Slashdot Mirror

This who situation has been badly misrepresented. Did none of you bother to check the original Reddit post to see what it said? It said: "Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP’s (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file,” stonetear wrote. “Basically, they don’t want the VIP’s email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out. I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort. Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?” From http://burningbird.net/republi... Any of you that work with email know that what he's talking about is removing the email address from metadata. Why would you do so? Primarily because you don't want the public to get their hands on the email address. Clinton's email address was already known at that time. She was no longer using it, the Committee knew it, and it wasn't relevant to the FOIA request (email metadata is typically not included in FOIA requests). This was _not_ about deleting emails. We don't even really know if this was about Clinton, or if the writer is Combetta. I thought /. used to be full of geeks? What happened?

"this is not an open API; this is a free API, owned and controlled by one company only: Google. Hopefully, the world will remember another time when Google offered a free API and then pulled it."

Your criticisms seem to be aimed at HTML and CSS, and at attempts to make up for their failings with Javascript toolkits. What Mozilla is pushing here is significant enhancement to Javascript in order to remedy many of its failings while maintaining backward compatibility. Microsoft, on the other hand, is trying to limit changes to the language. According to Eich, Microsoft is criticizing the ES4 proposal without offering concrete alternatives. Instead, he says, they are developing their own language in secret.

I think Javascript's a pretty good language. Certainly it's not perfect - few languages are. PHP, C++ and Perl spring to mind as being particularly flawed, but they have been indispensable nonetheless. Javascript has a huge installed base of runtimes and many programmers are familiar with it (so there's lots of bad code, which may be why JS has such a bad rep). We know how conservative most developers are about learning new languages (especially ones that don't look like C or BASIC), so there would be a significant cost and risk to trying to switch horses from Javascript to something else. Browser compatibility is another matter altogether - but we know who is causing the trouble there.

Javascript is practical and flexible; the main problems I have encountered are weak support for OO and larger projects - problems the ES4 effort appears to be trying to address. Microsoft's argument is for making minimal changes in favor of some unknown future language. If they really are working on that language in secret, and are able to complete it while Javascript is mired in controversy, the outcome is unlikely to be good for the rest of us.

1. The number #1 : Toma ya!
2. The woman's defence!
3. Clever students women with brilliant teeth!
4. 29% are women!, 2003.
5. Dangerous! Women in Black-White!
6. women as web-designers!
7. women in IT more than men because of cheap salaries!

1. The number #1 : Toma ya!
2. The woman's defence!
3. Clever students women with brilliant teeth!
4. 29% are women!, 2003.
5. Dangerous! Women in Black-White!
6. women as web-designers!
7. women in IT more than men because of cheap salaries!

"For girls who have grown up with technology, there is no significant gender gap in internet usage," said eMarketer senior analyst Debra Aho Williamson. "The rise of activities that are particularly appealing to young females, such as social networking, will result in even greater usage."

This reminds me of my 12 year old neice who sites on MSN for hours at a time jibba-jabbin to her friends, whilst her brother would rather watch Hockey on TV.

This is good news for those people who've recently been ranting about there not being enough women in web design, and trying to work out the reasons why. With more women now online than men, the balance will hopefully be redressed (when that generation gets off MSN and wants to do something useful with their lives).

What about me, said C#. I look like Prince!

Bite me! said C.

I'm also surprised a lot of posters seem to be seeing this sort of thing for the first time!

I've heard so much fluff about folksonomies and social this-and-that that I'm well sick of it, but you're right. It's a serious article. I've come to reliably expect real content from dlib; They do a good job. The article at Burningbird.com is a great one, too. There seems to be a divide between people who do official tree-based classification and the tag-based classifiers. The tree people say flat namespaces aren't rich enough to provide context and, without a central authority, the system is open to abuse, while the tag people say you can't possibly expect to know the structure beforehand, so you need tag-based "set" classification.

I'm reminded of a story about a university which, engaged in a grounds beautification project, wanted to fix the problem of no one using the sidewalks, instead cutting across lawns and making unsightly dirt through the manicured lawns. Instead of replanting grass where the trails had been worn through the lawn, then fencing off the area, which would have created even more of an eyesore, they tore up all the sidewalks instead and planted grass where the sidewalks were. 1 year later, they went back and made winding sidewalks where the dirt trails which had been worn into the grass from foottraffic, and landscaped around those.

I wish the two sides wouldn't be so opposed, because it seems obvious to me that the two need each other. Tree people are right that unguided mass action is no substitute for the action of an experienced editor, while tag folksonomists are right that you can't set the structure beforehand, and expect people to adhere to it as things change. It's clear to me that the tags are creating the categories that the future, managed, tree-based classifications will need to use.

In the meantime, what would be wrong with del.icio.us and their like publishing a set of "best practices" for tagging? I know they want things to evolve organically, but surely they could at least issue guidelines on the use of underscores and plus signs, for example, and make recommendations on how to make tags useful for others(akin to good password recommendations, except ones people actually follow).

Here are some suggestions from my own experience:

If you're going to use the tag, "Blog" or "web" or "research", or something generic like that, include at least one more tag.

Look to see which one of the various ways you could tag something is used by most people.

Provide an example of a two level tag system, where you tag something with a broad general tag, then one or more specific tags. For example: if you're tagging pictures you took of a gigantic live oak, you could tag the picture, "tree" and "live oak". It would address the criticism that tag classification doesn't scale.

I feel like I should be emailing this to the respective people, not burying it in a slashdot comment, but what the hey.

Wordform, although it was created for different reasons

Speaking of the blogging experts circle, this is funny and semi-relevant.

Okay, this reminds me of the Parable of the Languages, a rather clever look at where programming has come from, and where the field is going to:

If programming languages could speak, really speak, not just crunch bytes and stream bits, they would have much to say that is both wise and profound.

After all, the original programmers were philosophers, and programming languages were philosopher tools...

In Babble Meadow, in the twilight hours between day and night, when pesky noseeums float past on the breeze and birds rustle among leaves in preparation for bed, the programming languages would meet. And talk...


Read on at http://weblog.burningbird.net/archives/2002/10/08/ the-parable-of-the-languages.

• Jay Allen's MT-Blacklist" plug-in;
• Simon Willison's Blacklisting Comment Spam;
• Scripty-goddess' Anti-Comment Spam Tactics;
• BurningBird's Comment Spam Quick Fix;
• Kalsey Consulting's ideas on dealing with Comment spam; or
• even my own observations and suggestions on the topic

Some more details about AOL Journals from:

1. An AOL employee involved in the Journals project.
2. San Francisco Examiner columnist Jeff Jarvis who was invited to an exclusive preview (five high profile bloggers were invited)
3. Thoughts on AOL Journals from Internet consultant and professor Clay Shirky, one of the five invited

Blogs: AOL Journals Coming This Fall

AOL has discovered blogs. AOL Journals (so named because AOLers were confused by the term ''blog'') will make its debut this fall. The new service will let subscribers use AOL Instant Messenger to post to their blogs/journals with RSS/XML. AOL by Phone users will be able to leave voice mail that will be posted to their blogs as MP3s. More thoughts on the AOL Journals beta from Clay Shirky and Shelley "burningbird" Powers

this.

Some of you may already have read it, but it's on-topic nonetheless. :)

<i>"There's no one language that addresses all problems."</i>

I've found PHP so much easier than C++, VB, BASIC, and Java...For what I do, it's much easier and more supportive...however, I've never done anything in Perl...

At first, it was Yahoo!. Then, they started using the Y!...YaPHPoo (Yaff-poo) now?

Now, one last note...If programming languages could speak...., what would PHP have to say for itself now?