Sharon Osbourne smiles with her son Jack as he makes his first public appearance since welcoming new born daughter at the Elton John AIDS Foundation Academy Awards
The Devil Wears Prada fans go wild for Anna Wintour's Oscars team-up with Anne Hathaway as they declare the acid-tongued fashion mogul was 'funnier than the host'
Selma Blair carries a cane amid MS battle as she walks the red carpet at 2026 Vanity Fair Oscar Party
Oscars viewers left shocked as Eric Dane, James Van Der Beek and Brigitte Bardot are SNUBBED from In Memoriam segment: 'What a disgrace'
Conan O'Brien leaves Timothee Chalamet squirming alongside girlfriend Kylie Jenner before roasting Leonardo DiCaprio and Michael B. Jordan in awkward Oscars 2026 monologue
Behind-the-scenes Oscars moments that WEREN'T on TV from Leonardo DiCaprio hugging Michael B Jordan to Ethan Hawke kissing Gwyneth Paltrow
Busty Goldie Hawn, 80, upstages her Oscar-nominated daughter Kate Hudson at the 2026 Academy Awards
Kylie Jenner breaks the internet with ultra-revealing 2026 Oscars look as she stuns fans ahead of Timothee Chalamet's big night
Oscars chaos as two nominees TIE for award... for only the seventh time in ceremony's history
Rob Reiner's Hollywood inner circle unites onstage for tearful Oscars 2026 tribute to murdered director
CodeSOD: A Little Twisted
Dana sends us a WTF that'll turn your head. She was shopping for new hard drives, and was doing it from her phone, a fairly reasonable tool to use for online shopping these days. She opened the website of one vendor, and it was rotated 90 degrees. Or half-pi radians, for those of us that are more used to sensible units.
This was irrespective of any rotation settings on her phone, the website insisted on showing itself in landscape mode. This created quite the unusual appearance when she held her phone in portrait orientation: the browser chrome surrounding the content was in portrait mode, but the page itself was in landscape.
Obviously, this is a terrible design choice. But Dana wanted to know more. So she started digging in. There was no sign of this behavior on a desktop, which sure, I'd hope not. Attempting to use wget to download the page caused a 403. Using curl downloaded a JavaScript challenge. Fine, they didn't want bots, but Dana wasn't a bot.
Poking around in the network tab of the desktop browser's debugging tools helped Dana learn a few things. First: the line endings in the files were all CRLF, implying that all development happened on Windows machines. Maybe that's not interesting, but in 2026, it feels unusual. Second, the page is setting a PHPSESSID cookie, so clearly the backend is written in PHP. But most important, Dana is able to piece together what she needs to successfully use curl to download the page, once pretending to be a desktop browser, and once pretending to be a mobile browser. With that, she ran a diff to see what changed.
The desktop version started with 42 blank lines. The mobile version started with 41. The rest of the pages were substantially the same, with two exceptions. First, the mobile page also added a stylesheet called stylesheet-responsive.css. I assume that name was chosen because irony is dead; nothing about this site is responsive. Second, there was a subtle difference in the body tags.
You see, both pages had a body tag like this:
<body marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" topmargin="0" bottommargin="0" leftmargin="0" rightmargin="0" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">But the mobile page, continued from there:
<!-- header //--> <body id="landscape_mode_only" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" topmargin="0" bottommargin="0" leftmargin="0" rightmargin="0" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Yes, the mobile version has two body tags.
Dana writes:
Even though I don't have access to the real PHP source-code, I can imagine what it looks like.
Somewhere in that PHP source-code there is browser-detection (or rather browser-sniffing) and that toggles if it should serve a slightly different HTML code to the user. I do not want to work for that website, I do not want to look at that backend source-code. And I have to feel sorry and respect for the browser developers, as they have to write software that can handle completely broken HTML.
While I hate the results, the fact that the HTML specification originally required clients to render even the most broken HTML is arguably a really good design choice. Expecting people to do the right thing never works out for you.
Let's not forget their "responsive" CSS, which is obviously worth looking at, even if it's obvious what it must be:
@media only screen and (orientation:portrait) { #landscape_mode_only { height:98vw; -webkit-transform:rotate(90deg); -moz-transform:rotate(90deg); -o-transform:rotate(90deg); -ms-transform:rotate(90deg); transform:rotate(90deg) } }This forces everything in the body to rotate sideways.
Look, actually responsive design is hard. But "just force the page into landscape mode no matter what the user does" is definitely not the solution.
And Dana points out one last thing:
As a cherry on the top, observe how the comment that marks the end of the header is placed after the <body> starts. Which is wrong already, but also stupid, because </head> already marks the end of the head. And the head is not really the header.