Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 7bit's commentslogin

And then what? You're looking at a list of hundreds of submissions and why they have been added or not added, which completely defeats the purpose of that website.

I don't get the point of these sites, because it I want a curated list, I visit the front page of hackernews or reddit -- and trust the system.

Ohh.directory I'd the same thing, except for a different selection process.

You either trust it or you don't.


> You either trust it or you don't.

don't see why it has to be this way. It doesn't take much to tell us what the review process is like and what gets added and what does not. If I know in advance that the blogs I submit are outside their scope, then I won't waste time submitting them.

I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual.


Give it a rest. The scope is in the FAQ. Blogs get added when I have time.

As you can tell from the site, there are many, many suggestions and I’m not finding time to add many new blogs https://ooh.directory/about/charts/

There is no guarantee any blog you suggest, even if it’s in “scope”, will get added before either of us die. If that’s a problem save yourself all this angst and don’t suggest anything.


Appreciate the reply. My submissions fell within the scope though. I think I took the rejections too personally. Sorry for that. I appreciate the time and effort you put into maintaining the site. I will give it a rest.

Sorry for being a pain in this thread. Wishing you all the best with the project going forward.


In which case they're in the pool of (currently) 2,888 other suggested blogs that I've yet to evaluate.

>> "I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual."

Because no one who wants one has made it. Why not be the change if it's something you want?

If your response is anything other than enthusiasm to get started, you understand why it hasn't happened.


Which is okay. But don't pretend otherwise.

Those poor users. If they want to remove the fourth wheel from their car, they will bump into some issues. Who cares.

I do but shitty web devs don't

Exactly. Any company promoting their values lost all credibility. It's just corporate lies until they find an investor. And I hate being treated like a child and lied to.

Just tell me that you're waiting for the money shot and then I can take you seriously. Otherwise just F O.


The very fact that UTF-8 itself discouraged from using the BOM is just so alien to me. I understand they want it to be the last encoding and therefore not in need of a explicit indicator, but as it currently IS NOT the only encoding that is used, it makes is just so difficult to understand if I'm reading any of the weird ASCII derivatives or actual Unicode.

It's maddening and it's frustrating. The US doesn't have any of these issues, but in Europe, that's a complete mess!


> The US doesn't have any of these issues

I think you mean “the US chooses to completely ignore these issues and gets away with it because they defined the basic standard that is used, ASCII, way-back-when, and didn't foresee it becoming an international thing so didn't think about anyone else” :)


> because they defined the basic standard that is used, ASCII

I thought it was EBCDIC /s


From wikipedia...

    UTF-8 always has the same byte order,[5] so its only use in UTF-8 is to signal at the start that the text stream is encoded in UTF-8...
    Not using a BOM allows text to be backwards-compatible with software designed for extended ASCII. For instance many programming languages permit non-ASCII bytes in string literals but not at the start of the file. ...
   A BOM is unnecessary for detecting UTF-8 encoding. UTF-8 is a sparse encoding: a large fraction of possible byte combinations do not result in valid UTF-8 text.
That last one is a weaker point but it is true that with CSV a BOM is more likely to do harm, than good.

> The very fact that UTF-8 itself discouraged from using the BOM is just so alien to me.

One of the key advantages of UTF8 is that all ASCII content is effectively UTF-8. Having the BOM present reduces that convenience a bit, and a file starting with the three bytes 0xEF,0xBB,0xBF may be mistaken by some tools for a binary file rather than readable text.


Did you read past the first sentence I wrote?

ASCII does not work for any country than the US, making it a shit encoding.


> The very fact that UTF-8 itself discouraged from using the BOM is just so alien to me.

Adding a BOM makes it incompatible with ASCII, which is one of the benefits of using UTF-8.


Another one who fails to read past my first sentence...

I read past your first sentence, but ASCII is used by non English speaking countries for many things. Source code, for one.

Indeed, I've been using the BOM in all my text files for maybe decades now, those who wrote the recommendation are clearly from an English country

> are clearly from an English country

One particular English-speaking country… The UK has issues with ASCII too, as our currently symbol (£) is not included. Not nearly as much trouble as non-English languages due to the lack of accents & such that they need, but we are still affected.


Every car manufacturer has a catalog of spare parts you can order. I really don't understand what you're on about with your post.

That it should be possible for somebody with a reasonable understanding of car maintenance to actually fix or maintain their car instead of having a blob of proprietary nonsense only meant to lock you in and milk your wallet with mandatory dealer repairs and subscriptions.

Complexity is the reason your car doesn't drink fuel like people drink water and also the reason there's vastly less severe accidents than 60 years ago.

Censorship is one of these words that get slapped on anything.

Filtering one port is not censorship. Not even close.


> censorship, the suppression or removal of writing, artistic work, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security

It is not the responsibility of the Tier 1 or the ISP to configure your server securely, it is their responsibility to deliver the message. Therefore it is an overreach to block it because you might be insecure. What is next. They block the traffic to your website because you run PHP?

Similar to how the mailman is obligated to deliver your letter at address 13 even though he personally might be very superstitious and believe by delivering the mail to that address bad things will happen.


I don't agree with your argument, but I don't want to debate that.

But let's say I agree: That still is not censorship.


I've never been to a town square where I had to let some random person photograph my face or tell me to leave.

Value-focused organizations mean nothing to me. They throw out their values as soon as they are in the way of financial success.

Having a fully open-source self-hostable product improves this significantly.

Okay, a

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: