Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | notpushkin's commentslogin

That’s pretty much class action lawsuits!

> I'm putting my email on GitHub precisely to give people a way to contact me.

They’re not only looking at the public email in your profile, they’re also looking at your committer email (git config user.email). You could argue that you’re not putting that out for people to contact you.

(I’ve used that trick a couple times to reach out to people, too, but never mass emailing.)


Wise does accept cards for transfers, but I think most people use cheaper methods. (Also, last time I checked, they’ve used Adyen.)

I’ve poked around – looks like it’s not enough to just declare you’re an accredited investor, but also prove it?

What evidence do I need to provide as a US investor: https://help.angellist.com/hc/en-us/articles/15569926884109-...

As a non-US investor: https://help.angellist.com/hc/en-us/articles/15570114297869-...


I would be surprised if Stripe has made less per transaction. Visa and Mastercard make way more transactions though.

I suppose the legal department wants the wording of that paragraph to be very specific. It’s not only there for the kid, it’s for the court as well.

Justified text is really not good, yeah. `text-wrap: pretty` works fine with left-aligned text though!

Hmm, I’m looking at the demo in Chrome and don’t see any difference when I turn on `pretty`: https://cdpn.io/pen/debug/xxvoqNM

In Safari, it’s a very different look.


Yeah, very weird.

Caniuse claims it's supported in Chrome: https://caniuse.com/mdn-css_properties_text-wrap_pretty

But you're right, it very clearly isn't working.

Is it a regression? Did it break and nobody noticed?


From https://webkit.org/blog/16547/better-typography-with-text-wr...

"While support for pretty shipped in Chrome 117, Edge 177, and Opera 103 in Fall 2023, and Samsung Internet 24 in 2024, the Chromium version is more limited in what it accomplishes. According to an article by the Chrome team, Chromium only makes adjustments to the last four lines of a paragraph. It’s focused on preventing short last lines. It also adjusts hyphenation if consecutive hyphenated lines appear at the end of a paragraph."

The article goes on to talk about how it's up to the browser (and not necessarily permanent) about how to handle the setting, and furthermore a new value was agreed upon to do what Chromium was doing, called "text-wrap: avoid-short-last-lines".

Here's the article on what the Chromium version does: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/css-text-wrap-pretty/


Ah, OK. I finally got the demo to show a difference under one specific window width, where it changed the last line of a paragraph from one word to two words.

So it does exist... but yeah, barely does anything. Thank you for finding the explanation!


Amazing summary. Thank you so much!

I think the answer is in the post:

> Although Safari is the first browser to ship a non-joke implementation of text-wrap

(Emphasis mine.) Chrome is using a different algorithm for this, which probably fixes some typographic problems, but defaults to greed most of the time.


Interesting. As far as I can tell, Chrome isn't doing anything different. I can't find any window width where the checkbox makes any difference.

Edit: finally found it, see cousin comment.


No, it’s not. You can turn it on or off independently.

I’m looking at the comparison [0] and the `pretty` example is hyphenated, while greedy is not. Not sure it’s fair to compare them like that, considering we’ve had `hyphens: auto` for a while now.

Edit: it’s actually vice versa! Which I should have known because the very next paragraph says:

> But the “smart” algorithm decides to add an entire line to it, which requires inflating all the white space proportionally.

Which is exactly how the example on the right looks.

[0]: https://matklad.github.io/2026/02/14/justifying-text-wrap-pr...


That jumped out at me too... I'm not sure if they have different hyphenation properties set though, or if the greedy justified version just doesn't wind up hyphenating anywhere in this particular case?

Unfortunately there's no live HTML demo to inspect, just the images.


Just found this demo in the Safari blog post: https://cdpn.io/pen/debug/xxvoqNM

Fascinating, thank you!

Playing around with it, seems that Safari simply stops hyphenating entirely when when text-wrap is pretty, regardless of whether it's justified or not. (If you smoothly resize the browser width, it makes it pretty easy to tell if hyphens ever come up.)

Which means the image on the left seems like it might be the wrong image?

And now I wonder if text-wrap: pretty is supposed to avoid hyphenation? Are hyphens not pretty? Or is it just a partial implementation by Apple, that they haven't gotten around to supporting hyphenation for it yet?


You can get it if you carefully adjust the window width! Or there’s one example in the author’s post – the word “implementation” is hyphenated for me [1].

So it looks like the algorithm tries to minimize hyphenation, which makes sense to be honest.

[1]: https://matklad.github.io/2026/02/14/justifying-text-wrap-pr...


Ha. Oh wow. OK, I got "implementation" to hyphenate... but only once I changed the zoom level, and only for one specific exact window width. One pixel narrower or wider, and it stopped hyphenating.

So hyphenation exists in theory, but I'm just going to go ahead and say that however it's tuned seems completely broken.


Again, I think it’s very deliberate :-) Hyphenated words are slightly harder to read, so it makes sense to avoid them – maybe not as zealously, though.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: