notes.husk.org. scribblings by Paul Mison.

2012-11-05

post/35082297456

photo 22:41:10
two months of nate silver in gif form by Michal Migurski on tecznotes:

One week per second, 538 collected daily since September 3rd.

I tweaked the image to crop out the (somewhat distracting) probabilities, remove the looping, and optimise transitions (to get it under the Tumblr 2MB file size limit).

two months of nate silver in gif form by Michal Migurski on tecznotes:

One week per second, 538 collected daily since September 3rd.

I tweaked the image to crop out the (somewhat distracting) probabilities, remove the looping, and optimise transitions (to get it under the Tumblr 2MB file size limit).

2012-04-16

post/21221254939

photo 20:18:32
Golden Gate hachures, by Michal Migurski. (more, via.)

Golden Gate hachures, by Michal Migurski. (more, via.)

2012-03-05

post/18768306182

photo 02:21:19
The Webkit inspector reporting on the size of a single post to Twitter, from a post by Michal Migurski:

Twitter allows you send 140 characters in a tweet, which (when you add entities, hashtags, and all that) ends up in the 4KB range as represented in the JSON API. 140 is what you see, so I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that a single tweet page on Twitter has about a 15,000-to-one ratio of garbage to content.
I get links to tweets by mail, etc. on a regular basis, and the aggressive anti-performance and apparent contempt for the web by Twitter’s designers is probably the thing that gets me most irrationally riled-up on a daily basis. How does this pass design review? Who looks at a page this massive, this typically broken and says “go with it”?

The Webkit inspector reporting on the size of a single post to Twitter, from a post by Michal Migurski:

Twitter allows you send 140 characters in a tweet, which (when you add entities, hashtags, and all that) ends up in the 4KB range as represented in the JSON API. 140 is what you see, so I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that a single tweet page on Twitter has about a 15,000-to-one ratio of garbage to content.

I get links to tweets by mail, etc. on a regular basis, and the aggressive anti-performance and apparent contempt for the web by Twitter’s designers is probably the thing that gets me most irrationally riled-up on a daily basis. How does this pass design review? Who looks at a page this massive, this typically broken and says “go with it”?

what

more