Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ldarby 2804 days ago
Easter eggs are generally hidden and take users doing something special to find out about it.

You calling this an easter egg had me confused as to what the hell this thread was about, searching for "firefox easter egg" shows nothing about it.
1 comments
Dylan16807 2803 days ago
So this is the looking glass thing.

You could see the existence of the extension because of poor decisions.

But it didn't turn on unless you went into about:config and manually flipped "extensions.pug.lookingglass" to true.

Definitely intended as an easter egg. Even of the people getting upset about the visible extension, 99+% of them never saw the enabled effect.

link
ldarby 2803 days ago
You're forgetting what "easter eggs" are IRL - chocolate eggs hidden in a back yard that people have to look for.

The analogy applies to computing in 2 ways: they're hidden, and it's something desirable. Niether of those ways apply to what Mozilla did. Therefore it wasn't an easter egg and you trying to pretend otherwise is just confusing.

link
Dylan16807 2803 days ago
The intent was for it to be hidden! That's why it didn't activate! And for the person that would activate it, it was desirable.

They made a mistake in deployment that turned it into a scary mysterious blob. That's bad, but doesn't change the underlying nature of the code.

We can agree that the exact same code in C, not showing up in any lists or menus, not triggering without a magic about:config phrase, would be a clear easter egg, right?

(Also easter eggs don't inherently have to be fun, sometimes they're just someone's initials.)

link