How to add full-width/full-bleed images to the Bedford template in Squarespace

You can customize the top background image in the Bedford template, but what you might not know is that you can add arbitrarily many full-bleed images throughout the page (i.e. images that stretch to take up the full width of the page). This is useful when creating long single-page websites.


Step 1.

The key to adding more full-bleed images is to create an Index page. Click Add Page and thenclick on the Index tile:


Step 2.

A new index page will appear in the sidebar. Now click on the Add Page button that’s nested underneath it:


This creates a sub-page that’s nested within the parent index page. You can create as many sub-pages as you want, and they’ll all be joined together into one page.

Step 3.

Now select the sub-page and click on Settings in the top right:


In the dialog, you can choose the image and customize what text appears over it:



This will setup the top image on the page. Repeat step 2 and 3 to add additional sub-pages to the index, which allows you to add more full-bleed background images.


Straightforward, but not very documented. That’s it!



While developing EventMapper, I’ve really enjoyed looking at how concerts are distributed in different cities. These are maps of various cities on a Saturday night (April 26, 2014).

New York is probably the most concert-dense US city I’ve seen (as expected.

London sort of has a spiral thing going on, which is cool.

Boston spreads the concerts out quite widely geographically :/

San Francisco has two clusters of concert areas separated by a bay.

Try out EventMapper to see how your own city looks!

The easiest way to migrate private repos from Github to Bitbucket

Github is fantastic, but their pricing makes it so adding private repos gets expensive rather quickly. I was paying $12/month for 10 private repos and still running low - the thought of upgrading to $22/month wasn’t too appealing. Luckily, Bitbucket offers unlimited private repos for individuals.

There are a bunch of existing guides on migrating git repos to Bitbucket, but they’re all about changing git remote settings. And that’s fine, but I prefer a more foolproof approach that can be done quickly even when you want to migrate a lot of private repos.

Note: this approach involves deleting and re-cloning your repos, so don’t do it if there are dependencies on your local repos.

First, make sure all the repos you want to transfer are completely synced with Github, because we’ll be deleting them later. In each one, do:

git push --all origin

Now, sign up for a Bitbucket account and go to Repositories -> Import repository


Bitbucket knows the score and has a Github import feature. Click on it and authorize access (make sure you’re comfortable with the privileges granted). Once you do that, you’ll get a nice list of all your Github repos:


Now you can just click import on the ones you want. Don’t worry, private repos will remain private after importing.

Finally, delete the local copies of the repo and re-clone them with the Bitbucket URL, which you can find on the Bitbucket repo page. Note that to clone with SSH, you’ll need to copy your public key to Bitbucket, which you can find in your account settings.


Example with a repo named “configs”:

rm -rf configs
git clone

I personally prefer this approach over changing the git remote settings on each repo - there’s less likelihood for error. And if you use Bitbucket’s handy Github import, you can migrate a lot of repos quite quickly.

Where flat design falls short

Flat design is popular and, as a whole, there’s not much to complain about. It’s easier to implement and harder to screw up, and its tendency  towards clean, simple interfaces is great. But the lack of visual detail becomes a disadvantage when using certain components.

Here’s an example of Windows 7 native radio buttons:


And here’s an example of flat radio buttons, from the popular Flat UI:


Flat design, by eliminating gradients and textures, by nature means fewer affordances - you don’t have as many visually distinctive characteristics. With the Windows radio buttons, you don’t need to even look at the buttons directly to know what they do - the slight “scooped-in” effect clues you in subconsciously. Whereas with the flat buttons, it requires a moment’s thought (is that a button? or just a pretty icon?). You’ll still figure it out, but designers want users to have to think less, not more.

Here’s another comparison - native Windows buttons:


And flat UI buttons:


Again, with the flat version, it can be hard to tell exactly what you’re looking at, whereas with the former you don’t even need to think about it.

Adding small visual details like this give elements depth, but to make them look as simple and elegant as a “flat” counterpart takes more work - which I think is part of the reason flat design has taken off so much. But for interactive components like buttons and inputs, having clear and easily identifiable visual characteristics works better, and you can’t really do that with flat design.

Welp, I’m on an Elon kick - this is a talk he gave at Khan Academy. I think he gets along better when he can open up and talk about some of the technical stuff, so it makes for a good interview.

I also like Salman Khan’s little reactions to what Elon says - because Elon is always going off and making completely amazing statements, totally 100% deadpan.

You are going to make every moment count. I mean, you better make every moment count. Live your life now; start in the morning. You mustn’t sit around waiting to die. When it happens you should come into the cemetery on a motorbike, skid to a halt by the side of the coffin, jump in and say: “Great I just made it.”
Michael Caine

I was going to go to guitar center, but my guitar teacher told me to go to a place in Lexington that specializes in acoustics. I’d lived there for a decade and never knew it existed.

The place had probably around 50-100 acoustics, and it was a blast trying them. Gibsons and Martins were a letdown. Collings sounded great, but they didn’t have anything below $2,000.

Then I tried a Taylor. To be honest, I had come into the store thinking I might get a Taylor - I’d watched some comparion videos on Youtube and they seemed to fit the bill. I knew I had to pick one based on how it sounded in person though, so I was careful not to bias myself too much.

Picked up one more or less at random - a 214ce limited edition. It had this resonant, bright sound.

And that wood.

So yeah, I really liked it.

But I had to be thorough. I probably tried out another 10-20 guitars, including higher end and lower end Taylors like the 314ce, and fun ones like a rumbly baritone guitar.

It’s funny, in the end that I liked that first Taylor I’d picked up the most out of anything in the sub-$2,000 price range. I bought it and I’ve been playing the crap out of it ever since.