Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
Someone created a 0-followers private Twitter account and posted something to try out the new views count feature.
It raked dozens of views in a couple hours.
HOW?!?
Source: https://twitter.com/briggityboppity...
It looks like a funny data reverse-engineering exercise, so let's try and figure out what is going on.
Hypothesis 1) it is the OP's own views.
Reasonable, but unlikely if what OP says about not checking it for hours is true.
H2) It's some background job in OP's device that is refreshing OP's own latest tweets, so even without human interaction technically H1 is true. It would be some really shoddy engineering to count eye-less page views, but that's also what managers would demand.
H3) it's some internal Twitter automated function like back up, replication, indexing and word count.
See H2, it would be even dumber to count that as page views.
H4) it's some internal human reviewing for a keyword that could be associated with porn (in this case, "butts"). Really? dozens of humans to review a no-impact single post? They would have to employ hundreds of thousands of reviewers.
H5) it's some page-loading shit, like thousands of similar tweets get stored in the same index hash page and end up counting as a view in all of them every time someone loads the index page. It would be like counting every hit in the namenode as a hit in every data asset in it's Hadoop partition, or every hit in a storage block as a hit in each of it's files.
Duuuumb and kinda like H3.
H6) page views are just a fraud to scam investors. Maybe it's a "most Blockchain transactions are fake" situation, maybe it's a "views get more engagement if you don't think a lot about it" situation, maybe it's a "we don't use the metric system to count page views" situation.
All of them are very dumb.
Other hypothesis or opinions?10 -
after exploring a lot of ui frameworks and architectures, i am trying to go back to android dev but again with the curiosity for the one single question that i had at the start of my career 5 years back : why is it's ui so complex?
can anyone help me understand it?
like comparing with the most basic ui framework : html/css/js, why android is so different? we got activities, fragments and views. the worst thing in android is lifecycles, that each of these ui components have.
The view lifecycle is simple to get over with : whatever is the lifecycle of its parent, is the lifecycle of view.
a view's parent is another view, whose parent is another view, whose parent is... and so on until we reach the root view which is stored by either a fragment or activity
therefore a view's lifecycle = lifecycle of activity or fragment
till here its very clear. the fuckup is simply in the next part:
WTAF is activity ?WTAF is fragment? why are their various functions called in the sequence they are called? oncreate, on start, onstartview, ondestroy... why?
activity is still somewhat okay, but fragment is completey weird af : it can be a part of activity: basically it can cover your complete screen and behave as an activity itself (so you don't get to say that activity === screen and fragment === view) AND IT HAS ITS OWN FUCKING LIFECYCLES! So does that mean fragment's fucntions cna also be called by OS?
what's more mind fucking, is the fact that android activity can destroy/pause or recreate fragments on its own, by some "views" like viewpager , or even hold multiple fragments as "alive" at the same time, using something called a "backstack" ??!??!
and each of these fragments in the stack can be called by system at any time? like wtf???
all these stuff is super confusing and i haven't even scratched the surface. the newer , more complicated stuff like viewmodel, livedata and again "lifecycles" has a complete seperate behavior and functionality of their own. plus the various "reality-check" scenarios like: when a user is streaming a video in picture-in-picture mode while keeping your app in split screen with maps in the second split, when a call comes and the video keeps running, and user rotates the device, let me know the clusterfuck situation for the 3rd fragment in your 5 icon navigation view currently at the payment page with 2 fragments and 1 activity in backstack!!!
god bless thy soul for this shitty framework isn't going anywhere , rather its super strong and getting more clusterfucked with new beautiful shit everyday.
(if someone can ignore my gentle language, i would really like to know/get redirected to some resources where i can learn more on this)3 -
An app I'm making for a client currently has 23 "pages" that are simply web views.
Most of those pages have A HREFS which open other pages (some external pages that I have no access to as a developer).
Of course, some of the links aren't HREFS and are javascript calls to change the content on the screen without going to another page. So the user thinks they have gone to another web page when then system doesn't recognise it as another page...
Additional to this, there are multiple versions of the pages depending on which language the user has selected in the app.
And nobody seems to have considered how the default back button handles all these possible eventualities (whether it can go back to previous web page, IF it was an HREF and not just JS mimicking a new page (and how would my webview even catch that), and of course IF the language hasn't changed during the user journey etc etc)
Am I wrong for being annoyed about this? Am I the dick for not developing a clean solution to it? Or am I justified because webviews have no place inside an app!
I'm sort of hoping apple deny this app due to too many web views :S8
Top Tags
Weekly Rant
View