Google Helps Offer Blogger Pro For Free

business plan... by Pandora's+Vox · 2003-09-10 19:03 · Score: 3, Funny

1. release formerly profitable software for free
2. ???
3. Profit!!!

are they doing tose little google text ads or what?

-Leigh

Re:business plan... by ErixTr · 2003-09-10 19:10 · Score: 5, Funny

No. The reality is;

1. Profit
2. ???
3. Release formerly profitable software for free

--
less is more
Re:business plan... by Neo-Rio-101 · 2003-09-10 19:13 · Score: 1, Funny

Or maybe it's: 1. Profit 2. ??? 3. Release formerly profitable software for free 4. Entice more users 5. ??? 6. Start charging for the service again 7. Repeat step 1

--
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Re:business plan... by Channard · 2003-09-10 19:36 · Score: 2, Funny

4. Other people choose free blogging rather than the pay service. 5. Go Bust 6. 'Would you like fries with that?'
Re:business plan... by Spy+Hunter · 2003-09-10 19:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

I think Google, being in the unique position of controlling what most people see on the web, sees anything that improves the web in general as improving their service. In particular, blogs are a great source of links to popular and useful sites for Google's PageRank algorithm to work with. That means more accurate and relevant Google results. As crazy as it sounds, this may just be a move by Google to try and make blogging more popular, because it has the side effect of improving their service. Also, blogging involves people in the web community, where they will inevitably come to rely on Google as we all do.

--
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Re:business plan... by jsse · 2003-09-10 19:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

I know it might sound a bit strange to you, but:

2. Increase the market share by flooding the market with free software.

This business model works when you can find a way to extend your other business in the new market share conquered. A typical example(but not very successful) is Netscape. Hotmail is always free and it's good to remain free for the sales of other products, e.g. Outlook.

Some business still execute this kind of plan even after the big boom. Those companies which failed with this business model during the boom is due to the fact that they don't have any concrete plan to make use of the advantage of high market share earned. (or the VC money arrive before they could make a plan ;)
Re:business plan... by pyrros · 2003-09-10 20:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

Blogs could be bad for the quality of google's results: because of blogs linking to eachother, the get a bigger pagerank than thy should, and therefore more influence on google than they deserve. I'm afraid that getting more of the unwashed massed to blog would be a bad thing. Ofcourse google could change the way pagerank works so that blogs have a reduced pagerank or something to that extend.

Salon article about blogs and their influence on google

Excerpt:
You'd be hard-pressed to design a system that gave the blogging community a greater impact on Google's results. Because bloggers by definition link far more than your average Web page, and because they also tend to link to each other's sites (most blogs feature a now standard list of comrades in their margins), a page that attracts the attention of a few bloggers will quickly shoot up the Google rankings. Do a search on Larry Lessig's book "The Future of Ideas" -- a hit with the blogging community -- and a review from a blog called Sopsy Digest shows up 15 notches higher than an article from Business Week. (Or at least it did the last time I checked; Google rankings are hardly set in stone.)
Re:business plan... by ArekRashan · 2003-09-10 20:57 · Score: 1

Presumably, an increase in the data set of articles and links as a result of an increasing trend towards blog content can be optimized for in Google's search algorithms to expand the utility of the search engine. Word of Blog and Word of Link would serve as online analogues of Word of Mouth and Word on the Street.
Also, don't worry about the Google-bombing effect of blogs: This will recede as a broader pool of blog data is indexed, as individuals or even organized groups would have an increasingly harder time creating anomalous "spikes" in the search results. The more data you have, the less a datum means.
What would create spikes are the same things that do now: multiple authors discussing the same topic and linking to the same article. This would simply begin to happen at a faster pace.
Re:business plan... by tiled_rainbows · 2003-09-10 22:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

a review from a blog called Sopsy Digest shows up 15 notches higher than an article from Business Week.

Maybe that's because the Sopsy's Digest review was better than the Business Week review.

I've heard this argument before, but IMHO it just boils down to journalists whining that "amateurs" are scoring higher on Google than they are.

But it is, in part, precisely this egalitarian, anyone-can-get-exposure nature of the Web that makes it so cool. If you don't like it, stick to the print media.

--

evil math within Nature's Cubic Creation!
Re:business plan... by Spy+Hunter · 2003-09-10 23:02 · Score: 1

Exactly! Thanks for putting that so succinctly.

--
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Re:business plan... by pyrros · 2003-09-10 23:05 · Score: 1

Good point. My worry is not about "amateurs" scoring better than the pros. It's about bloggers scoring better than everybody else, pros and other amateurs included.
Re:business plan... by Spy+Hunter · 2003-09-10 23:40 · Score: 4, Interesting

The point is that when anybody can have a blog, there is no "everybody else" to worry about. Everyone can post whatever they want, and blogs act as a sort of collaborative filtering method to bring the good links to the top of Google searches (and other blogs), and therefore into the public awareness.
This is totally different from the old way of content filtering, where we pay companies (with money or with eyeballs on ads) to sort our content for us and present only the good stuff. There may be a bias against non-bloggers (I don't see why there should be, since blogs can link to other deserving sites as easily as to each other), but since anybody can be a blogger with minimal effort it shouldn't be a problem. The only real problem is that this system has the potential to take over certain functions now performed by newspapers, magazines, radio stations, music companies, and other "content filterers"; some people don't like that.

--
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Re:business plan... by j_d · 2003-09-11 00:41 · Score: 1

The point is that when anybody can have a blog, there is no "everybody else" to worry about.

The person you replied to wasn't denying that anyone could blog, but rather that there would be the bloggers, and then there would be journalists.

The difference, I think, is that under best circumstances, bloggers are essayists, whereas journalists would continue in their function as news reporters.
It's a shame to see the worth of blogs be reduced to how they alter google's search results. Most that I care about have more opinion & discussion than linkorrhea. I wonder if bloggers will ever have a moment as defining as, say, the Federalist Papers?
Re:business plan... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 00:51 · Score: 1, Interesting

Maybe that's because the Sopsy's Digest review was better than the Business Week review.
I don't know about this particular review, but I generally find reviews done on technology by established media to be either a big ad or just an overview or comparison of features. While blogs link or contain such reviews, if you find a review on a blog or linked from a blog, you're also likely to find a review where the reviewer did some real in-depth testing. Also, blogs usually allow better feedback options, allowing users to add their real-world experience.
Ask yourself:
(1) How many reviews in the mainstream media give more information than you can find on the product manufacturers webpage? How many reviews on a blog give more information than you can find on the product manufacturers webpage?
(2) How does the feedback of a review in the online version of "more professional publication" compare to the feedback you'll see on a blog?
(3) How often do you see reviews, which give only the same information found on the webpage, linked from a blog, regardless of its origin?
Re:business plan... by Spy+Hunter · 2003-09-11 01:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

And what I'm saying is that journalists can blog too, instead of writing for a publication, if they are worried that they aren't getting heard because they're not a blogger. The only thing is that this may mean that "journalist" may start to disappear as a paid position like it is today. (perhaps they could sell targeted text ads to still make money?) But that's speculation, and far into the future. Certainly now bloggers do much better as essayists than news reporters. But that could change. Think Drudge report, or Kuro5hin or Slashdot even, if you have a sufficiently loose definition of blog. A large enough network of Slashdot-type sites, each with a community and each with a different focus, would have sufficient breadth to pull in a good number of interesting stories, while serving as a filtering mechanism at the same time. Then higher-level news blogs might emerge that cull the most interesting stories making the rounds in each sub-topic community. Or perhaps you could just bookmark a few sub-topic sites that interest you and just read those all the time.
I'm not sure what you mean by "reducing" blogs to "merely" altering Google's results. Nobody is saying that blogs are reduced to anything. How is allowing blogs to determine Google rankings, which are arguably the most influential things on the Internet, reducing them in any way? I'd say its magnifying their power. It's not like their sole purpose will be to alter Google rankings. It's just a nice side effect that Google wants to make use of.
If you want blogs that have fewer links and more discussion, I'm sure you'll always be able to find them. Even the small number of links on a link-light personal blog are likely to be very high quality though, worth their weight in gold to Google.

--
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Re:business plan... by fenix+down · 2003-09-11 01:20 · Score: 1

Wasn't Google planning on making a blog tab? If they're still working on that, they could be trying to make Blogger dominant enough to let them invent all kinds of blog standards to make all the cool features they've come up with practical.
Re:business plan... by gekkotron · 2003-09-11 01:24 · Score: 2, Funny

So this is only available in Soviet Russia?
Re:business plan... by jrockway · 2003-09-11 02:20 · Score: 1

I say it's:

1. ???
2. ???
3. ???
4. Release software
5. ???
6. ???

Not a lot of thinking going on :)

--
My other car is first.
Re:business plan... by mmol_6453 · 2003-09-11 02:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'd have to point out a counterexample to Netscape: Internet Explorer.

Comes bundled with every version of Windows, and you don't have to download it.

--
What's this Submit thingy do?
Re:business plan... by LostCluster · 2003-09-11 02:54 · Score: 1

are they doing tose little google text ads or what?

Bingo... that's got to be the plan. Google already has a powerful advertising system, and it'd be rather trivial to associate ads entry-by-entry with the blogs using the AdSense technology they're already trying out elsewhere.

I'm sure this is a drive to get the Blogger userbase as big as possible, then they'll roll out the ads.
Re:business plan... by Evil+Grinn · 2003-09-11 03:38 · Score: 1

I'm sure this is a drive to get the Blogger userbase as big as possible, then they'll roll out the ads.

The ads are already rolled out. The free Blogger already had ads before Google bought it.

--
where there's fish, there's cats
Re:business plan... by j_d · 2003-09-11 03:39 · Score: 2, Interesting

And what I'm saying is that journalists can blog too, instead of writing for a publication, if they are worried that they aren't getting heard because they're not a blogger. The only thing is that this may mean that "journalist" may start to disappear as a paid position like it is today.

The disappearance of journalist as career is an interesting thought -- firstly, isn't there a certain level of legitimacy in being a paid reporter? There are certain skills required to be a good reporter, and these skills are not available or even evident to some. Secondly, reporters aren't all commentators; news should be presented free of coloring opinion as much as possible, right? While I don't discount the concept of blogging-as-news, I do believe that more blogging is editorial in nature.

A large enough network of Slashdot-type sites, each with a community and each with a different focus, would have sufficient breadth to pull in a good number of interesting stories, while serving as a filtering mechanism at the same time.

With sufficient tuning, I bet you could filter metadata from the bloggers, emotional content, and sort of, what, large group psycho-dynamics? Neat stuff.
Re:business plan... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:08 · Score: 0

you are flat out wrong.

links in blogs point to what bloggers are talking about, are interested in, and thus searching the web one gets what people who use the web are interested in.

Web is NOT the real world, thus if people on the web decide to talk about peanut butter and jelly, that is all you'll find. If they decide to talk about the virtues of slashdot when contrast against a terrorist organization, you may find little.
Re:business plan... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:14 · Score: 0

what's wrong with it taking over? newspapers took over something when they first came out...

it's called progress.

unfortunately progress and business often clash, and allowing businesses to flourish in the face of progress is EVIL, it's true terrorist to allow a company to exist when it's services are no longer neccesary.
Re:business plan... by Spy+Hunter · 2003-09-11 07:11 · Score: 1

Hopefully the legitimacy of being a paid reporter would be able to be replaced by the legitimacy stories would get from making it through several levels of this collaborative filtering. Advertising would also help this if significant money was being made. Being a well-known and popular blogger might confer some sort of legitimacy and also carry some responsibility. The objectivity issue is interesting; however, I would question the objectivity of our current news sources anyway. I think a network of blogs could be just as objective, again due to filtering. Such a network might also have stories with a wider range of viewpoints, which might be a good thing.
Once again, this is all just speculation. It remains to be seen if this can work in the real world to replace journalism as we know it and all that. But I think it would be cool.

--
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Re:business plan... by pyrros · 2003-09-11 07:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

links in blogs point to what bloggers are talking about, are interested in, and thus searching the web one gets what people who use the web are interested in.

The possible problem is: searching the web gets you what bloggers are interested in, and bloggers are not 100% representative of web users.

The issue here, as I see it, is that because of crosslinking, a lame blog entry about subject X could get a higher pagerank than a good forum thread about the same thing. Now, this is more of a problem with pagerank than a problem of blogging, but my point that more people getting into blogging could worsen google's results' quality still stands.

And just to be sure I'm clear on this: this is not the bloggers' problem, this is google's problem, and frankly link farming is a much worse "exploit" of this than the bloggers' artificially increased pagerank.
Re:business plan... by Sanga · 2003-09-11 08:44 · Score: 1

Blogs could be bad for the quality of google's results: because of blogs linking to eachother, the get a bigger pagerank than thy should,

Thus Google inviting the bloggers into their fold, can control the false links -- and count only the outgoing links as real links for their PageRank.
Re:business plan... by Spy+Hunter · 2003-09-11 09:55 · Score: 1

Google results mirror the interests of its users. I fail to see this as a bad thing. The vision is that in the future, everyone *will* be on the web, *everyone* will blog if they want to, and so anyone who wants to can have their opinion expressed and influence Google results themselves. Everyone will bring their experiences to the web, making it richer on every topic you can imagine, not just those having to do with what geeks care about. Right now Google is a great place to find information on computer-related issues, because much of the web is concerned with these issues. In the future, if everyone uses the web, then Google will be a great place to find information on everything.
This is a far-looking view, I don't expect that it will happen to a huge extent in the near future (like 10 years). But maybe in 50 or 100.

--
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}

Bloggers are smarter by OMG · 2003-09-10 19:07 · Score: 4, Funny

From the free features list:

Spellchecking: Fewer typos. Look smarter.

I say: Spellchecking is for wimps. Be smarter. ;-P

Re:Bloggers are smarter by Xpilot · 2003-09-10 19:19 · Score: 1, Funny

I say: Spellchecking is for wimps. Be smarter. ;-P

...said the guy on Slashdot. Oh the irony.

--
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:34 · Score: 0

I understand that one of the revolutionary things about blogging is the quick direct-to-keyboard "reporting" style, but really, how much thought do people who don't concentrate the least bit put into their sermons? Proper spelling isn't just nice to have, it signifies familiarity with the written word. I think I just gave an argument for spellchecking, damn it. Anyway, spellchecking is evil. It makes you think you can write sloppily and get away with it, but you can't: Lack of writing discipline also shows in other ways.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:38 · Score: 0, Funny

Their's no way I can spell wrong with a spell checker, is there!

Now where'd that grammar checker go?
Re:Bloggers are smarter by ozbon · 2003-09-10 19:57 · Score: 1

I agree. The joy of no spell-checking on Blogger was that it showed up who could spell vs. those who would normally use a spellchecker.

Now (in theory) blogs will be a lot more literate - or at least slightly less illiterate.

--
I say we take off and nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 20:02 · Score: 0

I think I just gave an argument for spellchecking, damn it. Anyway, spellchecking is evil. It makes you think you can write sloppily and get away with it, but you can't: Lack of writing discipline also shows in other ways.

Yeah, like that meandering, contradictory post you just made then.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by pyrrho · 2003-09-10 20:37 · Score: 1

Why do you care if the machine does the spelling or not. I do not get it.

The brain is finite... are there not better things to do than take the language too seriously? I mean, the grammar, the spelling, everything changes not-very-gradually over time. If you like seeing well spelled words, that is more understandable to me than wanting to see mispellings to tell you some deeper truth. What do you think it tells you?

I cannot imagine it really tells you anything genuine, as there are many causes for mispelling with diverse causes. The content counts more than the encoding. If the encoding is not bad enough to be ambiguous, which most mispellings are not, no harm no foul, I think. What's between the lines, tells you the quality of the thinking.

Mispelling can be a distraction, I admit, but again, why not have the machine clean that up, it's not hiding anything, just removing a bit of noise in the signal... the signal which is actually broadcast form of an idea formin' in their 'ead.

Quality of spelling is for people that are good at polishing product, typesetters and whatnot, it's a valid skill, don't get me wrong. I admire a polished piece of work.

Even if spelling were important though to spell well some place like slashdot requires two things of me, to slow down a notch (type slower than I think, which is already the case without slowing down more), and proof reading. If you proofread even once, sentance by sentence, is the double in time cost worth the added clarity? If so, how often is it worth it, what percentage of your signal would have gotten through. Which takes less time, to clarify again in the future, or to slow down and get it right the first time.

Same answer as always: depends on the circumstance. Blogs are the spelling-doesn't-really-count circumstance I'd vote.

It's the twenty first century and good spelling is a matter for an efficiency expert.

--
-pyrrho
Re:Bloggers are smarter by daveo0331 · 2003-09-10 20:42 · Score: 5, Funny

Even with spell checking, it will bee easy too tell who knows how to spell correctly, who van avoid making typos, whom knows how to use grammar correct, and who can avoid using, improper punctuation.

--
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 21:14 · Score: 0

They may be, but Blogger's feature list manages to include a mis-spelling of 'whither' (wither).

Malaprop lives!
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 22:19 · Score: 0

Bad spelling/grammar is tacky. You need to learn/follow rules to get your ideas across.

Anyway, blogs are just shit so who cares? They're going to date reeeeally quickly, and in a few years people will be saying `oh, a blog - how early 2000's`.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by lelnet · 2003-09-10 22:49 · Score: 3, Offtopic

>are there not better things to do than take the language too seriously?

There are definitely better things to do than take the language (or anything else) too seriously...by definition. The question is whether or not insisting on reasonable spelling and grammar constitutes taking the language too seriously, or merely seriously enough.

For most people who care about such things (and I'll admit without shame that I'm one of them, as I also admit that I'm not entirely without faults in the spelling and grammar department myself), they're simply a very useful shorthand...noticeably poor spelling and/or grammar are an instant tip-off that the person whose work you're reading either is an imbecile or hasn't taken the time to do even minimal checking of their own work. In online media especially, this is an important thing, because other tip-offs about the same problems often aren't available.

Perhaps you don't think that's an important enough thing to pay attention to. If so, pardon us for disagreeing with you.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by jejones · 2003-09-10 23:37 · Score: 4, Funny

Now (in theory) blogs will be a lot more literate - or at least slightly less illiterate.

No, it's just that the illiteracy will be of a different sort; computer-aided, so to speak. A spell checker won't save people who confuse "there," "their," and "they're" or "its" and "it's," use "loose" where they mean "lose," or use apostrophes for plurals.

Do a web search for "my tail is dun." I burned out on the Xanth series long ago, but I would love to see that little scene from Centaur Aisle handed to everyone entering junior high. Humor drives points home very well indeed.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by fenix+down · 2003-09-11 01:27 · Score: 1

It's the same damn thing as a newspaper column, only on the internet. How the hell's that gonna date? Maybe the kind that are just public diaries by boing people can date, but those already did in the early 90s when it was a publishing fad.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 02:12 · Score: 0

Your post is victim of _all_ that. Loser.

That was the joke. Loser.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 02:48 · Score: 0

"It's the same damn thing as a newspaper column, only on the internet."

It's a collection of words, like a newspaper column, only subject to no editing/control by a third party, so it's more likely to contain opinion and less likely to contain facts. Newspapers sell - or at least they should if the company responsible wants to stay in business, so there's generally some credibility, or at least a consistant bias. Blogs are just some sweaty idiot sitting at his PC talking shite. At least, most of them are.

Seriously, they'll date just as quickly as all the late 1990's `mi furst webpage` crap with pictures of peoples pet cats, stumpy freakish looking girlfriends, `you are visitor number 000000000031` counters and `under construction` logos.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 02:49 · Score: 1, Insightful

A spell checker won't save people who confuse "there," "their

Don't forget "then" and "than". (Which seems to include about 50% of the /. population.)
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:17 · Score: 0

requirement to spell is an indication of a language designed at a time when such concepts as spelling a word were deemed noble. Unfortunately, most people are too lazy to switch to better languages, thus we are stuck with English.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:26 · Score: 0

perhaps the problem is english itself.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by pyrrho · 2003-09-11 09:14 · Score: 1

I'm going to like blogs as long as interesting people keep writing them, of course, like TV, it's up to you if you read crap.

Lessig's blog is crap? I don't think so. The Bagdad blogger, crap? No, it's historic... we actually have civilian communication from within a country we're attacking! holy changed world batman.

and you're premise about following rules to get ideas across... what if your ideas don't fit the rule?

--
-pyrrho
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 22:18 · Score: 0

"The Bagdad blogger, crap? No, it's historic... we actually have civilian communication from within a country we're attacking! holy changed world batman."

Yes, it's crap. Probably faked. I don't even care, but we'll see.

"and you're premise about following rules to get ideas across... what if your ideas don't fit the rule?"
Re:Bloggers are smarter by pyrrho · 2003-09-12 07:57 · Score: 1

It's not faked... it's been confirmed by press that was over there for the war.

Of course, you can still think it's crap, you don't have to like what he writes after all. But if you think it's not an amazing event in history, you're wrong.

--
-pyrrho
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-14 22:42 · Score: 0

"it's been confirmed by press that was over there for the war"

I was thinking it was a US "embedded" reporter who was responsible.
Re:Bloggers are smarter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-15 08:12 · Score: 0

nope. Turns out the guy also acted as an interpreter for a New York Times reporter. He's real, it's real, and you can decide for your self the quality of his opinions... but he is an Iraqi, he is from Bagdad, he still lives in Bagdad, and his house was raiding and an american GI took his Dad's Johny Walker.

Google Can afford it by abhikhurana · 2003-09-10 19:08 · Score: 5, Interesting

I suppose google can afford to offer such serivices for free. Just look at google groups. But I won't be very surprised to see context specific ads on the blogs as well. The strategy google is following is targeted advertising. So if some blogger writes about say IBM Vs SCO, you can expect to see an ad of some Linux solution on top of that blog (Or worse, an MS ad saying you won't have any IP problems with MS). I think its a good idea because like search engine, you know who your target customer is for blogs. So there is indeed a business plan behind this.

--
What's under yellowstone?

Re:Google Can afford it by Jotham · 2003-09-10 19:41 · Score: 4, Interesting

Also one of the main problems Google is currently having with their search results is that too many blogs are ending up in the top results, often ranking higher than the primary site that contains the information that the blogs refer to (due to many blog-users who heavily cross-linking amongst themselves which ups their rating).
To combat this they've already discussed creating a seperate category for blogs to help seperate these.
Good to see them taking a proactive stance -- get enough people using your service and you're suddenly got a category of blogs already identified and indexed.
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt as they've always been quite responsible with ads and while its a potential revenue stream I don't think they'll ever be as intrusive as other free sites/services.
Re:Google Can afford it by MonTemplar · 2003-09-10 20:33 · Score: 1

The advertising would only affect those who choose to let Blogger host their weblogs on the BlogSpot servers - if you choose instead to have the weblog pages published to your own existing webspace, they are currently ad-free. I'd be interested to see if this changes in the near future. Currently, Google doesn't offer their text-ad service for personal pages.

MT.

--
-MT.
Re:Google Can afford it by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 21:22 · Score: 0

To combat this they've already discussed creating a seperate category for blogs to help seperate these.

No they haven't, that was just another bullshit story from the Register that caught on.

The reason blogs are often ranked higher is that they often contain more useful information than the original sites (and a link straight to them as well). This is _good_ when you are looking for information on something.
Re:Google Can afford it by tommertron · 2003-09-10 23:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

To combat this they've already discussed creating a seperate category for blogs to help seperate these...
Okay, I don't quite understand the logic of this though. If Pagerank(tm) is supposed to be built off people linking a site because they recommend, aren't blogs a key tool in it? I've always seen Pagerank and a very grassroots tool; it uses people on the Web to suggest things. If thy separate blogs from searches and presumable Pagerank also, who's left to link sites for Pagerank, the corporate business sites? That doesn't seem too useful to me, and seems to open the whole thing up to corporate abuse.

--
Random rants about technology: http://technorants.blogspot.com
Re:Google Can afford it by TheViewFromTheGround · 2003-09-11 00:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

I can understand Google having too many blogs in their search results in most cases. What about cases involving technical questions, such as web design, where the blogs are the best place to look and should be dominating the search results?

--
Online citizen journalism from the inner city: The View From The Ground
Re:Google Can afford it by fm6 · 2003-09-11 04:23 · Score: 1

But I won't be very surprised to see context specific ads on the blogs as well.
Ooh, good point! I'll bet somebody at Google did some math, and decided that the ad revenue from increased blogging would more than make up for lost membership fees. These guys always seem to find a way to do the right thing, and still make a buck doing it. Strange, but actually rather admirable. And I, for one, don't mind a sponsored link or two. Sometimes they're even useful.
Re:Google Can afford it by perlchild · 2003-09-11 05:37 · Score: 1

Anyone thought that it might be easier for google to control how blogs affect page ranking now that they own one?

Say even to the point that they lower scores on other blogs, but keep blogger.com scores high, and say "Blog on the best, better pageranks than the rest" ?

No Business Model? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

What about disecting your blogs and turning it into digestable infor they can sell?

Re:No Business Model? by blibbleblobble · 2003-09-11 00:05 · Score: 1

This would probably be a good time to mention the real blogging website:

http://www.invisiblog.com/

Mixmaster / cypherpunk remailers make your blogs anonymous, while still listing them in order by person. Not even the website knows the IP address where a blog came from.

we don't need no stinkin' plan by RevDobbs · 2003-09-10 19:08 · Score: 4, Funny

It's the dot-com frenzy all over again! Free services with no business plan.

Who needs a business plan? Just make sure that the numbered item before "profit" is "???".

Re:we don't need no stinkin' plan by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 01:49 · Score: 0

Or do it like SCO:

1. ???
2. ???
3. Profit!!

Yeay! by qmrq · 2003-09-10 19:09 · Score: 5, Funny

Now we get to listen to all the little teenie bopper girls out there talk about makeup problems, who the cutest boy in class is, who kissed who behind whose back..

We also get to listen to middle-aged women who do the blog thing bitch. Woo!

Re:Yeay! by Sneftel · 2003-09-10 19:17 · Score: 1

Now we get to listen to all the little teenie bopper girls out there talk about makeup problems, who the cutest boy in class is, who kissed who behind whose back..Yeah... and with spellchecking, this time we'll actually be able to understand them.

--
The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
Re:Yeay! by Chicane-UK · 2003-09-10 19:26 · Score: 1

The irony is that its not much different after you leave school and get into an office environment.. difference being there are just more politics!! :)

--
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
Re:Yeay! by qmrq · 2003-09-10 19:30 · Score: 1, Funny

yea, i kno it stnks when u cant undrstand ppl who talk lik this!!!11! :((
Re:Yeay! by Pseudonym · 2003-09-10 19:32 · Score: 1

No, there are different politics.

--
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Re:Yeay! by cloudless.net · 2003-09-10 21:50 · Score: 0, Troll

I have been running a blog site since 1999. Sometimes I ask myself "what am I doing this for?" But then I realized blogging is worth it as long as there is an audience. What you think is boring might be interesting to others. I will keep blogging as long as my friends keep visiting my site.
Re:Yeay! by jejones · 2003-09-10 23:40 · Score: 1

No worse than having to look past similar categories of dead tree publication--actually better, because you can let a search engine filter for you.
Re:Yeay! by qmrq · 2003-09-11 00:03 · Score: 1

There will always be an audience, as long as we have voyeurs. There's one inside us all.
Re:Yeay! by mmol_6453 · 2003-09-11 02:36 · Score: 1

There's no difference.

--
What's this Submit thingy do?
Re:Yeay! by Slime-dogg · 2003-09-11 07:48 · Score: 1

Don't forget the half-suicidal completely drugged up lithium dependant blue haired chicks!

"I fail to see why life is important at all. Here's some crappy poetry:"

At least if you find a good web-journal or blog, it's better to read that than surf through your buddy list, reading the away messages and profiles.

--
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.

But hey... by squaretorus · 2003-09-10 19:10 · Score: 3, Funny

... as long as there are a stack of short term, overpaid, worthless stock laden jobs up for grabs who's complaining!!

Let the good times roll (briefly) (again) (maybe)

Re:But hey... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 02:15 · Score: 0

Dear squaretorus,

The RIAA wishes to inform you that your use of the phrase "Let the good times roll" infringes on the copyrights of several artists. Please expect correspondence from our legal staff to arrange compensation for your shameless abuse of our country's copyright laws.

Squatters by Catharz · 2003-09-10 19:10 · Score: 4, Interesting

It's only a matter of time before people start squatting on people's names for their "blog" space. As the post said, it'll be the .com frenzy all over again.

I used to work for a well known Australian domain name registrar. Some of the stupidity of the .com goldrush was remarkable. One of our sales guys asked for a list of all .com names (up to 6 characters long) that "haven't" been registered. It took one of my fellow developers (one with the patience, determination and ability to keep a straight face) to explain to him and the general manager that it would take at least a month of processing time to generate the list (by which time it would be useless).

--
To know that you know what you know, and that you do not know what you do not know, that is true wisdom. --Scooby Doo

Re:Squatters by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:21 · Score: 5, Funny

Reminds me of the story I heard about a company that wanted a site developed called News Exchange. The domain name they wanted? newsexchange.com.au
The developers made the company realise the folly of the plan by making the title of the site "NewS exChange"
Re:Squatters by l-ascorbic · 2003-09-10 20:18 · Score: 2, Interesting

Funnily enough, Experts Exchange are no longer to be found at expertsexchange.com. I guess it attracted the wrong kind of clientele.
Re:Squatters by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 22:39 · Score: 0

http://www.whorepresents.net/
Re:Squatters by Erwin-42 · 2003-09-11 00:24 · Score: 1

There was also this international company, PowerGen, which opened a branch in Italy. Their Italian home page was named www.powergenitialia.com.

(I saw this on RISKS and I'll note that some people though it was not real -- but at some point there was a real looking homepage at that address).
Re:Squatters by Da_man · 2003-09-11 00:41 · Score: 1

Man, I can't believe I am reading this. Deja Vu all over. I used to work for an eCommerce company in Ireland, when I witnessed the Marketing manager (how strange) ask one of the developers for a list of ALL unregistered domains. His reply:
...that's like making a list of everything that isn't green!
Obviously this wasn't sinking in:
... so you just won't do it! Is that it?
Prompted my first ever email to Scott Adams, one of many while there.
Re:Squatters by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 08:12 · Score: 0

It took one of my fellow developers (one with the patience, determination and ability to keep a straight face) to explain to him and the general manager that it would take at least a month of processing time to generate the list (by which time it would be useless).
I don't think running a process through the .com zone file would take at least a month. You must have worked with some shitty developers.
Re:Squatters by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 08:31 · Score: 0

Only takes a couple hours if you know how.

I expected this by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:12 · Score: 0

This has to do with their future search engine. This is part of their plan from day one.

Livejournal is the standard by Billly+Gates · 2003-09-10 19:12 · Score: 2, Informative

At least thats where the bigest amount of blogs are.

--
http://saveie6.com/

Re:Livejournal is the standard by sinserve · 2003-09-10 19:28 · Score: 1

Or Xanga amongst the lamers.
Re:Livejournal is the standard by Infonaut · 2003-09-10 19:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

At least thats where the bigest amount of blogs are
And as we all know, quantity DOES equal quality - especially in the world o' blogs. ;-)

--
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Re:Livejournal is the standard by nhaines · 2003-09-10 20:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

Of course it doesn't--but LiveJournal is happily Open Source. :)
Re:Livejournal is the standard by 87C751 · 2003-09-10 22:39 · Score: 1

LiveJournal is happily Open Source.
As are b2 and Movable Type, among others. I always thought that the appeal of LiveJournal was that it doesn't need separate hosting, and perhaps some "snob appeal" in that free accounts are available only to the invited.

--
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
Re:Livejournal is the standard by Decaffeinated+Jedi · 2003-09-10 23:06 · Score: 1

I've only recently started using it, but Greymatter gets the blogging job done quite well if you have the cgi access and small amount of webspace necessary to implement it. It's not quite as fancy as Movable Type and lacks a few features like built-in support for syndication, but I was just looking for a simple, open source, ad-free piece of blogging software and it works for me.

--
DecafJedi
my weblog: apropos of something
Re:Livejournal is the standard by shione · 2003-09-11 00:10 · Score: 1

I guess Livejournal's a snob then since free registration is only made available by invitation :)
Re:Livejournal is the standard by Zigg · 2003-09-11 00:19 · Score: 2, Informative

Movable Type is most assuredly not Open Source.

It does not matter for most people's use, but it's still incorrect to say that it is.

</PEDANTIC>
Re:Livejournal is the standard by Firehawke · 2003-09-11 01:46 · Score: 2, Informative

It's not so much "snob-appeal" as finding themselves taking in more users than their hardware could handle. In the end, they had to limit things just to keep enough funding coming in to keep the servers running.

Of course, you don't have to have an invite code if you pay for your account outright.
Re:Livejournal is the standard by Doc+Hopper · 2003-09-11 05:22 · Score: 1

Don't forget Drupal. Kind of the spiritual successor to Geeklog, in my opinion. It's stuck in a world of its own, where it can't quite decide if it's a blogging tool or a content management system. I kind of enjoy that "in-between-ness"; it's powerful, but not bizarre, it's easy enough to operate (once set up) that anybody can do it, and it's really easy to program for and debug...
...for a geek. It's what I run my blog on, and so far it's far easier to customize than Movable Type ever was for me.

--
Matthew P. Barnson
I learn what I think when I read what I write
Re:Livejournal is the standard by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:30 · Score: 0

slashdot is read by a lot of people.

quantity does equal quality right?

Blog-quality post on blogging by Empiric · 2003-09-10 19:13 · Score: 5, Interesting

Random, haphazard thoughts on this...

It'd be really nice to have some kind of comparison list for various blog sites out there. I note from the blogger.com information, that they're still not making RSS part of the free service level, something which (ahem) LiveJournal offers on their free accounts.

I wonder if blogger.com has a client app... Semagic will autocreate your HTML and other handy stuff (including spellcheck) to make posting as easy as sending an instant message.

They also have friends lists, communities, and a bunch of stuff I haven't had time to check out.

Which brings up a core question... why have the blog format at all? In a lot of cases, it seems to just be a higher-tech version of rants written in a personal journal (as browsing some of them indicates), but I think eventually widespread adoption will happen simply because people will want some some way to tie their writing back to themselves. For most community sites/systems (Usenet, IRC, ...Slashdot... as prototypical examples), everyone could just be named a variant of joe13234, and it would make no functional difference. Some people (lawyers, politicians, analysts, etc.) are essentially paid for their comments, and a weblog can be seen as an extension of their work that provides a meaningful tieback to themselves.

On the dot-com thing... it seems like everything on the net, private IP or not, is being forced into a shareware model, in effect. Some fraction of the public using a system will toss a few bucks in the direction of the provider, and IMHO people will need to realize that they need to do this occasionally or we'll end up with extremely high-bandwidth connections to nothing. Even if you don't pay for everything, paying for something, even semi-randomly, helps keep the wheels of the net turning.

I now submit my comment to the traditional, ritual Slashdot assault.

--
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?

Re:Blog-quality post on blogging by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 20:26 · Score: 1, Interesting

A comparison list of blog features? I bet no site can beat the drunkmen's blog service. Not only is it cram loaded with features like RSS, it is the easiest posting mechanism around: automatically generated posts!

Check the slasdot blog: slashdot.drunkmenworkhere.org

How's that for google blog clog?
Re:Blog-quality post on blogging by alanjstr · 2003-09-11 00:26 · Score: 0

I found a way to have an RSS feed without paying for it. The instructions were even posted on the blogger help site. Read my blog for instructions.
Re:Blog-quality post on blogging by I_M_Noman · 2003-09-11 03:04 · Score: 1

It'd be really nice to have some kind of comparison list for various blog sites out there
PC Magazine did a mini-comparo earlier this month.
Re:Blog-quality post on blogging by kmarius · 2003-09-11 04:33 · Score: 1

It'd be really nice to have some kind of comparison list for various blog sites out there. I note from the blogger.com information, that they're still not making RSS part of the free service level, something which (ahem) LiveJournal offers on their free accounts.
I think it's because they want more control over how people view their pages. It's understandable, because the free services must be paid for with ads. If free accounts could generate RSS, the readers might use software like NNTP//RSS to extract the raw information, without viewing the ads.
Re:Blog-quality post on blogging by Razzak · 2003-09-11 07:41 · Score: 1

I wonder if blogger.com has a client app... Semagic will autocreate your HTML and other handy stuff (including spellcheck) to make posting as easy as sending an instant message.

Actually, it's easier than that. You add a link to your browser's toolbar and click that link whenever you want to write something. A little window pops up with a text field and a publish button. You write, you click. You're done.

Platform agnostic and doesn't force me to launch yet another worthless application on my desktop.

hello young person, toke on this crack its free ! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:13 · Score: 1, Interesting

yeah great idea, offer it for free until users have bashed in a million words building up a nice resource that they have no control over then threaten to take it away a year or two later unless you pay the $39.99 that they have just had to introduce, you think we are stupid or what ?

hotmail had a similar plan except it took them 5years till everyone had a hotmail address then charge 50$ a year or put up with 2mb total inbox limit and 10filters so you can be spammed into submission

but then i would expect that from redmond, not google they are our friends right ? right ?

Re:Site Is slashdotted - Repost by B3ryllium · 2003-09-10 19:14 · Score: 0, Troll

Does the RMS Hippie doll come with an "Official RMS Odour-Enhancing Packet" and a free sample of hair?

Re:Gogle kan aford et by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:15 · Score: 0

Just might actuallee create me own BLoGG know!!!

/. no free spell checkee-- D'OH!

hello young person, toke on this crack its free ! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:17 · Score: 0

yeah great idea, offer it for free until users have bashed in a million words building up a nice resource that they have no control over then threaten to take it away a year or two later unless you pay the $39.99 that they have just had to introduce, you think we are stupid or what ?

hotmail had a similar plan except it took them 5years till everyone had a hotmail address then charge 50$ a year or put up with 2mb total inbox limit and 10filters so you can be spammed into submission

but then i would expect that from redmond, not google they are our friends right ? right ?

Former members by Flingles · 2003-09-10 19:18 · Score: 2, Interesting

What happens to the members who just signed up? I would feel pretty bad if I payed my $35 to find out it's free 2 months later. Do they have any advantages over free users?

--
Karma: -2^0.5 . Mainly due to the imbibing of dihydrogen monoxide

Re:Former members by Timesprout · 2003-09-10 19:23 · Score: 2, Informative

Google said it would give Blogger Pro subscribers either a $24 Blogger sweatshirt or a prorated cash refund. That offer is good through Oct. 1.

--
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Re:Former members by sinserve · 2003-09-10 19:25 · Score: 4, Informative

RTFA. It says "Google said it would give Blogger Pro subscribers either a $24 Blogger sweatshirt or a prorated cash refund. That offer is good through Oct. 1."
Re:Former members by gregfortune · 2003-09-10 19:26 · Score: 1

You know who's going to feel real bad? The guy who wins the lotto on the day before the end of the world. See, the stuff that comes out of the end of a cow, it happens...

Seriously, there's nothing to be done. Prices on processors drop seconds after some poor fool purchases them. Same with RAM, hard drives, etc. Mortage rates go down two days after refinancing a home. That's what economics is all about.
Re:Former members by nacturation · 2003-09-10 19:26 · Score: 3, Funny

I would feel pretty bad if I payed my $35 to find out it's free 2 months later. Do they have any advantages over free users?

Sure there are advantages, like the new built-in spellchecker which would tell you that there's no such word as payed but that you're likely looking for the word paid.

--
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Re:Former members by Evil+Al · 2003-09-10 20:29 · Score: 1

I got an email inviting me to visit this link to claim my free sweatshirt. No offer of a cash refund though.

--
Ah, computer dating -- it's like pimping, but you rarely have to use the phrase "upside your head" -- Bender
Re:Former members by Snaller · 2003-09-10 22:52 · Score: 1

Why should that make him feel better?

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Re:Former members by Zigg · 2003-09-11 00:21 · Score: 1

When did he say he wanted to feel better? He wanted advantages. It's too bad a spellchecker can't correct the constant flow of "loose" for "lose", "your" for "you're", etc., however.
Re:Former members by Psychic+Burrito · 2003-09-11 00:36 · Score: 1

Hmmm.... and how much is a Blogger Pro subscription?

Blogger Pro users still get some additional features (RSS, Email stuff). If the Blogger Pro subscription is $24 as well, you can essentially get the additional features for free (sign up, pay the money, get the money back by refund).

Which would open up the question: Why make a difference between Blogger normal and Pro?
Re:Former members by fenix+down · 2003-09-11 04:16 · Score: 1

Well, clearly they prefer that you wear their ads over taking their money.
Re:Former members by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 07:16 · Score: 0

I will never ever buy a program that needs "Activation"!

Your slashdot account needed activation. Doh!

This worries me... by shadowcabbit · 2003-09-10 19:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

One of the main reasons I use Blogger on my site is because it makes it easy to alert visitors to the latest things I've put up. Rather than hack away at HTML and PHP, which I do enough of already, I just pop open a BlogThis! and go. The automation and ease of use are what I really like (and it has sort of tempted me to blather on like an idiot about random crap, but what's a blog for if not that?).

Now they're removing the barriers between the paid service, which I did not subscribe to, and the free service. They say they're doing this because Google owns them, and there's no reason to have people pay them. Aside from the fact that that sounds completely nuts, I wonder what's going to change. Other folks here have mentioned text ads-- well, I don't want that. So far my site is ad-free, and I'd prefer to keep it that way.

Alternately, what if BlogThis! goes away-- or worse, requires you to view an ad before it'll open? This seems like the more likely scenario, because in this case the targeted audience isn't the people reading the blogs (think about it, how many hits does Aunt Mabel's Church Society blog really get?) but rather the people writing the blogs. Fill out a survey when you sign up and you too can blog for the low low cost of nothing plus time to read the same advertisement for scotch tape that you've read on every other site!

Of course, none of that is confirmed yet. But it'll happen, I bet.

(and no, this is not a thinly-veiled attempt to get people to visit my site)

--
"Why Subscribe?" Good question...

Re:This worries me... by rmohr02 · 2003-09-11 00:07 · Score: 3, Insightful

Alternately, what if BlogThis! goes away-- or worse, requires you to view an ad before it'll open? This seems like the more likely scenario, because in this case the targeted audience isn't the people reading the blogs (think about it, how many hits does Aunt Mabel's Church Society blog really get?) but rather the people writing the blogs. Fill out a survey when you sign up and you too can blog for the low low cost of nothing plus time to read the same advertisement for scotch tape that you've read on every other site!
Considering Google's track record, this seems highly unlikely. Google has found that targetted text ads to the side of the page work much more effectively than popups or annoying banner ads.
Re:This worries me... by Dinny · 2003-09-11 02:37 · Score: 1

I think the most likely business plan for google is to provide a searching service for blogs. By owning the servers that hold the content it makes it very easy to search or know when this are changing.

This strategy allows Google to continue generating money the same way it does now (text ads around search results), and offer new services (blog searching) to normal customers.
Re:This worries me... by WCityMike · 2003-09-11 02:41 · Score: 1

You could always go visit Diary-X. Although if memory serves, he has some Slashdotting protection built in, so you may have to cut and paste that URL into a new window.
Re:This worries me... by Mad+Merovingian · 2003-09-11 09:04 · Score: 1

If you're running your own site, what's to stop you from transferring to a different blogging tool (MT/Greymatter/other poison of choice) if Blogger starts inserting ads? I run MT on my site, and it has a bookmarklet feature that is quite similar in function to Blogger's BlogThis! tool. Blogger may have an advertising monopoly over everyone on Blogspot, but as soon as they start including advertising on self-hosted sites, those sites will just switch to a different tool.

I wouldnt worry for google by acegik · 2003-09-10 19:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you take a tour on their site you will find out that they do make money - its not that obvious like on any other banner/pop exploded site, but they put small ads here and there, they offer PRO services for businesses where they sell servers and services... They make money without annoying the surfers and its very rare thing to find on the net.

--
Dont just mail it - Maileet

LiveJournal is much more worthy of note by SynKKnyS · 2003-09-10 19:23 · Score: 4, Interesting

After all, LiveJournal is completely Open Source. Subscription only gives you added features, but the free version does not even have ad banners. The site is completely funded by subscriptions and donations. A few other sites have spun off thanks to the freely available code, including DeadJournal.

Re:LiveJournal is much more worthy of note by cloudless.net · 2003-09-10 21:57 · Score: 1

From LiveJournal.com:
"Joining the site is free if you're invited by a friend, and very inexpensive otherwise. Free users can upgrade their accounts for extra features."
So it is not free unless I am invited by a friend, right?
Re:LiveJournal is much more worthy of note by Duwke · 2003-09-10 23:20 · Score: 1

So.. I want to check out LiveJournal, but I have to pay to even see how it works?! Interesting marketing program...
Someone give me a code, let me see how it works, then I might pay a few bucks...
Re:LiveJournal is much more worthy of note by shione · 2003-09-11 00:20 · Score: 2, Informative

you can try it here: livejournal test server

You get the full privileges of a paid account to test out which is better than opening a free account on the main servers to test.

Only disadvantage with the test server is your account could be purged anytime but that shouldn't be a worry if you're just testing how things work.

enjoy :)
Re:LiveJournal is much more worthy of note by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 00:36 · Score: 1, Informative

I don't think "try before you buy" is really the intended purpose of the test server.

Re:Blog-quality post on blogging (good point) by shadowcabbit · 2003-09-10 19:23 · Score: 1

Even if you don't pay for everything, paying for something, even semi-randomly, helps keep the wheels of the net turning.

I would kill for moderator points right now.

--
"Why Subscribe?" Good question...

Free eee by Iron+Monkey543 · 2003-09-10 19:27 · Score: 1, Insightful

Those Free features are really nice, but these features didn't even take that long to code in, except for the spell checker. It's like AOL saying they are offering free smilies on their email :).

"NOW"??? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:27 · Score: 0

"Now" we get to? We couldn't previously?

Re:"NOW"??? by qmrq · 2003-09-10 19:32 · Score: 1

Before it was only the rich girls. :-P

Smart move by insecuritiez · 2003-09-10 19:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

Google has quite a following but this sure as hell couldn't hurt their image. There are so many users that default to MSN search because that's all they know. Getting their name out there for more that just searches to the common users is going to help them establish even more dominance.

Re:Smart Move by mr_sas · 2003-09-10 22:48 · Score: 1

legion of people out there categorizing the web for them - for very little money? *looks at dmoz.org*
Re:Smart move by Uart · 2003-09-11 02:21 · Score: 1

Do common users even use blogger? Will they even care? From my experience the average blogger isn't your common user.

Although, I do see where you are going with that... its the Arthur Fortune effect.

"We love Arthur Fortune,
He gave us a dollar..."

--

Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
Re:Smart move by kmarius · 2003-09-11 04:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'm afraid that Google will become too big. They have searches for almost everything (web, usenet, news, shopping) and are continually expanding. They are so popular that they have become part of the language ("googling for information")

I know this is because they offer a good service, at least the web-search and usenet parts are good, but they are becoming very dominant. Google is probably the start page of many browsers, and that means they have a power over how people find information. Google is quickly becoming the portal for information, and is continually expanding into other markets

This can't be good for competition
Re:Smart move by insecuritiez · 2003-09-11 06:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

I was waiting for someone to say that. Google is becoming big. But I don't see them hurting competition just yet. As long as MSN is around Google has competition. Maybe not technically but as for user-base it does. Millions upon millions have IE set to MSN and even more millions have MSN internet service defaulted to MSN. There is no way Google can compete with a default setting. And "educating" them about MSN and alternatives won't work because a lot of them don't even know that MSN is a webpage.

Some thanks! by teamhasnoi · 2003-09-10 19:33 · Score: 2, Funny

Here's a picture of the Blogger guys making fun of a poor handicapped person at Google. Geez, they think they own the place.

I am so going to blog about this.

Reasons for making it free by eric2701 · 2003-09-10 19:33 · Score: 4, Interesting

I bet google has modified this software ( or is planning to in the future,) so that doesn't clobber there search results as much. Maybe they are building in tags and such so that there regular bots won't be as confused by all the links between blogs. Since this is a growing problem for them, it would make sense to try and preempt it.

Re:Reasons for making it free by Khazunga · 2003-09-10 23:01 · Score: 1

And why can't it be done without converting it to a free service?

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you

Blogs indexed separately? by bs_02_06_02 · 2003-09-10 19:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

Has google ceased to index blogs with the rest of the web? I know there was some grumbling in the past months about this.
I just got an account on the freeware blogger from google. The PRO was down. I don't think I would have paid for the "pro" features. Just like I wouldn't pay for a free email box.
Blogging is the online method of talking to the bartender. It's kind of relaxing... until you realize you have no idea who you are talking to.

--
-- No sig for you!

Re:Blogs indexed separately? by MonTemplar · 2003-09-10 21:46 · Score: 1

Has google ceased to index blogs with the rest of the web? I know there was some grumbling in the past months about this.

Indexed? Yes. Mine certainly is. Perhaps you're thinking of PageRanks for weblogs. Can't comment on that, as mine is only a couple of weeks old, hence not linked to much as yet (*hint*).

MT.

--
-MT.
Re:Blogs indexed separately? by shione · 2003-09-11 00:23 · Score: 1

blogs in general or just blog.com?

My livejournal site gets a full page in Google search.

ahem? by danielsfca2 · 2003-09-10 19:34 · Score: 1

I'm not sure how to interpret that "ahem." I can see that you have a LiveJournal by your website link. I have a paid account with LJ as well. But are you trying to indicate disdain for that service?

Maybe it's that it's too late and I'm not thinking very well.

I totally agree with your "shareware" comment, though. I pay $30/year for Salon.com, $25/year for LiveJournal, $2/month for afraid.org FreeDNS, $9/month for SuicideGirls.com (so sue me, punk girls are hot)... anyway, I don't have to pay for most of these things to get the functionality I want, but I pay anyway because I want to support these particular content providers especially, and also the "free" Internet in general.

Re:ahem? by Empiric · 2003-09-10 19:41 · Score: 1

Not disdain at all... just an acknowledgement of the livejournal link and the resulting possibility I'm partisan on this. :)

--
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Re:ahem? by danielsfca2 · 2003-09-12 18:48 · Score: 1

eh, that's okay. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions. They vary in cuteness IMO. Some are okay, a few are just plain adorable.

Hmm by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 19:35 · Score: 0, Offtopic

I want to keep a journal, but I want it on my computer, I'd prefer if it's not web driven and I want it to be robust and quite stable, able to backup, encrypt and compress, and any other features. Anyone know something like this?

Pro now free because they're not hurting for cash by dw5000 · 2003-09-10 19:40 · Score: 4, Informative

At least, that's what the e-mail I got from Evan Williams said. His explanation:

Pro subscribers helped keep us going as a struggling start-up, when servers and bandwidth were at an extreme premium. We wanted to keep basic Blogger free, but we needed to start charging in order to keep the lights on. So we built new things that would appeal to some Blogger users....

Today, as you may know, Blogger's situation is much different. For one thing, we're part of Google.... Google has lots of computers and bandwidth. And Google believes blogs are important and good for the web.

So, apparently, they have the money to offer the feature set of Pro to everyone. Good for them. (I moved to MT a few months ago for a number of reasons.) Those of us who paid the $35 got a nice parting gift. :)

blargh. by edrugtrader · 2003-09-10 19:50 · Score: 4, Interesting

maybe they just want the content...

bloggers create thousands of well written reviews of software/hardware/music/movies/porn, and google could index it, figure out what people like and sell that data to advertisers...... they bascially own the output of thousands of wanna be writers for a drop in the bucket.

sure, a normally company to offer these services would be a horrid business model, but already profitable google only needs a few more comodity servers and probably no more techies to maintain this... why not...

plus google text ads will probably be there.

personally i use marketbanker.com to sell and display text ads (which, incidently, google has removed from their search index... monopoly anyone? that was the first "evil corporate move" i have ever seen google make.)

--
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E

Million Monkeys at a million Typewriters by t0qer · 2003-09-10 19:52 · Score: 2, Interesting

What are the TOS for this? Do they own your comments/Blogs?

Re:Million Monkeys at a million Typewriters by PReDiToR · 2003-09-11 01:30 · Score: 1

If they decided that all your comments were free to serve up to the world, would you mind?

Or would you start up something like the RIAA and come out with BIAA and start sending out nasty letters to 12 year olds that shared your blogs without paying you for them?

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
Re:Million Monkeys at a million Typewriters by Lugae · 2003-09-11 02:10 · Score: 1

While I can't find the URL, and I haven't used Blogger since 2001, I remember them making a big deal that you own the things that you right and that Blogger does not take ownership of the material on their blogs.

Why a cliche? by iamacat · 2003-09-10 19:52 · Score: 2, Interesting

Whoever said a business must charge everyone for everything in order to make money? I can watch some free shows on antenna or download some Linux ISOs, but UPN and Redhat are still around

I would guess either Blogger Pro didn't have that many subscribers or they have plans to get free users pay for other things later. Maybe even sell books based on highest-moderated posts. Like every business decision its a gamble, but we don't have enough information to assume that Google is run by a bunch of idiots.

archive? time capsule? by golgotha007 · 2003-09-10 20:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

i don't understand how people will use some commercial website to put down personal information.

there's 2 good reasons why anyone would want to have a blog or diary:

1. one of the reasons i keep a journal or diary is because at some future point in my life i would like to look back and have memories brought back to me that i may have forgotten.

2. another reason is i am constantly moving around the world and i like to have a central place where my friends and family can keep updated on my activities.

using a commerical blog application satisfies requirement number 2, but what about number 1?
blogger won't be there forever, one day they will disappear. it may not be this year, or next or even in the next decade, but they will disappear or change in some way at some time.

when this happens, what about all your data? how is your data formateed? will they send you your data back to you in some comma delimited format? who knows?

that's not good enough for me. i wrote my own to satisfy my own requirements. if you don't want to write your own, there's plenty of free and open ones on sourceforge.net.

remember, when using a public service to keep your personal information, think about the future for that information.

Spell-checker - is there a 13-y-o angst mode? by KNicolson · 2003-09-10 20:01 · Score: 4, Funny

Cuz lst tym 1 luk'd @ rndm blogz 90% wuz thiz kinz f shizz.

Ugg, even more painful to write than read!

Re:Spell-checker - is there a 13-y-o angst mode? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 22:07 · Score: 0

jesus tapdancing christ! reading that almost gave me an aneurism. bring that shit to IRC and you'll get your ass klined

But I've already got free blogger software by kfg · 2003-09-10 20:08 · Score: 3, Funny

It's called "vi."

KFG

Re:But I've already got free blogger software by switched4OSX · 2003-09-10 20:55 · Score: 1, Funny

Emacs is the only way to go
Re:But I've already got free blogger software by rmohr02 · 2003-09-11 00:11 · Score: 1

emacs is better!

Just kidding. I prefer emacs, but vi is a close second.
Re:But I've already got free blogger software by antibryce · 2003-09-11 01:23 · Score: 1

When the whole blogging fad first hit a friend of mine decided he would set up his own. So he hacked up a ksh script and installed gopher. Now when he wants to add an entry he just runs "updateblog" and types his entry into vi. On exit it uploads to his gopher server.

My friends are huge dorks.
Re:But I've already got free blogger software by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 05:06 · Score: 0

Do you see the "No Karma Bonus" checkbox below the Post Comment field? Use it from time to time, mmkay?
Re:But I've already got free blogger software by rmohr02 · 2003-09-11 06:43 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Mod me how you will. I really don't give a shit.

Whee! Funn Boggly Poast! by teamhasnoi · 2003-09-10 20:09 · Score: 2, Informative

Uh, This marketbanker.com? If you view the source, they could use a meta tag or keywords or something...and marketbanker isn't really a name that I think of when I'm looking for text ads. I tried a few other things but it won't come up.

A link(client/customer) of theirsPassthison.com made we want to kill and kill again, however. There's some javascript popup alert that comes up every time you roll over it. I happened to have the offending link positioned under the box, so every time I dissmissed it, another took its place with godawful inane sayings about 30 times before I was able to run away..

I don't think Google *needs* to exibit monopoly power. The net has proved itself run by idiots, with tardy design skills.

Re:Whee! Funn Boggly Poast! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 21:25 · Score: 0

If you view the source, they could use a meta tag or keywords or something...

Keywords in meta elements went out with the ark. The only search engine you can possibly improve your rankings with with them is MSN, and that's debatable because you have to pay them anyway.
Re:Whee! Funn Boggly Poast! by teamhasnoi · 2003-09-11 02:19 · Score: 1

I'm afraid you are incorrect. Sure I read the 'keywords are dead' posts, but in practice, they still work. I just added meta tags, a new title, and some human-visible keywords (in a sentence) to a site that had never even had a title since 1999.
Come the Google dance, and the site placed higher in all cases - in one case, it came it first. This wasn't attributable to anything else; I ran a 'linkto' search - same as before, and business was slower than usual for that month.
They may not carry the weight they once did, but they still work to improve your rankings.

true, but... by pyrrho · 2003-09-10 20:10 · Score: 1, Insightful

spelling has nothnig to do with intelligence.

--

-pyrrho

Re:true, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 20:19 · Score: 0

....said the man who could not spell...
Re:true, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:36 · Score: 0

And all that intelligence is useless if nobody can or wants to spend the time decyphering what you're trying to say.
Re:true, but... by pyrrho · 2003-09-11 09:40 · Score: 1

but if it's easy to decipher what's been said, then there is no problem.

If I mispell problem, melbpro. Ok.

If I mispell it probelm, that's probably clear in context.

It introduces some noise in the signal, but very little, far less than using the wrong word or unclear grammar. Note I didn't say "bad grammar" because arbitrary grammar rules are also useless (it's ok to split infinitives now... did you hear?), just unclear grammar. Things that make the message unclear are a problem. Arbitrary rules of english teachers --- not a problem. Here is why.

English teachers didn't invent english. There ARE NO RULES FORMING of english, the language is spoken. It's acted out. The rules are deduced from how people speak! Some of these deduced rules are just stupid. If it doesn't directly affect the ability to comprehend the text, it's pointless.

Language's change all the time, but english teachers give you unchanging rules... hmmm. Oh wait, the rules change too!

--
-pyrrho

funny, except... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 20:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

... the joke is getting old. The blogs I read are written by .) An important book publisher (O'reilly) .) cartoonists whose cartoons I read (Penny Arcade, Tom Tommorrow) .) Famous Political Comedian (Bill Maher) .) a Bagdad resident (or two) DURING the war...

I save that last one because that's the real deal... say it was teenage girls talking about makeup. That's real information for someone around the world wondering what is really going on. They could see how decadent and comfortable Wesertern miseries can be. Or we can see what's going on in Bagdad. The question of was it all made up came up, and it wasn't. It's proven a real person, and he is being honest within the range of his own biases, which again, is the point, these are people not journalists.

Yes, it's nice, it's vital to have journalists that try to be objective... but no one can really be objective, it's just as important to here all the biases in the world, not hidden beneath a veil of objectivity-seeming.

The blog is the web.

The original web pages were basically blogs. Not by date, but still, people had a little about them, their hobbies. Of course some of those hobbies were also full time jobs researching particle physics or medical science, but still, basically a personal page. It was a lot of IT workers, personal pages.

The blog makes that medium more chronological and therefore easier to produce changes for, in an era when a lot of different -types- of pages (web applications mind you) have been explored.

Anonymous because I'm so right I don't want to seem, you know, overly perfect or arrogant. Oh damn!

Re:funny, except... by RobotWisdom · 2003-09-10 21:53 · Score: 4, Informative

A web journal is not the same as a weblog.
Weblogs are annotated logs of web-reading, and are therefore outward-directed, with lots of links. Web journals are just self-directed diaries that happen to be posted on the Web.
The explicit original purpose of weblogs was to make the process of finding good reading on the Web more efficient. Unintentionally, the main current purpose is probably spreading news items that the mass media self-censor.
Wallowing in narcissism has nothing to do with weblogs, although the mass media have been propagating that slur since the earliest days.
Re:funny, except... by fenix+down · 2003-09-11 03:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

Same difference. You have so much overlap between the two that it doesn't really matter. Unless you're Anne Frank, you're not publishing a journal on the web without acknowledging other web sites. And no blogger does anything but relating links that he personally enjoyed.

Blogging isn't some selfless public service. It's just as narcissistic as any other personal site. Bloggers are promoting their own interests through the words of others. Maybe it's more interesting to read than someone just promoting themselves, but it's no less self-absorbed.
Re:funny, except... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 03:10 · Score: 0

Thinking back, I think I've actually posted links in my journal about 10 times.
Re:funny, except... by Omestes · 2003-09-11 05:06 · Score: 1

Now while I personally don't read many blogs anymore, I think that they are a good thing. Whats wrong with self expression, whats wrong with allowing yourself a peek into other peoples lives, even if at times they seem petty. I personally find them facinating, both as a trend, and in themselves.

By following your reasoning, isn't any act of human expression just some form of narcisim? You post this because you think that YOUR opinion actually matters, ditto for my own post. You write a book because you think that tyou are worth reading, you write a scholarly article because you think that you are smart enough to imput something into the 5,000 years of human knowledge. I guess to avoid your charge of narcisism we should all live quite humble lives in some form of a monastary, keeping our meager thoughts to ourselves.

The blog I used to use on my personal site was about philosophical and political events, from many persectives, and I thought that most of it was worthy enough to publish online, I guess I too am narcisistic, either that or my opinions/writing ARE indeed worth reading. Either that or it was just another normal form of self-expression.

Everything is self-absorbed, being that we are trapped in the shell of self until we die.

--
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
Re:funny, except... by ryantate · 2003-09-11 05:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

Wallowing in narcissism has nothing to do with weblogs, although the mass media have been propagating that slur since the earliest days.

Does having a popular weblog somehow give _you_ the right to define what weblogging is or should be, what is included and excluded? Or are you basing this on some survey of weblogs out there?

I certainly don't consider your non-personal blog any more authentic than things like this that were exploring personal topics eight years ago. Dave Winer has been posting psuedo-diary entries on Scripting News and DaveNet since the mid-1990s.

How dare you try to define weblogging for the rest of us.
Re:funny, except... by RobotWisdom · 2003-09-11 05:24 · Score: 1, Informative

How dare you try to define weblogging for the rest of us.
Simply because I coined the term.

(Heh.)
Re:funny, except... by ryantate · 2003-09-11 06:14 · Score: 1

Mod parent up. :--)

In all seriousness, thank you for the word, but I'm not sure it is yours any more, any more than Unix can be defined by AT&T or SCO. Also, nearly any serious document on the history of weblogs includes both the sites I linked to as among the earliest examples of the format, so arguing against diarism seems a bit revisionist.

Cheers
r
Re:funny, except... by RobotWisdom · 2003-09-11 06:26 · Score: 1

...arguing against diarism seems a bit revisionist
In the early days I didn't mind, but people seem to have forgotten the original meaning and substituted the derogatory 'diary' connotation, so I decided I better start laying down the law.

speeling by pyrrho · 2003-09-10 20:24 · Score: 1

It should have been anonymous because of the spelling... good points though.

--

-pyrrho

Re:Pro now free because they're not hurting for ca by blowdart · 2003-09-10 20:30 · Score: 1, Funny

the e-mail I got from Evan Williams said.

E-mail? Wasn't everyone reading his blog then? <g>

First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by lewp · 2003-09-10 20:36 · Score: 3, Funny

How many companies just do downright nice things anymore? Wild speculation aside, until there's a reason for me to feel otherwise, I fucking love you, Google.

--
Game... blouses.

Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by CharterTerminal · 2003-09-11 10:38 · Score: 1

I fucking love you, Google If you tell Google how you feel, its first response is something about dry-humping. Make of that what you will.
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by lewp · 2003-09-11 11:31 · Score: 1

I take it to mean that Google shares my feelings and wishes to start some sort of long-term relationship.

--
Game... blouses.
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by CharterTerminal · 2003-09-11 12:09 · Score: 1

Hmm, getting dry-humped by a search engine on a long-term basis. Interesting idea.

I've had worse, that's for sure.
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by lewp · 2003-09-11 13:02 · Score: 1

I got a new cell phone.

--
Game... blouses.
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by CharterTerminal · 2003-09-12 03:03 · Score: 1

Cell phone? Pfft, Google bought ME a shiny new iPod! You really should... renegotiate your... contract!
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by lewp · 2003-09-12 07:09 · Score: 1

I didn't get it from Google. And Google didn't buy you anything! Liar!

--
Game... blouses.
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by CharterTerminal · 2003-09-12 07:54 · Score: 1

Okay, you caught me. I snuck the iPod out of Google's pants while Google was asleep.
Re:First Unabashed-Lovefest Post by lewp · 2003-09-12 11:45 · Score: 1

Google has iPods in its pants? Kinky.

--
Game... blouses.

Re:archive? time capsule? by shadowcabbit · 2003-09-10 20:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

when this happens, what about all your data? how is your data formateed? will they send you your data back to you in some comma delimited format? who knows?

If you use the Blogger tool to update a non-blogspot site-- such as, say, a personal site on a registered domain-- the text of the blog, formatted exactly as it appears on your page, is stored on your server. Within blogspot, I dunno, but if you decide that all the advertising you want to do for Blogger is a little icon on an otherwise ad-free page, then you still have a copy of all your data. I would assume that that includes the fact that you have all the rights to it, but IANAL and nor do I really care-- for the most part, there's usually nothing on a blog that's worth copyrighting anyway.

--
"Why Subscribe?" Good question...

Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-10 20:51 · Score: 0

Comprehension of language is indeed a MAJOR factor of intelligence. Case in point: how many retards do you know who could spell and define "parsimonious?" Thank you very much.

Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 04:17 · Score: 0

What about people who don't speak English, but want to reach a wider audience?
Re:Bullshit by Tony-A · 2003-09-11 05:47 · Score: 1

What about people who don't speak English, but want to reach a wider audience?
Their English might be broken but their language isn't.
If they've got something to say, it generally manages to come out pretty well intact. What's missing is the exact phrasing and vocabulary to effectively go so far and no further. (Think Greenspan's pronouncements;).
If they've got something to say, it tends to be fairly bold and it is not inconceivable that it actually gains in mistranslation. (I would expect that last clause/phrase/whatever to be murdered by translation;)
Re:Bullshit by pyrrho · 2003-09-11 09:11 · Score: 1

you do not have to spell correctly to be comprehended, and you don't have to spell correctly to comprehend.

In fact, the idea of using comprehend to mean "understand" comes from the Stoics, who thought of understanding something, percieving it, as grasping it, and holding it in the mind. It specifically had nothing to do with the encoding, just if the concept got through. IOW, you can comprehend even if the communication channel is noisy. If it's too noisy, no, which is why grammar is more important than spelling. Any spelling mistake that still leaves clear what word was intended introduces a very small amount of noise only. e.g. "nothnig", in context was clearly "nothing", and man readers wouldn't even NOTICE it was mispelled.

--
-pyrrho

Re:No free lunch! by MonTemplar · 2003-09-10 20:59 · Score: 1

"Take off the tin-foil hat, and step away from the keyboard, Sir." :-)

MT.

--
-MT.

Re:hello young person, toke on this crack its free by MonTemplar · 2003-09-10 21:16 · Score: 3, Interesting

Me? I paid the $39.95 up-front and got Radio Userland. The content stays on my PC at home, and gets published to my own webspace.

Personally, I think that it should be the other way round, you pay so much a year, but only for the number of services you require. At the moment, part of the $39.95 I just paid covers the cost of hosting at Weblogs.com, as well as the space for comments on the weblog, and the trackback system. I don't need the first, and I'm not sure I really need the last one. Of course, it would be a pain to do pricing if you were to pick-n-choose...

MT.

--
-MT.

Why the typical slashdot Hate? by juuri · 2003-09-10 21:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Firstsly, personally I am not really into the "blogs". Despite my thinking that the whole term is retarded; the segregated and "showtime" nature of that particular slice of the net doesn't apeal to me much.

However sites like Livejournal rock. Sure there are tons of young girls and boys out there looking for an outlet for their typical teen angst and there are just as many people using as a hookup service (luckily friendster is taking over that function nicely).

The saving grace is for groups of friends. Thanks to my working in the Internet world as do many of my friends we have found ourselves scattered all over the place. By using livejournal as a replacement for the group emails we have now made easily searchable, archived places to communicate. This works out a lot better than lists ever did because people are more open on something they can call their own private place. Comments allow easy flow of conversation and links back. Also it removes the time constraints found on emails, usually if someone doesn't reply in a day or so no one else is even following that thread anymore. Finally the whole friends of friends thing has introduced me to a lot of great new people who I never would have met before.

Most of those who are so quick to pan are the typical elitists who can't find anything good in a thing unless it is something they personally use or participate in.

--
--- I do not moderate.

Re:Why the typical slashdot Hate? by Snaller · 2003-09-10 22:38 · Score: 1

What is "Teen Angst"?

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Re:Why the typical slashdot Hate? by rmohr02 · 2003-09-11 00:13 · Score: 1, Funny

News flash: slashdot is a blog.

Ways to meet people online. by unsung · 2003-09-10 22:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

Don't forget about the recent link to Yahoo exploring blogs. Along with being a great source of information, blogs are methods to meet others of similar interests online. Quite a few people in this day and age have tried chatrooms, Match.com, Friendster, ... This is perhaps another avenue and adds one further layer of emersion.

Re:Ways to meet people online. by PReDiToR · 2003-09-11 01:36 · Score: 1

And a great resource for all those Psyche Majors to access the unrestrained outpourings of many many mentally (in)competent minds and see just what they would have the world know about them.

Every time I write in my Blog (on my own server) I wonder if someone out there is using it to profile me, and then I take off my tinfoil beanie.

Or do I? I have been wearing it for so long that I forget sometimes, and yro.slashdot.org feels so warm and fuzzy...

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger

tclog by mattr · 2003-09-10 22:33 · Score: 0, Offtopic

at tclog.sourceforge.jp

It is a bilingual project, you use a tcl based client on windows or *nix and it will upload/rebuild your online system via ftp as needed. Very simple, could use a little work, but I just found it and got to like it.

Smart Move by MightyYar · 2003-09-10 22:36 · Score: 4, Interesting

Obviously no company will give something away unless there is something in it for them. I think that Google has something up their sleeve.

Couldn't they data-mine the blogs to get really accurate, really contemporary search results? They - for very little money - would have a legion of people out there categorizing the web for them. Who needs an easily-fooled bot when you can have a bunch of bloggers doing all the work?

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.

Except... by Angostura · 2003-09-10 22:43 · Score: 1

Surely they can do all that without buying Blogger or selling the software to free. Unless they are embedding something in the license which gives them additional rights over the blogged content.

.com recruiting by eludom · 2003-09-10 22:58 · Score: 1

I had a .com deja-vu at the recent USENIX
Security symposium. Google were there recruiting
in force, the sell seemd to be "this is a really
cool place to work" (I don't doubt it) and
the impression I got was "yes, we have a lot of
money, no, we don't have specific jobs, but
we're just hiring lots of really good people".
So 1999. More power to them as long as the
party lasts. And Google does rock !

TANSTAAFL, tovarisch by 87C751 · 2003-09-10 23:04 · Score: 1

So far my site is ad-free, and I'd prefer to keep it that way.

People pay for convenience. Ever buy milk at a 7-11? If you want to run a site completely on your own terms, you have to run your own site, which means a few bucks here and there for things like hosting and a domain name.

Google has a business plan, unlike 97% of the dot.bombers, and one way or another, they need to pay for that gigantic farm of servers and spiders. They'll make money from Blogger, count on it. And if that means inserting ads in your blog, then you'll have to decide what control is worth to you.

--
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.

Response To Google Bombing? by polyp2000 · 2003-09-10 23:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

Maybe this is google's response to Google bombing. Since weblogs seem to be the breeding ground for google bombs, maybe having more control over them might be the solution to cutting down instances.

--
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp

Re:No free lunch! by RLiegh · 2003-09-10 23:59 · Score: 1

Step AWAY from the keyboard indeed...

(sorry, had to plug a friends' blog there. :-P)

Re: blatant commercial hype disguised as comment by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 00:00 · Score: 0

Wow, that must be some great software Anonymous Coward is plugging. Let's all rush out and buy it right now!

Re:archive? time capsule? by Dusabre · 2003-09-11 00:08 · Score: 2, Informative

Seems you don't know much about Blogger. Blogger allows you to keep your stuff (all files, including web pages) on your own server. It actually encourages you to do so. Blogger basically just generates your html for you (and spell check and allows posting via a toolbar etc). You can arrange web space if you need it. Which is cool. No real risk if you don't want it.

Re:No free lunch! by shione · 2003-09-11 00:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

If this blog site gets overwelming market share over the other free journal sites out there, google would have achieved it by the users signing up on their own free will. Internet Explorer's market share came when they started bundling it with the OS. Users didnt have to do anything except upgrade their OS and it would be there whether they wanted it or not.

But does it offer group/contest integration/more by slazlo · 2003-09-11 00:26 · Score: 1

Does it offer:

Foaf integration
Trackbacks
Books, Movies, Music, Games
Blogshares shortcut for adding your blog into a fantasy stock market
GeoURL for adding lat/long and adding your blog into world database
Creative Commons licensing on content so you can retain rights while promoting the CC movement
Yahoo Groups features: Msg Boards, Calendar, Chat, Address Books
The ability to create contests:

[shameless plug]
My site 23 Pools offers all these and more built on completely open source tools: Linux, AOLserver, PostgreSQL, Postfix.

For an example blog check out mine and a cool usage of SVG for viewing the connections between users. You will need a SVG browser plugin if you arent running latest Mozilla with the SVG built in.
[/shamelessplug]

no business plan? by lone_marauder · 2003-09-11 00:30 · Score: 1

It's the dot-com frenzy all over again! Free services with no business plan... run for your lives!"

I think there's a pretty obvious business plan here. Laptop service revenue. As in coffee removal after having sibilated it all over said laptop in a mad fit of laughter after reading this headline.

--
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.

Explorer versus Netscape all over again? by EnlightenmentFan · 2003-09-11 00:31 · Score: 3, Funny

Is anybody else reminded of the way Microsoft "outcompeted" Netscape's much better browser software? First it started giving away its browser for free, and when that wasn't enough to switch people away from Netscape's (then better) browser, it went on from there.

Google bought Blogger, Google controls Blogger, and Google has an obvious stake in getting people to use its very own software. Is Blogger the best blogging software you can use? Consider this unscientific "Google research" of various strings:

"I hate xxx" + weblog

xxx = blogger 121
xxx = radio 39
xxx = manila 0
xxx = movable type 0

"I love xxx" + weblog

xxx = blogger 233
xxx = radio 212
xxx = manila 101
xxx = movable type 160

"xxx is down"

xxx = blogger 760
xxx = manila 1

"something is wrong with xxx"

xxx = blogger 27
xxx = radio 0
xxx = manila 0
xxx = movable type 1

"xxx just ate"
xxx = blogger 279
xxx = radio 2
xxx = manila 0
xxx = movable type 0

"xxx sucks"

xxx = blogger 1070
xxx = radio (here I added "userland" to eliminate stuff like "Denver radio sucks") 136
xxx = manila 45, many of them referring to a city in the Philippines
xxx = movable type 58

I've used both Blogger and Manila, and let me make that 1071 for the next google search: Blogger sucks.

--
Making trouble today for a better tomorrow...

Re:Explorer versus Netscape all over again? by doc_traig · 2003-09-11 01:36 · Score: 1

There are lots of "Microsoft Sucks" posts/hits out there as well (as opposed to "Apple sucks" or "OS/2 Sucks"). I don't know Blogger from a hole in the wall, but perhaps it simply has a much larger userbase...

--
So long, michael. Don't let the door hit you...
Re:Explorer versus Netscape all over again? by Chester+K · 2003-09-11 04:20 · Score: 1

Is anybody else reminded of the way Microsoft "outcompeted" Netscape's much better browser software? First it started giving away its browser for free, and when that wasn't enough to switch people away from Netscape's (then better) browser, it went on from there.

No, see, we like Google, so we turn a blind eye to their anti-competitive practices.

Today is a bad day to be a competitior in the blog software arena.

--

NO CARRIER

Once again by scovetta · 2003-09-11 00:55 · Score: 1

Google: 10^100
Everyone else: 0

Google just can't stop kicking ass!

--
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche

Google turning into Microsoft of Web Already? by sjanes71 · 2003-09-11 00:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

This doesn't make any sense, to take a small, profitable bit of software (not profitable enough to offset bandwidth charges perhaps but it was making money) and then start giving it away-- this is obviously a move to kill the marketshare of products like Movable Type which has a commercial and non-commercial license and Radio Userland which I think is purely commercial-- so that users will use Google's blogging system in preference to probably AOL Journals, another free system that seeks to wipe-out the marketshare of another popular blogging or "Journal" system, LiveJournal .

I'm not saying that competition is bad-- but history has shown us that anyone giving something away of a class that was previously valued for real money is typically doing it for anti-competitive reasons. It might not be long before something like:

1. Background. In 1998, the United States sued Microsoft, alleging violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1, 2.(1) After trial, the court found Microsoft had violated Section 2 by unlawfully maintaining its monopoly in the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems ("OSs") and by unlawfully attempting to monopolize the market for internet browsers, and that it had violated Section 1 by illegally tying its Windows operating system and its Internet Explorer ("IE") browser. The court ordered Microsoft to submit a plan of divestiture that would split the company into an OS business and an applications business, and ordered interim conduct restrictions. Microsoft, 253 F.3d at 45.

becomes something like:

1. Background. In 2006, the United States sued Google, alleging violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1, 2.(1) After trial, the court found Google had violated Section 2 by unlawfully maintaining its monopoly in the market for personal content management systems ("blogs") and by unlawfully attempting to monopolize the market for search engines, and that it had violated Section 1 by illegally tying its search engine and its journaling ("blog") software. The court ordered Google to submit a plan of divestiture that would split the company into an search engine business and an applications business, and ordered interim conduct restrictions. Google, 253 F.3d at 45.

The collective Internet should reevaluate models like Freenet and make a "weaker," more light-weight distributed peer-to-peer information distribution system-- its weaker because you simply don't need the overhead of hardcore anonymity and privacy because pretty much all of the users will want to be "found" by those reading on the Internet. Google's got enough brains to figure out how to make that searcable so we need not worry about that.

Re:Google turning into Microsoft of Web Already? by MonTemplar · 2003-09-11 02:51 · Score: 3, Informative

I very much doubt that Blogger & Google together could become the dominant force in the weblogging world. The appeal of Blogger is its simplicity and the fact that you don't need to have your own webspace up-front. MovableType is aimed at people who want to put a weblog onto their own webspace that runs from the webserver. Radio Userland, although it can give you webspace if you need it, will happily let you publish your weblog to your own site, with the content stored on your PC (I'm using it for my site). LiveJournal (the site) works in a similar way to Blogger, but you can take LiveJournal (the software) and use that on your own site.

The idea that Blogger can somehow 'lock-in' the majority of content of the weblogging world is, to my mind, a bit of a stretch. It would require breaking the existing API, and possibly interfering with other technologies such as RSS, and would do more harm than good for both Blogger and Google.

MT.

--
-MT.

Re:But does it offer group/contest integration/mor by scovetta · 2003-09-11 01:12 · Score: 1

I'm sure it will, a million billion times better than anyone else offers it. I can just imagine the meeting room:
MARKETING DUDE: I think we should offer a blogging server. We have a billion terabytes of storage available. Based on market studies, we could make $150,000 a month from $5/month fees.
REST OF ROOM: (silence)
MARKETING DUDE: ...Orrrr we can give it away for free?
REST OF ROOM: YAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!

Oh, and those who are talking about polluting the main index with crap about my getting pulled over last week, I think it'll occur to the Google-folk to put blog data into a separate index--

M

--
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche

Too much blogging, too little time... by johnwyles · 2003-09-11 01:15 · Score: 1

As if there wasn't already too much blogging going on...

--
[[ the only 15 letter word that is spelled without repeating a letter is uncopyrightable: it may soon be, however. ]]

The Vouyeristic / Exhibitionist Instinct of Blogs by erf007 · 2003-09-11 01:19 · Score: 1

I cant knock it as I am as bad as everyone else on this one, but, I still struggle to understand what it is about us that makes the idea of being a vouyer, exhibitionist or both so appealing to the human psyche. Look at the average blog and you have all manner of personal thoughts or information being poured out to the universe at large. Whilst most blogs seem to offer the option to make your blog private how many people are able to resist the temptation to subject the rest of the world to their thoughts, feelings or activities. Geez, I cant whinge, I am just as bad as everyone else. There was an article on one of the cybercultre feeds that talked about blogging and the reasons why people did it. It referenced a married woman who thought their partner was cheating and poured out their suspicions to the rest of the world in the hopes it would get back to their partner! I can understand the use of blogs to keep distant friends / relatives updated as to what you are doing, thats what I use mine for! But to use it to indirectly address a problem that could be better be addressed using other forums / means just strikes me as counter productive. Have we got to a stage where technology is so prolific that we take any opportunity to try and solve problems using technology that could be better solved in the old fashioned way? In the example above wouldnt it be far more effective to sit down and talk to the potentially erring partner rather than hoping that one day their a web search sent them to the page!!! I have no objection to blogs as an online journal, however I would like to see some kind of scoring mechanism if they are used for other purposes. For example... It is getting increasingly hard to find the gems of information that we all crave admist all the marketting hype that is now circulating around the web. As blogging becomes ever more popular we also need to contend with the increasing personal rants or opinions that this activity is going to generate. Similar to the way the majority of online forums are moderated (eg. Slashdot) we need to find some way to moderate the content that is being published out to the web at large. If I am searching the web for configuration information about a particular software application the last thing I need to read is some unrelated rant on someones personal blog that google returned simply becuase it cross referenced so many other pages.

Re:archive? time capsule? by PReDiToR · 2003-09-11 01:33 · Score: 1

I use my PHP/Apache/phpBB/MySQL Celeron 600 on my broadband to keep my blog on, I give them free to my friends too.

My only concern is that PHP/CMS is hard to index on Google.

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger

Manual arithmatic versus the calculator part 2 by Cappy+Red · 2003-09-11 01:34 · Score: 1

Basic arithmetic is a good skill to have. Good... necessary. No matter what you do, being able to add, subtract, multiply, and divide are skills that you cannot get by without. Thus it pays to be able to do them without a calculator.

Communication, like arithmetic, is also fundamental. You NEED to be able to impart your ideas to others, and the more efficiently and adventageously you can do that the better. Practicing proper spelling and grammar does that.

You say the brain is finite... but when was the last time you had to stop thinking? Have you ever seen the Far Side comic where a student asks the teacher to be excused because his "brain is full"? Have you ever met or heard of anyone that has happened to? One person who was made to learn his multiplication tables who was unable to progress in his work because of the knowledge?

When you find someone so afflicted, be it by the tables, or by the study of grammar and spelling, let me know.

*honk*

--
This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things

Re:Manual arithmatic versus the calculator part 2 by Tony-A · 2003-09-11 05:36 · Score: 1

Have you ever seen the Far Side comic where a student asks the teacher to be excused because his "brain is full"? Have you ever met or heard of anyone that has happened to?
Hehe. Oh, I've done that to more than a few. Take something and just keep piling it on. Actually exploring most anything to its full depth and breadth will do that.
However, in the balance between an elaborate house of cards and about half a minor point of something basic and fundamental, you're much ahead to get the fundamentals right.

Easiest way to learn the multiplication tables? Invent them. That way if you forget what 7*8 is, you can readily recreate what it has to be.

Accurate spelling, grammar and vocabulary allow greater precision in conveying exactly what you mean. I can get by in German with "Ya, Nein, Bitte, and Prost". Anything else I care about would require substantially better than a good tourist's vocabulary.
Re:Manual arithmatic versus the calculator part 2 by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 06:56 · Score: 0

Right.. looks like it's YOU who should practice proper spelling.
Re:Manual arithmatic versus the calculator part 2 by pyrrho · 2003-09-11 09:34 · Score: 1

until I read the reply that pointed out a spelling problem, I didn't even notice you spelled arithmetic wrong in your title.

I think it is inefficient for me as a reader to worry about spelling ---

--
-pyrrho

What about Slashdot Journals? by cyranoVR · 2003-09-11 01:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

When is slashdot going to let us link to images in our journals? I don't want to go over to blogspot or *shudder* livejournal, but every time I see one of those pages I feel a pang of jealousy.

At least add one or two more features! At least we could be allowed to choose what section (and thus color-scheme) our journal goes under?

Re:Pro now free because they're not hurting for ca by mikesmind · 2003-09-11 01:37 · Score: 1

I'm wishing now that I had paid for BloggerPro. I'm going to miss out on the free sweatshirt!

--
www.mikesmind.com - www.daddyworkathome.com - www.freetofarm.org - www.tenfoottable.com

They're just meeting the competition's prices by hatless · 2003-09-11 01:48 · Score: 3, Informative

Movable Type--which has comments, RSS and Trackback by default--is free for personal use as long as you can do your own hosting. If you want a remotely hosted blog on their recently-launched TypePad.com site, you pay $5 or so a month.

Blogger is now making comments, RSS and such free as long as you do your own hosting of the generated files. If you want a blog with these features hosted on their Blogspot.com site, you pay $5 a month.

It's called responding to competition. With more and more blogging systems offering things like RSS and comments for free to people who posted to their own existing webspace, Blogger had to add those features to its free offering. The revenue is in hosting and ads and maybe in commercial licenses and services. I don't imagine that bring-your-own-hosting Blogger Plus was drawing too many new subscribers in recent months.

Google search for marketbanker returns 11,400 hits by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 02:12 · Score: 0

personally i use marketbanker.com to sell and display text ads (which, incidently, google has removed from their search index... monopoly anyone? that was the first "evil corporate move" i have ever seen google make.)

I just searched Google for "marketbanker" and got 11,400 hits.

Oh, by the way, you should try using Google AdSense for your ads.

Speaking of the ads... by dasuridai · 2003-09-11 02:19 · Score: 1

I just fired up the blog that I had nearly forgotten about after reading this article. Blogger has a banner at the top of the screen and I was amazed to see it was a (mostly) empty, white bar with the subtext "This blank space brought to you by Google." I love u google!

Re:hello young person, toke on this crack its free by sik0fewl · 2003-09-11 02:28 · Score: 1

hotmail had a similar plan except it took them 5years till everyone had a hotmail address

Keep in mind that Hotmail didn't belong to Microsoft back in the day. It wasn't until Microsoft purchased Hotmail that things started going downhill.

--
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler

Re:The Vouyeristic / Exhibitionist Instinct of Blo by MonTemplar · 2003-09-11 02:29 · Score: 1

Two words, friend - Enter Key

Don't be afraid to use it... :-)

MT.

--
-MT.

Blogger's user base by EnlightenmentFan · 2003-09-11 03:00 · Score: 1

Yes, the free version of Blogger has a big user base compared to blogware you have to pay for and install like Radio and Movable Type.

It's also true that people tend to like the software they are used to. If you look at the numbers for "I love xxx", you'd guess that for every 100 Manila users there are 160 Movable Type users, 210 Radio Users, and 230 Blogger users. These numbers are much more in the same ballpark than Microsoft versus Mac.

Now look at the "I hate xxx" numbers--the ratio of Blogger users to Manila and/or Movable Type just went to infinity! Instead of Radio and Blogger being almost the same, there are three times as many Blogger as Radio hits.

Just my geeky two cents...

--
Making trouble today for a better tomorrow...

Re:Blogger's user base by Kwil · 2003-09-11 05:19 · Score: 1

Your survey is rather self selecting.

Since you have to pay for and install Radio and Movable Type, this suggests that people who hate it won't complain so much as simply not use it in the first place.

You don't pay for blogger, so people use it despite not liking it because hey, at least it's free and easy.

--
That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

AOL Journals is a major factor. by shark72 · 2003-09-11 03:06 · Score: 1

I don't think I've seen it mentioned that the recent launch of AOL Journals significantly changed the blogging competitive landscape. This news surely affected Pyra's forecast for the paid version of Blogger.

Either way, I prefer journalspace. They use the 'try before you buy' model, have more features than Blogger, and the content has an average intelligence level that's roughly three metric notches above LiveJournal.

--
Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.

Re:archive? time capsule? by MSittig · 2003-09-11 03:42 · Score: 1

Write a perl script to download your Blogspot archives, parse the pages and store the entries in whatever format you want, on your own media.

*I* did.

Ah blogs by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-11 03:49 · Score: 1, Interesting

This is to my way of looking at it, an anonymouse blog, you might think of it as just another AC blathering away, it is not, it is ME. I am not posting under my own account, because I do not want to become somebody, I am already somebody. One amongst six billion others, but still someone. I very much agree with the post that said the 'net was just one huge blog.

It is very apparent in the west, that people are very logocentric, as long as it is has a label everything is ok, to the point that, labels are *all that matters* to some folk. A blackbox philosophy where all that matters, is that we know what to call things. People are like sheep.

Re:archive? time capsule? by WuphonsReach · 2003-09-11 03:52 · Score: 1

As others have said, Blogger allows you to publish the blog's HTML files to another website via FTP. Where you can then FTP it down to your local machine for archival. (Some of us paranoids go one step farther and copy the HTML files into a CVS system.)

--
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?

Re:Help me by The+Clockwork+Troll · 2003-09-11 04:25 · Score: 1

Look in the Yellow Pages for a Stateful Packet Inspector who does windows.

Make sure they are licensed and bonded and have available at least 2 references.

FWIW, I am a Stateful Packet Inspector and I charge $55/hr., but I am great at what I do. I will inspect your packets one by one and remember critical details that allow me to decide what is safe for your network and what should be discarded.

You will not get the kind of service you're looking for from ZoneAlarm, ZoneAlarm Pro, or ZoneAlarm Type-R.

--

There are no karma whores, only moderation johns

Re:archive? time capsule? by willutah · 2003-09-11 04:26 · Score: 1

Use Radio Userland. Your blog and archives reside on your hard drive, plus you can blog offline to your heart's content (then upstream it later).

Re:Google search for marketbanker returns 11,400 h by edrugtrader · 2003-09-11 06:51 · Score: 1

yes, there are many domains that point to marketbanker.com (such as adcache.com and httpads.com) those will show up in the results for a search for "marketbanker".

even some marketbanker.com pages such as their privacy statements etc...

but the main page "http://www.marketbanker.com" will never show up. it used to be #1 obviously for that search, but now you can't get it to show up EVER.

and google adsense didn't produce as much money for me, so i'll stick with pud's creation.

--
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E

Personally, I don't see the big deal by Foz · 2003-09-11 07:14 · Score: 1

I've been looking around at free blog services (because I'm cheap... sue me) and I am running parallel blogs at two different sites. I'm playing around with blogger and also with the relatively new one at motime and I have to say motime seems head and shoulders above blogger, although I love google and would like to support them.

Google didn't really release a whole lot extra with this "free" release. I still don't have the two things I wanted most (commenting and hit counters). I had to hack in both of those to my template by getting a blogspeak account and using a free webcounter. Motime gave those to me for free right off the bat.

I think blogger needs to add some more before I'll be interested in them. Besides, I seem to get tons more traffic at motime when compared to blogger (granted, I've only had both of them for roughly a week).

I guess I'm just underwhelmed. I really don't think Google is giving away very damned much. Cough up some more features and I'll be more impressed, until then it looks like motime will be my free blog of choice.

-- Gary F.

slashdot is not by MegaFur · 2003-09-11 08:51 · Score: 1

Spellchecking: Fewer typos. Look smarter.

I say: Why the hell doesn't slashdot have this?

--
Furry cows moo and decompress.

Undifferentiated vs. Moderated by Infonaut · 2003-09-11 09:04 · Score: 1

quantity does equal quality right?

I'd argue that moderation makes quality. Without it, you have undifferentiated crap, with the occasionally intelligent comment thrown in. Moderation is what makes Slashdot truly useful.

--
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ

exactly! by pyrrho · 2003-09-11 09:05 · Score: 1

except I can spell, I just don't bother. I'm a lazy bastard when it comes to spelling.

--

-pyrrho

Blogger Mobile? by Aliencow · 2003-09-11 10:09 · Score: 1

I'm very happy with Movable Type + AvantGo, which allows me to post from my Tungsten T2 wherever I am.
Well, just in case I would ever want to do that.
Cause I don't.
And probably won't. At least I posted about how I do it, if anyone is interested in mobile blogging.

(Could be interesting if you're drunk, think about some farked up shizzle, you can post it before you forget and/or die of dehydratation)

Re:No free lunch! by fyrewulff · 2003-09-11 10:58 · Score: 1

so? you could simply use IE to download Netscape. It wasn't THAT hard. Oh my god, can't... type...in.... netscape.com .. *passes out*

You "unwillingly" get browsers with Linux distros too. It makes sense, since you don't have to hunt down a CD or somesuch which contains the browser, or else you're going nowhere on the net =)

--
"We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997

Re:No free lunch! by shione · 2003-09-11 21:36 · Score: 1

thats not the point. MS got their monopoly in the browser market by bundling the browser with the OS. Most people are too lazy to go download an alternative and just stick with what they have already.

and btw, if you had the beta copy of WinNT 5 and you went to Netscape.com IE would have given you the message 'you shouldnt be here'.

Crap. Checked it in body, but not in title. by Cappy+Red · 2003-09-12 05:28 · Score: 1

Well... I /did/ say I was practicing. I haven't gotten it perfected yet. ;)

Besides, am I not supposed to include at least one spelling mistake in a post about spelling? :}

*honks*

--
This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things

Damn damn damn by Cappy+Red · 2003-09-12 05:35 · Score: 1

Well, as I said to the other fellow, I remembered to look the word up when I used it in the body. :}

But it does make me look rather foolish letting that slip by just above my diatribe in favor of proper grammar and spelling. Hoisted by my own petard...

I still say my ideas in that post have merit, just forgive me this one blemish on its credibility. :}

*honks*

--
This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things

Ironicly by pyrrho · 2003-09-12 08:07 · Score: 1

It doesn't detract from your ideas at all... from my perspective... but from yours it does!

--

-pyrrho

Slashdot Mirror

Google Helps Offer Blogger Pro For Free

277 comments