But you don't have to re-think the original papers thesis, researched sources, supporting arguments and conclusion. Without doing some of that legwork on your own, no matter how you reword it, you are still plagiarizing.
I could be wrong. This may not be working as described as of the latest updates. The "don't post to my profile" option is there, but not the "who can see tags of me".
I have mine set so that i'm the only one who can see tags of me. So, people can tag me, but no one else sees it. That's even better than not allowing tagging, because the tagger doesn't have to know it's useless, and you will still get emails when they tag you, so you can stay on top of things.
I'm sure that after a few years in this world, their finger tips are not blemish free. So long as they leave behind at least a trace of oil, I'd argue that these fingerprints, being much more unique, would actually make the person easier to identify.
Maybe Search needs a Problem shake up. Innovation is great, but when I search now, more than ever, I quickly find what I am looking for. Spam results remain an issue, but for the most part, I have what I need in seconds.
So, what's the problem? Why does search need a shake up? Do we need to manufacture new problems? The drinking straw has been around for a little over 100 years. Get creative beverage engineers, make a better straw. One that doesn't suck.... Oh.
I understand that the piece is admittedly supposed to be provocative and start a dialog. So, what search problems do you have today? Is the fact that most search is text based something to overcome? Is there a frontier of a search engine that helps us ask better questions? How about analytical engines like wolfram alpha? Where can these technologies go? What else IS there that we need?
No. Not 35% of consumers. 35% of people who filled out the survey. There is no qualification of the sample in the article. Who knows how they were chosen?
35% seems shockingly high. Shockingly convenient for a who-the-heck-are-you website that could really get attention.
Since when is a marketing tactic the same as a business model?
No. That is not a viable business model. It is, however a viable marketing ploy if the cost of sending the message is less than the benefit received having sent it, which is likely given the low cost of email marketing (leaving room, of course for knowing how much that email list cost).
I'll get riled up when I see Facebook ban a legitimate Google+ ad. I don't doubt they would, but I don't see evidence that the ban is because it's for Google+. Suppose I put an ad on Facebook that says, "Hey everyone, Friend me on Facebook!". I have a feeling it might get the same treatment.
Instead of banning incandescent bulbs because they are inefficient, why not simply ban inefficient bulbs? If incandescent bulbs can be made more efficient, it'd be silly to have to repeal or modify a law later.
I bought a 15 dollar cable at Micro Center. It didn't work very well. This isn't because of the conductivity of the metal, it just had poorly manufactured connections, I think. Because it worked sometimes, I thought there was a laptop -> tv issue for a while. I would have saved a bit of grief with a better quality cable.
That's not to say the cables are not over priced. I think my CHEAP cable was still over priced. So long as the retail in the story is selling a quality cable, good! It really is a scam.
And everyone hated when email caused us to stop sending hand written typed letters. And everyone hated when typewriters caused us to stop sending hand written letters. And everyone hated when the postal service and carrier pigeons stopped us from visiting. And everyone hated when visiting stopped us from sharing a cave. And everyone hated when cave sharing stopped us from... cave-hogging?
I hope it's not just me, but I'm sick of seeing this trend of "list" articles on the web in the Cracked Magazine style. I cannot put my finger on it, but it comes off as litter to me. It's a cheap way to grab attention and generate page views by leading the reader through a slide show of bulleted items.
>> has the appearance of a cover up or a smear against china, in the eyes of your average idiot reading this post who's knows nothing about tiananmen square
Or to be fair, in the eyes of the intellegent reader who happens to not know the details of what is referred to as the Tiananmen Square Massacre.
Don't be so dramatic. Not everyone knows everything and we all take accounts of some events for granted. You rant has some good points, but my eyes glazed over at your egotistical attitude. You've got something to contribute, clearly. Why not let people take you more seriously?
I agree. I assume it's because it is difficult to prove. I don't see how it couldn't be done if there were pressure on our law makers to all it, though. I guess the pressure just isn't there.
I've tried sending nasty-grams to the sellers. For me it was a dead end. But I'm just a dude.
Should be, but it just doesn't go over well. I tried that with SoCuteUrl and got a number of emails asking to change it back. I do allow users to set a cookie so that they always go to preview first, but most people don't know it exists.
One additional benefit this practice could have, though, is to make it harder for people to use the service for SEO, since it would not resolve to the spammy page.
Yeah. I actually enjoy getting cheesed. As a lower-tier player, I find it to be a good exercise. Instead of getting mad, I change gears. My "success" metrics turns into "thwart the cheese". Even if I lose the match in the end, I have gotten some good practice in.
Slashdot Mirror
But you don't have to re-think the original papers thesis, researched sources, supporting arguments and conclusion. Without doing some of that legwork on your own, no matter how you reword it, you are still plagiarizing.
Then, I guess there was nothing to sully in the first place. Move along.
I could be wrong. This may not be working as described as of the latest updates. The "don't post to my profile" option is there, but not the "who can see tags of me".
I have mine set so that i'm the only one who can see tags of me. So, people can tag me, but no one else sees it. That's even better than not allowing tagging, because the tagger doesn't have to know it's useless, and you will still get emails when they tag you, so you can stay on top of things.
That option looks to still be there.
>> What's wrong with saying 4 deciliters?
Because, some of us learn to drink before we learn to count or even talk. We want to express our concern for that beer as efficiently as possible.
I'm sure that after a few years in this world, their finger tips are not blemish free. So long as they leave behind at least a trace of oil, I'd argue that these fingerprints, being much more unique, would actually make the person easier to identify.
Maybe Search needs a Problem shake up. Innovation is great, but when I search now, more than ever, I quickly find what I am looking for. Spam results remain an issue, but for the most part, I have what I need in seconds.
So, what's the problem? Why does search need a shake up? Do we need to manufacture new problems? The drinking straw has been around for a little over 100 years. Get creative beverage engineers, make a better straw. One that doesn't suck. ... Oh.
I understand that the piece is admittedly supposed to be provocative and start a dialog. So, what search problems do you have today? Is the fact that most search is text based something to overcome? Is there a frontier of a search engine that helps us ask better questions? How about analytical engines like wolfram alpha? Where can these technologies go? What else IS there that we need?
No. Not that high for apple fans. This was sort of my point. The title made it seem as if it were 35% of all consumers. Shocking and misleading.
It's been working for the comic books themselves for the past 70 years, so I guess the movies are sort of being faithful in this respect.
No. Not 35% of consumers. 35% of people who filled out the survey. There is no qualification of the sample in the article. Who knows how they were chosen?
35% seems shockingly high. Shockingly convenient for a who-the-heck-are-you website that could really get attention.
Since when is a marketing tactic the same as a business model?
No. That is not a viable business model. It is, however a viable marketing ploy if the cost of sending the message is less than the benefit received having sent it, which is likely given the low cost of email marketing (leaving room, of course for knowing how much that email list cost).
I'll get riled up when I see Facebook ban a legitimate Google+ ad. I don't doubt they would, but I don't see evidence that the ban is because it's for Google+. Suppose I put an ad on Facebook that says, "Hey everyone, Friend me on Facebook!". I have a feeling it might get the same treatment.
Instead of banning incandescent bulbs because they are inefficient, why not simply ban inefficient bulbs? If incandescent bulbs can be made more efficient, it'd be silly to have to repeal or modify a law later.
I bought a 15 dollar cable at Micro Center. It didn't work very well. This isn't because of the conductivity of the metal, it just had poorly manufactured connections, I think. Because it worked sometimes, I thought there was a laptop -> tv issue for a while. I would have saved a bit of grief with a better quality cable.
That's not to say the cables are not over priced. I think my CHEAP cable was still over priced. So long as the retail in the story is selling a quality cable, good! It really is a scam.
And everyone hated when email caused us to stop sending hand written typed letters.
And everyone hated when typewriters caused us to stop sending hand written letters.
And everyone hated when the postal service and carrier pigeons stopped us from visiting.
And everyone hated when visiting stopped us from sharing a cave.
And everyone hated when cave sharing stopped us from... cave-hogging?
Damn technology. Gimme back my cave.
I hope it's not just me, but I'm sick of seeing this trend of "list" articles on the web in the Cracked Magazine style. I cannot put my finger on it, but it comes off as litter to me. It's a cheap way to grab attention and generate page views by leading the reader through a slide show of bulleted items.
>> has the appearance of a cover up or a smear against china, in the eyes of your average idiot reading this post who's knows nothing about tiananmen square
Or to be fair, in the eyes of the intellegent reader who happens to not know the details of what is referred to as the Tiananmen Square Massacre.
Don't be so dramatic. Not everyone knows everything and we all take accounts of some events for granted. You rant has some good points, but my eyes glazed over at your egotistical attitude. You've got something to contribute, clearly. Why not let people take you more seriously?
Midway? So wouldn't that make it a pinball machine?
Only outlaws will incorrectly predict earthquakes.
That missing mass is called "the Freshman 15", Doll.
I agree. I assume it's because it is difficult to prove. I don't see how it couldn't be done if there were pressure on our law makers to all it, though. I guess the pressure just isn't there.
I've tried sending nasty-grams to the sellers. For me it was a dead end. But I'm just a dude.
If it's virtually free to bother 100,000 people to make one sale, it's beneficial to a spammer.
Should be, but it just doesn't go over well. I tried that with SoCuteUrl and got a number of emails asking to change it back. I do allow users to set a cookie so that they always go to preview first, but most people don't know it exists.
One additional benefit this practice could have, though, is to make it harder for people to use the service for SEO, since it would not resolve to the spammy page.
Ouch.
Yeah. I actually enjoy getting cheesed. As a lower-tier player, I find it to be a good exercise. Instead of getting mad, I change gears. My "success" metrics turns into "thwart the cheese". Even if I lose the match in the end, I have gotten some good practice in.