CSS has always been presentational/decorative. The "C" in CSS defined an easy way for a browser UI to let you override some settings easily - but these settings are underused and so are buried way down.
Also, True Type / Postscript / Web fonts still don't support color gradients.
And why should they? Fonts hold letter shapes and sometimes ligature data. CSS is for presentation/styling/color. CSS doesn't yet support color gradients on text (only backgrounds), but there are clever workarounds.
The fad before that was skeuomorphism, which wasn't a great plan on its own either. The problem is that people are only copying design ideas without understanding the why - and that's when it becomes fad-like. And those are the people that decided that a floppy symbol was somehow skeuomorphic rather than representational - when the vast majority of computer users have never used a floppy disk (which is true when you consider home computer adoption was driven by Internet adoption - especially at the older ages - and the rest are too young to have used one).
The "zoom" feature in most browsers simply scales the whole page proportionally these days, rather than scaling fonts. The forced stylesheet would just be to enforce colors.
A lot of web sites override those colors too. And often the selection color is even worse...though that would be what I would use override CSS for (if I needed it) - so I can see the original design until I highlight as needed.
It's somewhat good design. For bright screens, black on white can be harsh-looking. Part of the blame lies on people never tweaking blown out default settings on their screens - especially at larger screen sizes.
That doesn't mean body text should all be lightened (which I know some sites also do), but headline text and graphic overlay text should at least deserve special treatment.
I also wonder if ClearType isn't partly to blame. You get finer edges, but the color fringing kind of hurts the eyes at times.
UHD doesn't require you to fit more on your screen. You can also keep everything the same size at a much higher DPI, for better sharpness and clarity (edge contrast is contrast too). Or find somewhere nice in the middle. For those with high visual acuity, it's nice not having blurry edges.
And with browsers allowing stylesheet overrides and increasing support for screen readers, why should design be done for the lowest common denominator?
Simply zooming in will make low-contrast text easier to read.
Big Tech are colluding to deflate wages by trying to get more people into competition for jobs. Diversity is just a buzzword to get everyone to do their work for them. H1Bs are not quite the gold mine they were hoping for.
The lack of women in tech has mostly been because of natural aptitude/interest. Whether that's mostly cultural, or due to divergent brain development based on hormonal differences. You can't really convince someone to become interested - only nurture the interest that is actually there.
Just because it's possible, doesn't mean it can be done.
The Stingray devices already exist. Now here's a better blueprint to help amateurs build their own.
People were apparently fine with this security flaw when only a few proprietary hardware vendors were known to be exploiting it. Now, hopefully it can be taken seriously.
Try an ISP DNS server sometime. Before I remembered to change DNS after upgrading my router, I would get 2+ seconds of latency on every single page load before anything would happen at all. Even running my own DNS server and every query going straight to the root servers takes less time than that.
Unresponsive DNS queries would make pages slower if they relied on them. It's just that your neighbors aren't using their favorite web sites, leaving you with some extra bandwidth.
The thing about DNS is that to get the best speed, you want the nodes distributed as far and wide as possible. And you don't want it on the same servers as your main service. So it's either a different department or a different company - guess which one is cheaper.
What company lets you go to court these days? No, their terms and conditions surely have you agreeing to binding arbitration with a company of their choosing.
The entries tend to be longer, but individual definitions are usually brief. And in most cases there were more than one valid definition depending on usage.
Not about bribery != not a bribe
The term bribery is still typically only used to describe the criminal act. An advertiser persuading you to buy crap you don't need doesn't usually offer a gift or incentive. But when they do (in the forms of rewards/discounts) you could probably call it a (weak) bribe and a lot of common usage of the word reflects that.
You keep bringing the word "territory" into it and changing the argument. It's British territory by ownership and land. But the jurisdiction inside the embassy is with Ecuador and no one else - and that defines sovereignty fairly completely.
This is why I said "legally speaking" in the OP, not physically - because the land is not magically changed into Ecuadorian land.
Slashdot Mirror
CSS has always been presentational/decorative. The "C" in CSS defined an easy way for a browser UI to let you override some settings easily - but these settings are underused and so are buried way down.
Also, True Type / Postscript / Web fonts still don't support color gradients.
And why should they? Fonts hold letter shapes and sometimes ligature data. CSS is for presentation/styling/color. CSS doesn't yet support color gradients on text (only backgrounds), but there are clever workarounds.
The previous fad was antiskeuomorphism
The fad before that was skeuomorphism, which wasn't a great plan on its own either. The problem is that people are only copying design ideas without understanding the why - and that's when it becomes fad-like. And those are the people that decided that a floppy symbol was somehow skeuomorphic rather than representational - when the vast majority of computer users have never used a floppy disk (which is true when you consider home computer adoption was driven by Internet adoption - especially at the older ages - and the rest are too young to have used one).
The "zoom" feature in most browsers simply scales the whole page proportionally these days, rather than scaling fonts. The forced stylesheet would just be to enforce colors.
designed by a genius that prevents proper zooming
i.e. someone who doesn't understand mobile-responsive web design and attempts a "mobile-friendly" design anyway.
Maybe you should consider the lameness of your joke - filter working as intended.
A lot of web sites override those colors too. And often the selection color is even worse...though that would be what I would use override CSS for (if I needed it) - so I can see the original design until I highlight as needed.
It's somewhat good design. For bright screens, black on white can be harsh-looking. Part of the blame lies on people never tweaking blown out default settings on their screens - especially at larger screen sizes.
That doesn't mean body text should all be lightened (which I know some sites also do), but headline text and graphic overlay text should at least deserve special treatment.
I also wonder if ClearType isn't partly to blame. You get finer edges, but the color fringing kind of hurts the eyes at times.
UHD doesn't require you to fit more on your screen. You can also keep everything the same size at a much higher DPI, for better sharpness and clarity (edge contrast is contrast too). Or find somewhere nice in the middle. For those with high visual acuity, it's nice not having blurry edges.
And with browsers allowing stylesheet overrides and increasing support for screen readers, why should design be done for the lowest common denominator?
Simply zooming in will make low-contrast text easier to read.
Biased, yes, but not how you think.
Big Tech are colluding to deflate wages by trying to get more people into competition for jobs. Diversity is just a buzzword to get everyone to do their work for them. H1Bs are not quite the gold mine they were hoping for.
The lack of women in tech has mostly been because of natural aptitude/interest. Whether that's mostly cultural, or due to divergent brain development based on hormonal differences. You can't really convince someone to become interested - only nurture the interest that is actually there.
Naming this supply ship for disaster, I guess. At least it's unmanned.
Just because it's possible, doesn't mean it can be done.
The Stingray devices already exist. Now here's a better blueprint to help amateurs build their own.
People were apparently fine with this security flaw when only a few proprietary hardware vendors were known to be exploiting it. Now, hopefully it can be taken seriously.
I actually just run BIND on a server on my LAN and that's still faster than my ISP. You can also always use Google's 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4.
I don't disagree with any of that. A company that large should be using multiple.
DDoS attacks are distributed too - it's in the name. And each bot will hit the closest server if the DNS system is using Anycast or similar.
Try an ISP DNS server sometime. Before I remembered to change DNS after upgrading my router, I would get 2+ seconds of latency on every single page load before anything would happen at all. Even running my own DNS server and every query going straight to the root servers takes less time than that.
sheer amount of deaths per terawatt
Compared to coal mining?
Unresponsive DNS queries would make pages slower if they relied on them. It's just that your neighbors aren't using their favorite web sites, leaving you with some extra bandwidth.
The thing about DNS is that to get the best speed, you want the nodes distributed as far and wide as possible. And you don't want it on the same servers as your main service. So it's either a different department or a different company - guess which one is cheaper.
Surely you mean binding arbitration, right?
legally enforcible
What company lets you go to court these days? No, their terms and conditions surely have you agreeing to binding arbitration with a company of their choosing.
The entries tend to be longer, but individual definitions are usually brief. And in most cases there were more than one valid definition depending on usage.
Not about bribery != not a bribe
The term bribery is still typically only used to describe the criminal act. An advertiser persuading you to buy crap you don't need doesn't usually offer a gift or incentive. But when they do (in the forms of rewards/discounts) you could probably call it a (weak) bribe and a lot of common usage of the word reflects that.
You keep bringing the word "territory" into it and changing the argument. It's British territory by ownership and land. But the jurisdiction inside the embassy is with Ecuador and no one else - and that defines sovereignty fairly completely.
This is why I said "legally speaking" in the OP, not physically - because the land is not magically changed into Ecuadorian land.
So whatever the Vienna Convention says, you really have to find what UK policy is before telling everyone that they're wrong.