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

Personally, I found this book very useful and straightforward. It is written by the creators of Tailwind CSS.

https://www.refactoringui.com


This one amuses me. You skip the long-windedness of the front page to look at the pictures. Your eyes are caught by two example user interfaces: contact forms. The one on the left looks great. The one on the right looks awful. Yet it's the one on the left that has the big red X next to it. So you backtrack to read why they're wrong. The reason is because borders "feel" busy and cluttered. Nothing empirical. No data to back it up. Just "feelings".

This led me to believe the whole website/book is going to be like this, so I haven't read any further. I'm sure it's great.


> The one on the left looks great. The one on the right looks awful.

This is also just a mere assertion of "feelings", with nothing empirical and no data to back it up.

As long as those are the rules we're playing by, I'll say that to me, the design on the left screams "designed by a dev", in the pejorative sense, while the one on the right looks like it had a designer involved.

Whether there are actual usability improvements is an orthogonal issue, but I don't feel there's a huge gap between the two.

I feel a lot of this comes down to trends, rather than actual usability. Keeping up with the latest trends in UI design is a signal that you care enough about design and UX to employ and empower a designer/ design team.

Paradoxically, sometimes signalling you care about design might involve making the UX worse (relative to what the user base is trained on), if that's what the trends dictate. For example, the sudden overcompensated reaction against skeumorphism that was "flat design".

Just some of my feelings.



For me, the main takeaway is something we all already know: that even though the CFR is low in younger healthy people, the hospitalisation rate is extremely high, and that's been one of the most important factors in this pandemic.

It's nice to finally see the hospitalisation risk presented clearly.




Unfortunately the number of ECMO machines is far cry away from what is required for this to work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extracorporeal_membrane_oxygen...

Even if you manage to double or triple capacity unfortunately it is no match to the exponential growth.


We have a lot more ECMO capacity than people think, CPB machines from heart surgery cases can be used to provide ECMO which are at least an order of magnitude more common than classic ECMO machines.


I know someone that was on QA at a major international horn manufacturer, the minimum activation cycles before failure for India were ~10x-50x higher than for other markets.


The overhand [1] and double overhand are quite different knots. Actually, since you specify that you mean the "Euro Death Knot", it is actually a "flat overhand bend" [2].

The parent's statement is not false, it's just that one must be precise about naming, because casual use leads to incorrect assumptions by others.

Other than that, yes, you are correct.

* [1] https://www.animatedknots.com/overhand-knot * [2] https://www.animatedknots.com/flat-overhand-bend-knot


Windy.com allows you to compare models, which varies based on the region you have zoomed in to.

This is really handy as national models can be much better for short-term and higher resolution predictions.

It has the widest range of models freely available that I'm aware of, including the commercial ECMWF model.


Very bright optical transient near the Trifid and Lagoon Nebulae: http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=11448

40 minutes later, Erratum: http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=11449


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

Search: