Jebdm

Huh? He asked if the list was by submissions or by votes, and I was pointing out that his answer was right at the top (by submissions).

It says right at the top:

     Domain                 Submissions

  1. techcrunch.com                4303
  2. nytimes.com                   3824
  3. wired.com                     1474

I agree that these are annoying, and yes, they can be awkward in a family setting. But it seems like the guy's problem isn't so much with the kids seeing it (which really doesn't seem to do any damage, they either don't get it and ignore it or they ask questions, which is a great opportunity to explain stuff), so much as that it makes him feel awkward to see "intimate" material on the channels he watches.

I don't think it's limited to just developers. A lot of people are just plain rude.

Part 2: http://andrewtrumper.blogspot.com/2009/05/how-to-work-with-p...

RSS may go away, but something better will take its place.

People put RSS on their blogs for multiple reasons. I use it on mine because it greatly increases the usability of my site. Another way it helps is that it makes sites "stickier"; without RSS, people would not have something automatically telling them "Hey, that site you liked updated! Go check it out!". They would have to either remember the URL, or remember a link path to the site, or bookmark it, and they'd have to periodically check back. (Not that I particularly care—while it is nice to have readers, I write mainly for my own amusement, and my site is not commercialized at all.)

And I think that these two factors are a net win for most sites, whether commercial or not. There are ways around the advertising issue—offer truncated feeds, put ads in your feeds, provoke comments, etc. Plus, I thought that the known wisdom was that regular readers don't use ads much, it's the ones that stumble onto your site from Google, etc.? I haven't seen a study, though.

Also, for the record, I basically don't check sites that don't offer RSS. If it's particularly good, it'll get bookmarked, and maybe I'll come back to it in a few months when I've got some free time. But most sites don't even get bookmarked. On the other hand, if I find a site that had a good article, I'll often add it to my RSS reader on a trial basis.

I shaved two years, it's worked out great for me.

Often, increasing profit margins means giving the customer what they want. For instance, take a hormone-based manipulation that makes beef leaner. As a result, it'd be tastier and healthier (?), and thus more appealing.

That's not to say that there aren't risks, and that sometimes the costs outweigh the benefits, but to condemn genetic or hormone manipulation on the basis of it being manipulation just seems silly. We don't complain about the use of engineered alloys over "natural" iron.

Going to become?

Maybe it's an issue of fear, but I doubt it; probably a combination of cultural stigma (thinking it is "weird" for a white person to go to a rap concert) and relative wealth of the target markets (concerts are much more expensive than albums, especially when you include travel costs).

Perhaps, but would releasing their music for free increase the demand for their concerts enough to make up for the loss in revenue? A million dollars, even if it makes up a relatively small percentage of profits, is still a million dollars.

I agree, but for the record syntax choice is pretty arbitrary; I find Python quite nice to look at, while Ruby looks like a kludge.

Definitely. Coming to Simon's Rock (although I am transferring for the fall semester) was easily the best decision I ever made.

Yeah, it looks like it. Written by the same guy, even.

My laptop battery only lasts about 25 seconds. Microblogging it is!

What about happiness? I'd rather be dying and happy than eternally healthy and not.

(You could be including happiness in healthiness.)

Actually, I just skipped to the last paragraph. Short paragraphs are one thing, but one-sentence paragraphs are just annoying. Of course, other people may react differently.

If I'm not mistaken, "to battletest a new language" was the purpose of building this.

Yeah, sure. I didn't mean to imply that Chrome didn't have some cool stuff.

I really hope this tab-as-process thing catches on, or at least become something you can enable (right-click -> fork or something similar).

"Chrome is a joy to use, and in my opinion at least, it's the first true advance in web browser technology since the heady days of Internet Explorer 4.0."

Um... add-ons? XMLHttpRequest? User scripting/Greasemonkey? User stylesheets? Built-in search bar? AwesomeBar? Ubiquity? Adblock? Popup blockers? True zoom? Session saver? Tabs?

Does something like this exist for RSS feeds or blogs?

Sure, but if I choose a competitor I either have to convince everyone I know to switch or be lonely. This isn't to say that this is Facebook's fault (well, I guess you could make the argument that they haven't tried to connect their network up with others, but that's not really their responsibility either), but it still is a huge pain.

(Similar is the problem with AIM; I don't like it, but few people I talk to use anything else.)

I was wondering if the one-block limit bothered anyone else. Maybe something like Haskell's where clause:

  map(foo, pairs) where:
    pairs = [(0,1), (20, 10), (30, 10)]
    def foo(pair):
      a = pair[1] * 2
      b = pair[0] * a
      return (b, a)

I'm not terribly familiar with Python's grammar, so it might be difficult to introduce a closing where-clause without ambiguity. In that case, it might be useful to use a do clause as well:

  do:
    <statements>
  where:
    <statements>

Another alternative would be to simply create a real function literal syntax (i.e., lambda that doesn't suck).

A local commit gives you a rich undo system.

You're right, of course. But there are a lot of people who use this kind of software that don't actually need to, and who would probably be better off using other options.

Also, I don't think that licensing costs hurt my point; by using free software, they could save on that money as well.

I noticed that as well. I run Ubuntu, which could be part of it (although that's not to say Ubuntu's not a little bloated as well). Just to test this, I opened up every program that I could think of which I use on a regular basis:

  - Firefox, with 20 tabs
  - Skype
  - Pidgin
  - Three terminal windows, running Python, vim, and CherryPy
  - Songbird
  - GIMP with a photo loaded
  - Two OpenOffice Writer files
  - Geany (a text editor) with nine tabs
  - Nautilus
  - Three large PDFs (books) using Evince Document Viewer
  - System Monitor (not much)

And I'm only at 1.2 GB! (No swap, out of 2 GB total.) I rarely have all of these programs open at once, either.

While I agree with his point in general, it might be overall more effective to avoid relying on apps as bloated as Visual Studio. Then, you can save some of the money on computer upgrades and avoid any negatives that might be associated with developing on a high-end computer. (Of course, I'm a moron for suggesting that there might be any.)

Shouldn't being more narrowly focused make them more efficient?

What about LÖVE? http://love2d.org/

It's really easy to program for; Lua is a language you can pick up without much effort. It's reasonably fast and built upon a few fairly ubiquitous libraries. Game distribution is easy (zip and change the extension to ".love").

Obviously it doesn't come pre-installed anywhere, but it's not hard to get. It would probably take a little work to make it run on game consoles, though, depending on how many of the libraries it depends on are already ported.

It did say "up to 10%", which I think is fairly believable since they were testing with large vehicles.

Well, it does make live shows more difficult.