First off, I have no idea what your site is all about. Why would I go to this site, why did you create it.
From a design perspective, it is simple, but very dark and hard to read. Reversed text (darker background, lighter print) can work for headlines, but for larger bodies of text it is more difficult to read.
Unfortunately, the way I see it you haven't communicated what it is and why i'd use it, and you also haven't designed it well enough from a strictly visual standpoint to make it usable.
I don't believe he launched it he appears to be just passing on the news. The L0pht was a very famous hacker think tank back in the 90s. They've presented for congress and it's members have done a lot of influential things in the security and software world. The people that will use this site and that follow them will appreciate the simple what I call developer design of the site.
This would have been a good thing to put on the site itself. It explains what we're looking at.
As the grandparent explains, this article has no context in the title ("[unspellable] website launched"), and no context in the target site. It's just a black hole (or rather a grey hole, given the site's look and feel). I made it back here without any idea what it was or why I had been sent there.
The grandparent's assessment was completely correct and delivered constructively. It should not have been voted down.
The l0pht were such a big part of the internet world in the 90s that explaining what they were on a site with the focus such as this seems a waste of effort.
Even if you were completely unaware of them the use of the word relaunch would indicate that it was an existing site and a quick search on Google would show you why explaining who they are wouldn't always be considered necessary. Complaining of not knowing who they are just screams to me of laziness.
His assessment was targeted at a site where design is a concern for the site. The l0pht site has pretty much always been more about substance than style making a design critic pointless.
I don't understand why this post has been so heavily downvoted. It presents an honest opinion with no malicious intent. Are we going to attack people fo simply not being aware of every hacker group?
I agree that attacks are unwarranted but 1) downvotes are not necessarily attacks so it's folly to interpret them that way, and 2) the universe didn't just blink into existence at the moment of one's own earliest memory of it, and to treat things as such with arrogance and critique is just revealing the speaker's ignorance.
Once upon a time here, we generally left things at 0 or -1 or thereabouts if they were simply incorrect or misguided, and left 'piling on' for real trolls or other actively malicious individuals.
Maybe it's the additional arrogant tone and poor punctuation that makes the comment author sound so obnoxious, thus leading to more downvotes? That's what would get me.
It's actually another relaunch I think it was originally launched in the late 90s as hacker news network. Then after the @stake merger some stuff happened and it was shut down. It use to be like a slashdot specificall for computer security if I remember correctly(It's been a while).
Anyone actually still uses l0phtcrack? I remember using it back in the days, but now with rainbow tables a "stupid" bruteforce is simply not cutting it.
17 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 45.3 ms ] threadFrom a design perspective, it is simple, but very dark and hard to read. Reversed text (darker background, lighter print) can work for headlines, but for larger bodies of text it is more difficult to read.
Unfortunately, the way I see it you haven't communicated what it is and why i'd use it, and you also haven't designed it well enough from a strictly visual standpoint to make it usable.
For reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L0pht
As the grandparent explains, this article has no context in the title ("[unspellable] website launched"), and no context in the target site. It's just a black hole (or rather a grey hole, given the site's look and feel). I made it back here without any idea what it was or why I had been sent there.
The grandparent's assessment was completely correct and delivered constructively. It should not have been voted down.
Even if you were completely unaware of them the use of the word relaunch would indicate that it was an existing site and a quick search on Google would show you why explaining who they are wouldn't always be considered necessary. Complaining of not knowing who they are just screams to me of laziness.
His assessment was targeted at a site where design is a concern for the site. The l0pht site has pretty much always been more about substance than style making a design critic pointless.
*Add link with some history from the creator. http://www.spacerogue.net/wordpress/?p=94
Will Cult of the Dead Cow come back too?
(Wait! They are back already! I just hadn't looked in something like a decade. Jesus christ, they have a blog now...)