Re:I wish I could make that much moola....
on
Yahoo buys Flickr
·
· Score: 1
While I completely agree with you, I think you're missing out on a rather key element of their success.
Blogosphere support
Yes, I know uttering the word "blogosphere" is going to make many people deeply, deeply irritated (and perhaps with good reason), but I don't think Flickr (and Ludicorp) would be anywhere as successful without the frequent linking and press from popular blogs like these:
Kottke.org
BoingBoing
Stop Design
Adaptive Path's Blog
The founder's of Six Apart
etc...
It's kind of like Google, several years ago. Yes, Google was the best at what it was, but it also had an intagible "it" factor, and that was fueled more by word of mouth than by anything else.
One of the more interesting overviews of wikipedia, and wikis in general - something that you can send to someone non-tech-savvy who doesn't really understand the idea of a collaborative web page - can be found here:
Basically, shows how the "Heavy Metal Umlaut" (heh) page at wikipedia has evolved over some time. Interesting stuff. Note: This is a flash movie, although when it comes up, if your browser window isn't tall enough, it'll probably just look like a web page. Scroll down for the play/stop/back controls.
Re:Just to make sure we're all clear...
on
Juiced
·
· Score: 1
I agree with you, but the trouble is that customers only have a finite amount of money. So, if you have limited resources, and you have to choose between Half-Life 2 or Doom 3, and something independent, you're more likely to go with the known property, even if it isn't as creative (or even as good).
Gone are the days when smaller companies - those that create the games for the love of creating games - could compete with funded games from major studios on the same level.
Re:Just to make sure we're all clear...
on
Juiced
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Hehe...I don't want to give the impression that I completely disagree with you, because you're right - CSS is a funky monkey. I imagine that it's the titles of these declarations that are as disconcerting as anything: I imagine I know _exactly_ how they came up with the idea for inline-block:
---
"Well, we've got display: block. That's great. Everything get's a line. Displayed at the block level. Set widths. great."
"Well crap, what if I don't want the item to take up a whole line? What about span's and em's?"
"Well then, those are inline elements."
"Oh no! What about those situations when I really want elements to be inline - I don't want to have to worry about floating and clearing and wrapping - but I want to give them a width?!"
"Hmmm...crap. I know! inline-block!"
---
Have you ever written decent code, and then had to add onto it, and then add onto again? Pretty soon, without a lot of forethought and planning, the code becomes increasingly less decent. At the end, you're either implementing hacks to solve problems, or you're re-writing everything. Obviously, CSS can't be completely re-written at this point, so it gets style attributes that seem hacked up. The problem isn't that there's no need for inline-block, it's that the name of the style makes it obvious that it was added to the CSS model, rather than planned for from the beginning.
Now some snarky SOB's going to come and tell me how wrong I am.:-)
Why would anybody want to use display: inline-block. The article I link to says "The real use of this value is when you want to give an inline element a width. In some circumstances some browsers don't allow a width on a real inline element, but if you switch to display: inline-block you are allowed to set a width." How many times are people going to run into a situation to need this?
*snip*
For a long time I've been trying to get a list that will appear like a table. You can make a list set them to display as inline. It works, but then you can not set a width, which then makes it useless.
I find it funny that the example you used to document CSS's failings is solved by a modification that you profess nobody needs.
When I first read the article blurb, I thought it meant Google was announcing some sort of source code repository, like SourceForge. Instead, it's a listing of their various open source projects.
That's cool, certainly, but nothing terribly exciting. Isn't this stuff that's already been floating around on the Google website? Or is this a quick-and-dirty attempt to match developer.yahoo.com, which still looks to be more capable.
"Then there was the Nintendo keynote. This was the company who established the business model that has crucified the industry today.. Iwata-san has the heart of a gamer, and my question is what poor bastard's chest did he carve it from?"
Lastly, I just want to say that there are a small number of people who take their "news" from Johns show. They take what he says as fact. Most are younger (18-25) year olds[...]. Yes they are ignorant of the fact that he follows another "satire" show, because they don't watch that other show. They tune in to his show and take it as news.
I know - isn't that ridiculous? Heh, I only wish that someone could do some research into the viewers of the Daily Show, just to see how ignorant they are.
Kerry was presidential. Bush was not. What does that mean? Well, it means he didn't stammer through questions; he didn't look like a deer caught in headlights; he didn't lose his place while speaking; and he didn't get caught looking petulant, irritated or just unsure while he wasn't speaking - no, that honor belonged to Bush tonight.
I mean...come on. Kerry is so far above Bush on matters of foreign policy that it's just laughable - and this debate underscored that. But even moreso, it made that obvious without making Kerry look like a long-winded douchebag. That's a pretty impressive feat.
On another note, I'm glad we went to Iraq. I think if you aren't, you would be the sort to stand by a watch while somebody was being mugged, raped, assaulted, etc. But that's my opinion.
Well, that's not exactly a terribly accurate analogy. What about this - what if we stood by while somebody was being assaulted, and then it happened again, and we stood by, and then it happened a third time, and again...until one day, the victim happened to have a lot of money, and the aggressor fought with your dad. That's not acting out of a sense of duty; that's acting out of a sense of opportunity.
I want to know each candidate's views on guns. I want to know each candidate's views on gay marriage. I want to know each candidates views on abortion, illegal immigration, patents, copyrights, taxes, our economy, healthcare, and so on.
Well maybe you should wait for the domestic policy debate; this was the foreign policy debate.
I can't wait to ask them what they think of Kerry's comment. Most of them already think Kerry is a dork, and after tonight, I'd tend to agree with them.
Bah. After you chat with them, if any of them have any medals, you'd better make sure they didn't award them to themselves.
Oh yeah...because God knows you're above such invective.
Re:low unemployment compared to europe
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
Better suggestion: If you think Bush is the better man for the job between the candidates on the ballot, vote for him. If you think Kerry is a better choice, vote for him. Shocking, I know, but I'm a rebel.
And how, praytell, would we ascertain whether Bush is the better candidate on the ballot? If only we had some guideline, some benchmark, some way that we could really determine whether this was the case. If only Bush had already shown his capability, during, perhaps, the last four years...
Oh wait. He did.
And it was dismal.
Of course this is a referendum on whether Bush (the incumbent) is a capable president - that is the case with every mid-term election! Just because Kerry is untested does not make him invalid; Bush's complete incompetence and disturbing lack of credibility on any issue whatsoever makes him a less desirable candidate.
I find it amusing that you found a way to remark, of the grandparent poster, that "there are people out there with a dumber approach to casting their vote, but I'm damned if I know any," when, if we compare your reply with his initial statement, there are really no differences. Allow me to demonstrate. His response is regular, while yours is in bold:
If you are better off, if your country is better off, if you think Bush is the better man for the job between the candidates on the ballot, then vote for Bush. Otherwise, if you think Kerry is a better choice, vote for him.
Heh, when juxtaposed, your statements are exactly the same. Yet, you're "damned" if you know anyone with a "dumber approach to casting their vote." Curious, that.
they are registered Democraps (yes, demo-craps, because the democrat party is a bunch of CRAP!)
Aah, political discourse in 2004.
You'd better be careful. Right now you're a far more effective and damning indictment of our educational system than a Kerry campaign commercial could ever hope to be. (Yes, indictment, because I'm saying u r teh SHEEP!)
I had proposed something like this to maintain the sunflower design - which I believe to be one of the most unique electronic designs of the decade.
And you were rightly chastized on MacRumors.com...because of the idea that people should add water (?) to the base of their sunflower iMac is just bizarre.
Look, I can't say enough good things about the new iMac. Somehow, they managed to shoehorn a 1.8Ghz G5 in there, allow you to add up to 2gigs of RAM, give you a serial ATA hard drive and a 20 inch screen, while making it user-serviceable (for the most part) and hovering around 2 inches thick (for the 20inch model.) That is amazing.
Furthermore, when this thing starts selling like crazy (which it will, look at that price), there will be more wall mounts and sunflower-style arms that one might have believed possible in such a limited market. I imagine they will probably even get a better graphics card in there, at some point (Don't think so? ATI just announced a 128mb card, the Radeon 9200, for PCI PowerMacs...these are systems that stopped shipping 5 years ago.)
Slashdot Mirror
Blogosphere support
Yes, I know uttering the word "blogosphere" is going to make many people deeply, deeply irritated (and perhaps with good reason), but I don't think Flickr (and Ludicorp) would be anywhere as successful without the frequent linking and press from popular blogs like these:
It's kind of like Google, several years ago. Yes, Google was the best at what it was, but it also had an intagible "it" factor, and that was fueled more by word of mouth than by anything else.
One of the more interesting overviews of wikipedia, and wikis in general - something that you can send to someone non-tech-savvy who doesn't really understand the idea of a collaborative web page - can be found here:
l
http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/gems/umlaut.htm
Basically, shows how the "Heavy Metal Umlaut" (heh) page at wikipedia has evolved over some time. Interesting stuff. Note: This is a flash movie, although when it comes up, if your browser window isn't tall enough, it'll probably just look like a web page. Scroll down for the play/stop/back controls.
EA Presents...
Oblong Projectile Carry-And-Toss!
Starring everyone's favorite player...Gritty Ruffian
I agree with you, but the trouble is that customers only have a finite amount of money. So, if you have limited resources, and you have to choose between Half-Life 2 or Doom 3, and something independent, you're more likely to go with the known property, even if it isn't as creative (or even as good).
Gone are the days when smaller companies - those that create the games for the love of creating games - could compete with funded games from major studios on the same level.
Yeah. I think it's made by Electronic Arts.
Hehe...I don't want to give the impression that I completely disagree with you, because you're right - CSS is a funky monkey. I imagine that it's the titles of these declarations that are as disconcerting as anything: I imagine I know _exactly_ how they came up with the idea for inline-block:
:-)
---
"Well, we've got display: block. That's great. Everything get's a line. Displayed at the block level. Set widths. great."
"Well crap, what if I don't want the item to take up a whole line? What about span's and em's?"
"Well then, those are inline elements."
"Oh no! What about those situations when I really want elements to be inline - I don't want to have to worry about floating and clearing and wrapping - but I want to give them a width?!"
"Hmmm...crap. I know! inline-block!"
---
Have you ever written decent code, and then had to add onto it, and then add onto again? Pretty soon, without a lot of forethought and planning, the code becomes increasingly less decent. At the end, you're either implementing hacks to solve problems, or you're re-writing everything. Obviously, CSS can't be completely re-written at this point, so it gets style attributes that seem hacked up. The problem isn't that there's no need for inline-block, it's that the name of the style makes it obvious that it was added to the CSS model, rather than planned for from the beginning.
Now some snarky SOB's going to come and tell me how wrong I am.
Why would anybody want to use display: inline-block. The article I link to says "The real use of this value is when you want to give an inline element a width. In some circumstances some browsers don't allow a width on a real inline element, but if you switch to display: inline-block you are allowed to set a width." How many times are people going to run into a situation to need this?
*snip*
For a long time I've been trying to get a list that will appear like a table. You can make a list set them to display as inline. It works, but then you can not set a width, which then makes it useless.
I find it funny that the example you used to document CSS's failings is solved by a modification that you profess nobody needs.
When I first read the article blurb, I thought it meant Google was announcing some sort of source code repository, like SourceForge. Instead, it's a listing of their various open source projects.
That's cool, certainly, but nothing terribly exciting. Isn't this stuff that's already been floating around on the Google website? Or is this a quick-and-dirty attempt to match developer.yahoo.com, which still looks to be more capable.
"Then there was the Nintendo keynote. This was the company who established the business model that has crucified the industry today.. Iwata-san has the heart of a gamer, and my question is what poor bastard's chest did he carve it from?"
Technically, that was last year. This year they're too busy calling people stupid assholes.
Yeah. How dare they get utility and enjoyment out of something they've purchased. Assholes!
That would be pretty awesome - plug the ipod into the projector, and you've got something that doubles as a remote, and a second viewing space.
where, in order to get the Xbox 2, you had to trade in your current system.
Thanks for the clarification. Without it, we might not have gotten the hilarious joke.
Me fail English?! That's unpossible!
Hmm, that's strange - it's an instanced store, so you shouldn't meet any other players looking for WoW.
Oh wait..
Lastly, I just want to say that there are a small number of people who take their "news" from Johns show. They take what he says as fact. Most are younger (18-25) year olds[...]. Yes they are ignorant of the fact that he follows another "satire" show, because they don't watch that other show. They tune in to his show and take it as news.
I know - isn't that ridiculous? Heh, I only wish that someone could do some research into the viewers of the Daily Show, just to see how ignorant they are.
Check it out.
A lot more than just Netscape in there. Very, very fascinating.
Kerry was presidential. Bush was not. What does that mean? Well, it means he didn't stammer through questions; he didn't look like a deer caught in headlights; he didn't lose his place while speaking; and he didn't get caught looking petulant, irritated or just unsure while he wasn't speaking - no, that honor belonged to Bush tonight.
I mean...come on. Kerry is so far above Bush on matters of foreign policy that it's just laughable - and this debate underscored that. But even moreso, it made that obvious without making Kerry look like a long-winded douchebag. That's a pretty impressive feat.
On another note, I'm glad we went to Iraq. I think if you aren't, you would be the sort to stand by a watch while somebody was being mugged, raped, assaulted, etc. But that's my opinion.
Well, that's not exactly a terribly accurate analogy. What about this - what if we stood by while somebody was being assaulted, and then it happened again, and we stood by, and then it happened a third time, and again...until one day, the victim happened to have a lot of money, and the aggressor fought with your dad. That's not acting out of a sense of duty; that's acting out of a sense of opportunity.
I want to know each candidate's views on guns. I want to know each candidate's views on gay marriage. I want to know each candidates views on abortion, illegal immigration, patents, copyrights, taxes, our economy, healthcare, and so on.
Well maybe you should wait for the domestic policy debate; this was the foreign policy debate.
I can't wait to ask them what they think of Kerry's comment. Most of them already think Kerry is a dork, and after tonight, I'd tend to agree with them.
Bah. After you chat with them, if any of them have any medals, you'd better make sure they didn't award them to themselves.
Oh yeah...because God knows you're above such invective.
And how, praytell, would we ascertain whether Bush is the better candidate on the ballot? If only we had some guideline, some benchmark, some way that we could really determine whether this was the case. If only Bush had already shown his capability, during, perhaps, the last four years...
Oh wait. He did.
And it was dismal.
Of course this is a referendum on whether Bush (the incumbent) is a capable president - that is the case with every mid-term election! Just because Kerry is untested does not make him invalid; Bush's complete incompetence and disturbing lack of credibility on any issue whatsoever makes him a less desirable candidate.
I find it amusing that you found a way to remark, of the grandparent poster, that "there are people out there with a dumber approach to casting their vote, but I'm damned if I know any," when, if we compare your reply with his initial statement, there are really no differences. Allow me to demonstrate. His response is regular, while yours is in bold:
If you are better off, if your country is better off, if you think Bush is the better man for the job between the candidates on the ballot, then vote for Bush. Otherwise, if you think Kerry is a better choice, vote for him.
Heh, when juxtaposed, your statements are exactly the same. Yet, you're "damned" if you know anyone with a "dumber approach to casting their vote." Curious, that.
Because you think Kerry will do better? Kerry isn't going to pull troops out of Iraq, you know.
Yes, but he wouldn't have put them there in the first place.
they are registered Democraps (yes, demo-craps, because the democrat party is a bunch of CRAP!)
Aah, political discourse in 2004.
You'd better be careful. Right now you're a far more effective and damning indictment of our educational system than a Kerry campaign commercial could ever hope to be. (Yes, indictment, because I'm saying u r teh SHEEP!)
I had proposed something like this to maintain the sunflower design - which I believe to be one of the most unique electronic designs of the decade.
And you were rightly chastized on MacRumors.com...because of the idea that people should add water (?) to the base of their sunflower iMac is just bizarre.
Look, I can't say enough good things about the new iMac. Somehow, they managed to shoehorn a 1.8Ghz G5 in there, allow you to add up to 2gigs of RAM, give you a serial ATA hard drive and a 20 inch screen, while making it user-serviceable (for the most part) and hovering around 2 inches thick (for the 20inch model.) That is amazing.
Furthermore, when this thing starts selling like crazy (which it will, look at that price), there will be more wall mounts and sunflower-style arms that one might have believed possible in such a limited market. I imagine they will probably even get a better graphics card in there, at some point (Don't think so? ATI just announced a 128mb card, the Radeon 9200, for PCI PowerMacs...these are systems that stopped shipping 5 years ago.)
yhbt
I thought that might be the case.