Google's latest Unitard - Arsenic Manipulation Pathologically

Lorne Kates

Still, my question stands, why even do opacity:0 by default?


<script type="text/javascript">
onDocumentReady()

{

FuckingFlashyFadeIn();
}
function FuckingFlashyFadeIn()

{

var opacity = document.body.style.opacity.
if(opacity < 1)

{

document.body.style.opacity = opacity + 0.01.

setTimeout(FuckingFlashyFadeIn, 1);

}

}
</script>

Because god-for-fucking-bid you see even a single PIXEL of their Unicorn cum before it's 100% full rendered! And even then, each page must be REVEALED undo you.

Filed under: <sound src="angelic_trumpet_fanfare.ogg" />

riking

@Lorne_Kates said:

setTimeout(FuckingFlashyFadeIn, 1);

Not flashy enough.

(function(){
var start = performance.now();
function FuckingFlashyFadeIn(time) {
  var timePct = (time - start + 250) / 1000;
  if (timePct > 1) { timePct = 1; }
  // put your curve transform here
  // var animPct = timePct; // linear
  var animPct = timePct * timePct; // quadratic

  document.body.style.opacity = animPct;
  if (timePct < 1) {
    requestAnimationFrame(FuckingFlashyFadeIn);
  }
}
requestAnimationFrame(FuckingFlashyFadeIn);
})();

^ paste that into your JS console

anonymous234

Quick, someone make a CSS version of that PowerPoint animation where the letters come in one by one accross the screen!

(It's not Javascript so it's OK)

LB_

From what I know about CSS I don't think it's possible yet, unless you want to code the delay for each letter manually. Also, I think nth-letter pseudo-elements aren't in CSS yet, maybe they will be in CSS4.

Lorne Kates

@riking said:

^ paste that into your JS console

I've learned long ago not to do that.

Filed under: Super secret browser options, press ALT-F4

riking

Recorded a video.
tdwtf-fadein.mp4 (882.6 KB)
tdwtf-fadein.webm (940.8 KB)

bb36e

No .ogv?

riking

tdwtf-fadein.ogv (2.3 MB)

Oh yeah, forgot about the upload size limit. This one isn't re-encoded.

bb36e

My hero

Arantor

Good job, Google. How to fuck over competent web devs that actually understand performance.

ben_lubar

Rules of performance on websites:

If you're having performance problems, someone is doing something horribly wrong.

Arantor

Followed by

Even if you aren't having performance problems, someone is still probably doing horribly wrong.

CoyneTheDup

@Spanky587 said:

A goal of the Accelerated Mobile Pages Project is to ensure effective ad monetization on the mobile web while embracing a user-centric approach. With that context, the objective is to provide support for a comprehensive range of ad formats, ad networks and technologies in Accelerated Mobile Pages. As part of that, those involved with the project are also engaged in crafting Sustainable Ad Practices to insure that ads in AMP files are fast, safe, compelling and effective for users.

I vote this as a leading contender for weasel-buzz-management-deception-worded crap of the year.

A goal of the Accelerated Mobile Pages Project is to ensure ~~effective ad monetization on~~ shoving every ad possible onto the mobile web while embracing a ~~user-centric~~ ad-targeted-to-browsing user approach. With that context, the objective is to provide support for ~~a comprehensive range of ad formats, ad networks and technologies~~ any f*****g thing advertisers can think up in Accelerated Mobile Pages. As part of that, those involved with the project are also engaged in crafting ~~Sustainable~~,inescapable, Ad Practices to insure that ads in AMP files are fast-er than the desired content, safe from user blocking, compel~~ling~~ user viewing and effective for ~~users~~ advertisers (the other users).

Sorry, cynic here.

Addendum: Everyone seen those pages that web sites lead you to, that lead you through 20 pages, each of which has 20 ads and a twelve-word paragraph? That's what AMP means. Except now you won't be able to read the paragraph without clicking through the 20 ads.

Spanky587

@CoyneTheDup said:

I vote this as a leading contender for weasel-buzz-management-deception-worded crap of the year.

Sorry, cynic here.

The first sentence exposes what a load of bullshit the whole thing is:

"A goal of the Accelerated Mobile Pages Project is to ensure effective ad
monetization on the mobile web while embracing a user-centric approach."

Users hate ads. That's why ad-blocking is a thing. A "user-centric" approach does not include pages crammed full of annoying, intrusive, deceptive ads.

CoyneTheDup

@Spanky587 said:

A "user-centric" approach does not include pages crammed full of annoying, intrusive, deceptive ads.

Well, now, that all depends on how you define "user-centric" doesn't it? It is so obvious that they mean, "advertising aimed at the bulls-eye of the target, which is the individual user" but what they want us to think it means is, "serving the wants and desires of the user." Yeah, right, if you like being on a bulls-eye for advertising.

I really don't know who they think they're fooling.

loopback0

@CoyneTheDup said:

I really don't know who they think they're fooling.

Themselves, maybe.

CoyneTheDup

Hmmm...I was thinking about that acronym. They say it is Accelerated Mobile Pages. I'm betting it really stood for:

Advertising Master Plan

Other creative expansions?

LB_

Another Major Problem

Spanky587

Asian Massage Parlor

Army of Mediocre Players

dkf

@CoyneTheDup said:

Other creative expansions?

Awkwardly Manipulate [spoiler]Peritoneum[/spoiler].

aliceif

@Onyx said:

>//Make sure shit that we got from server is valid

public    IsValid( ) {
    if(sizeof( ) > && sizeof ( ) < ) {
        return ;
    }
    else {
        return ;
    }
}

I see no problems with this! SHIPIT!

Also, Swift coders are gonna be , Discourse doesn't support emoji in code blocks.

A WTDWTF clbuttic!

aliceif

~~One of MicroSoft's first products was an APL interpreter!~~No, they didn't, but they planned to write one.

APL is weird and the programmers that use it are worse than LISP ones ...

Onyx

Wow, concerns for performance on mobile... if only someone thought of that before... OH WAIT

Opera Mobile - Wikipedia

Now, true, Turbo servers didn't do JS but it would damned well be able to handle the "on document.ready ad loading" shit if they bothered with it. Maybe it does these days, unless Turbo got gutted the same way the browser itself did.

Aaaanyway... I'm a bit confused about the "ad support" thing. I'm guessing they are defining some kind of element that can load ads directly, as in, instead of embed code you just give it parameters your ad network gives you? I can see one potential benefit here - maybe, just maybe, the ad frames get rendered they do in most Android apps: down at the bottom of the screen where they don't get mixed with content. And no popups, probably, so yay.

Note: I didn't check out the code or anything, but given that they claim it works in any browser I'm guessing it gets parsed to regular HTML? If not, well, disregard the above, I guess.

LB_

Google Chrome on mobile has Data Saver built in, which uses Google's servers to compress the pages before sending them to your phone. No idea which came first.

Onyx

Opera Turbo was available on Desktop somewhere in 2009, not sure if Opera Mobile had it earlier.

Google Chrome is on mobile since... 2014, is it? So, yeah...

kt_

@Onyx said:

Opera Turbo was available on Desktop somewhere in 2009, not sure if Opera Mobile had it earlier.

Sure I had it on Symbian-powered Nokias pre-2009. Would go as far to say around 2007.

It was extremely awesome feature back then, when data transfer was spoon expensive.

TwelveBaud

@Onyx said:

Aaaanyway... I'm a bit confused about the "ad support" thing.

Most modern ad networks give you a bunch of JavaScript that document.writes everywhere to try to dodge ad blockers and to adapt to what's available (nevermind that the HTML phrasing content mechanism makes that redundant). Google's proposing that ads are either static images (which heavily restricts analytics) or sandboxed in a pre-sized iframe that shows up "sometime later" than the rest of the content. Granted, that ad can be the size of the whole screen, and have arbitrary JS including a tiny place to onclick fade the ad to transparent, but <sarcasm>no one would ever do that, would they?</sarcasm>@Onyx said:

Opera Turbo was available on Desktop somewhere in 2009, not sure if Opera Mobile had it earlier.

Opera Mini came out in Jan 2006, and could not browse at all without Opera Turbo.

Onyx

Right, it was Mini

Ok, that explains why I couldn't find good data about Turbo, I was looking at Mobile, not Mini. which is not confusing, at all...

Fox

@TwelveBaud said:

Granted, that ad can be the size of the whole screen, and have arbitrary JS including a tiny place to onclick fade the ad to transparent, but <sarcasm>no one would ever do that, would they?</sarcasm>

The funny thing is Google released a study recently that showed that the vast majority of users exit a website entirely when confronted with one of those ads. My personal favorite part is when the news site I was reading that story on gave me a full-window ad while I was reading it.

dkf

@TwelveBaud said:

Most modern ad networks give you a bunch of JavaScript that document.writes everywhere to try to dodge ad blockers

And is written in such a way as to ensure that you don't see any of the reason why you went to the surrounding site in the first place until some pestilently slow service has scribbled its shit in there. I know it's not my network — even Belgiuming Dishcurse hardly takes any time to load — so it's got to be crappy ad servers being crappy.

Any service that causes too much trouble that way gets its own “special” entry in /etc/hosts to blackhole it. Don't want me to do that? Adequately resource your goddamn service so that users aren't kept waiting!

blakeyrat

@TwelveBaud said:

Most modern ad networks give you a bunch of JavaScript that document.writes everywhere to try to dodge ad blockers

That's not why they use document.write().

That said, document.write() would also be unnecessary if all the various parties in the ad exchange market could just get together and agree on a simple JSONP-based protocol for requesting ads.

Lorne Kates

@blakeyrat said:

That's not why they use document.write().

Correct. They use document.write to obfuscate the bile they're about to spew on your computer, in order to bypass various security and quality checks, and to try to dodge content filters.

document.write("var x = 'alksdjflkasd.js;'");
document.write("<scr" + "ipt src='" + "via" + "gra.ru/" + "eval(x)" />");

Sprinkle in some more evals, some base64 encoded text, and you have the anatomy of an ad. Trustworthy.

blakeyrat

@Lorne_Kates said:

Correct. They use document.write to obfuscate the bile they're about to spew on your computer, in order to bypass various security and quality checks, and to try to dodge content filters.

Nope. None of those things. Pretty sure it doesn't even bypass content filters anyway. Maybe really fucking stupid ones. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

Someday I'm going to hear a tirade on Internet advertising from someone who actually knows something about it. Someday. Today is not that day.

Lorne Kates

@blakeyrat said:

Nope. None of those things

Nope. Pretty sure it is.

blakeyrat

You're probably sure of a lot of things that are dead-wrong.

I just hope the other morons on this forum aren't assigning any worth to those words you barf out.

It's usually used to implement a double-redirect. Which, like I said, I'm opposed to, since you can do a double-redirect just as well using JSONP and putting a document.write() to a server outside of your control is always rolling the dice. But that's how the industry grew up, unfortunately.

Also dumb multivariate tools, like whatever they call Omniture Test & Target nowadays, use it to do content injection. Which is also kind of a questionable use, but I usually worked-around that in multivariate tests I personally set up.

lolwhat

TROLL FIGHT!

Lorne Kates

@blakeyrat said:

You're probably sure of a lot of things that are dead-wrong.

No, I'm absolutely sure I'm 100% correct.

@blakeyrat said:

Omniture

FUN STORY: A client of ours uses Omniture to track data on shopping cart checkout. At some point, they just straight-up stopped getting data. I confirmed the script tags were right, the data was being posting OK. Sent client to Omniture support.

Weeks later they have an error message "duplicate data: order ID". I asked the client to ask support to let us know WHICH Order IDs are duped, and when the original dupe was submitted.

Instead I get a small datasheet containing the previous day's dump of data-- which doesn't include order ID or referrer.

Ask again-- more weeks go by-- finally get a data dump of all the data going back to when the "dupe order ID" issue started. Which doesn't help, since I asked for when the order ID was first posted (thus subsequent posts are dupe).

So nearly 2 months into the whole fiasco, finally get data from their original ecomm store (before they used our product). And what do you know, there's order IDs 1, 2, 3 (they're actually part of a more complex sequence, but let's call them 1, 2, 3 for the sake of simplicity). And of course, when they switched to our ecomm solution, they reset their sequence to 1, 2, 3.

The solution: Add the order prefix to the order id. So instead of "OLDSTORE1, OLDSTORE2, etc", it's "NEWSTORE1, NEWSTORE2, NEWSTORE3". Months to actually get the data to prove that conclusion, though.

And then I found out that Omniture is owned by Adobe, and it all made sense.

blakeyrat

@Lorne_Kates said:

FUN STORY: A client of ours uses Omniture to track data on shopping cart checkout.

Omniture is shit. Really, really shit.

You can't even use it to track shopping carts correctly. (Pro-tip: call up your Omniture rep and ask what tracking pixel to load when a user both adds and removes items from the cart simultaneously. The answer is blubbering.)

Actually if you want a real laugh, unobfuscate their hugenormeous tracking script sometime. Count the obvious bugs. Our company wrote a JS in 15k that did everything theirs did and more. 15k.

@Lorne_Kates said:

And then I found out that Omniture is owned by Adobe, and it all made sense.

They weren't any better when they were stand-alone.

flabdablet

Tsaukpaetra

That's so pretty, It almost looks understandable.

Filed under: I think it's trying to tell me something...

Fox

If it's telling you to murder anyone, don't listen.

Tsaukpaetra

Nah, it's more along the lines of dancing around a pole, or something like that.
Maybe how inter-lunar transport is supposed to work?

Fox

Alright, let me know how that works out

Tsaukpaetra

@Fox said:

how that works

No can do, my interpreter can't provide a usable decompiled version.
The two suggestions are actually rated 14.42% confidence and 12.11% confidence (respectively).

Lorne Kates

@Fox said:

If it's telling you to murder anyone, don't listen.

Not murder. "Free" them. Save them. From the monsters.

riking

@CoyneTheDup said:

I really don't know who they think they're fooling.

The content publishers? The users don't really get a say in this...

MEANWHILE riking is implementing an AMP view for Discourse, and finds that they fucked up their js
also amp-img screws up the browser's preloader (but maybe that was CLOSED BYDESIGN?)