact: if users want to close the application or leave a site, they will — doesn’t matter which obstacles are placed on their path to the exit-button. The more obstacles there are the more negative the user experience will be.

As designers, it is our decision to provide users with a clear, unambiguous choice, but we have no right to decide for users which choice they make.

Any deviations from this convention result in a more design-oriented and less user-oriented design.

Users also don’t like to deal with dozens of opened tabs and some visitors tend to become quickly angry with the disabled back button. Furthermore, some visitors may not even realize that a new window was opened and hit the back-button mercilessly — without any result. That’s not user-friendly, and that’s not a good user experience we, web designers, strive for.

The EARN IT act turns Section 230 protection into a hypocritical bargaining chip. At a high level, what the bill proposes is a system where companies have to earn Section 230 protection by following a set of designed-by-committee “best practices” that are extraordinarily unlikely to allow end-to-end encryption. Anyone who doesn’t comply with these recommendations will lose their Section 230 protection.

Broadly speaking, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects online platforms in the United States from legal liability for the behavior of their users. In the absence of this protection, many of the apps and services that are critical to the way the internet functions today may have never been created in the first place – or they couldn’t have been created in America.

A year’s worth of cajoling back and forth has ultimately resulted in the EARN-IT bill wending its way through the U.S. system, a bill that, if passed, would see messaging services become legally responsible for the content on their platforms. While not mandating backdoors, per se, without some form of probes into message content, the argument runs that the punitive risks become unsurvivable.

there’s a bill tiptoeing through the U.S. Congress that could inflict the backdoor virus that law enforcement agencies have been trying to inflict on encryption for years... The choice for tech companies comes down to weakening their own encryption and endangering the privacy and security of all their users, or foregoing protections and potentially facing liability in a wave of lawsuits.

Once the platforms introduce backdoors, those arguing against such a move say, bad guys will inevitably steal the keys. Lawmakers have been clever. No mention of backdoors at all in the proposed legislation or the need to break encryption. If you transmit illegal or dangerous content, they argue, you will be held responsible. You decide how to do that. Clearly there are no options to some form of backdoor.

Despite its opposition, EARN-IT is the clearest threat yet to end-to-end encryption, given this clever twist in pushing the onus onto the platforms to avoid transmitting illegal content, rather than mandating a lawful interception approach.

Tiring of the privacy and safety debate, those behind EARN-IT have proposed making the platforms responsible for the content they transmit, encrypted or not. This would mean, as explained by Sophos, that tech companies “either weaken their own encryption and endanger the privacy and security of all their users, or forego protections and potentially face liability in a wave of lawsuits.”

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) has notable safe-harbor provisions which protect Internet service providers from the consequences of their users' actions. (Similarly, the EU directive on electronic commerce provides a similar provision of "mere conduit" which, while not exactly the same, serves much the same function as the DMCA safe harbor in this instance.)

The breach was caused by Facebook’s “View As” feature, which allows users to view their own account as if they were a stranger visiting it.

Don’t go to code academy, go to design academy. Be advocates of the user & consumer. It’s not about learning how to code, it’s about translating real-world needs to technological specifications in just ways that give end users agency and equity in design, development and delivery. Be a champion of user-centric design. Learn how to steward data and offer your help.

At Google, we believe that if we focus on the user, all else will follow.

allows you to deploy "'strict-dynamic' in a backwards compatible way, without requiring user-agent sniffing

A "tag" is a snippet of code that allows digital marketing teams to collect data, set cookies or integrate third-party content like social media widgets into a site.

It’s worth saying though that while the law may give you up to 30 days to honor these requests, most subscribers won’t. It is therefore prudent to honor opt-out requests promptly or risk being marked as spam and compromising the total legitimacy of your associated address.

What I don't like is how they've killed so many useful extensions without any sane method of overriding their decisions.

I know, you don't trust Mozilla but do you also not trust the developer? I absolutely do! That is the whole point of this discussion. Mozilla doesn't trust S3.Translator or jeremiahlee but I do. They blocked page-translator for pedantic reasons. Which is why I want the option to override their decision to specifically install few extensions that I'm okay with.

There will be those within organisations that won't be too keen on the approaches above due to the friction it presents to some users.

This is one possible path to take in that you simply reject the registration and ask the user to create another password. Per NIST's guidance though, do explain why the password has been rejected:

I suggest being very clear that there has not been a security incident on the site they're logging into and that the password was exposed via a totally unrelated site

By rendering important parts of the application with the real data on the server-side, an isomorphic application can show a meaningful initial page. On the other hand, client rendering application can’t show any meaningful information until it fetches all external data it needs. In the meantime, the only thing a user will see is a loading indicator.

One of the drawbacks of waiting until someone signs in again to check their password is that a user may simply stay signed in for a long time without signing out. I suppose that could be an argument in favor of limiting the maximum duration of a session or remember-me token, but as far as user experience, I always find it annoying when I was signed in and a website arbitrarily signs me out without telling me why.

Short of a fingerprint reader, two-step verification (aka two-step authorization) may be the single best way to protect online accounts.

2-Step Verification

There is a fundamental difference between these two kinds of content: the user comments are stored in our databases, which means their Markdown syntax can be normalized (e.g. by adding or removing whitespace, fixing the indentation, or inserting missing Markdown specifiers until they render properly). The Markdown documents stored in Git repositories, however, cannot be touched at all, as their contents are hashed as part of Git’s storage model.

I need that model created despite being invalid, so it actually works in my favor (I have an after-signup profile creation process users through

Each request to the API must be accompanied by a user agent request header. Typically this should be the name of the app consuming the service.