Agreed. The fix being the "Print" link, of course:
http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&...
Though it's silly to have to jump through that hoop, as tucked away and hidden as it is.
107 karma · joined February 19, 2007
http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&...
Though it's silly to have to jump through that hoop, as tucked away and hidden as it is.
A couple other good ones I've played are http://www.ferryhalim.com/orisinal/g3/bauns.htm and http://www.ferryhalim.com/orisinal/g3/bells.htm (apropos of winter time). Honestly, most of them are really worthwhile.
Pedantic Typo Report
The Future of Web Startups, Section 2. Standardization.
"In essense, let the market design the product."
"essense" vs. "essence"
That is all.
Is this really an apt description? Would it not be more accurate to say "RAM" and "hard drive", respectively?
(Leave it to me to miss the point in the name of pedantry, haha. I ask because I'm not particularly knowledgeable in neuroscience, but from the terminology this is what I assume.)
Sure, shatter the illusion why don't ya?
Kidding aside, I don't know why people are flipping out. One should think the editors are carefully chosen to not be power-hungry jackasses out to destroy a story's integrity. It's not even like they're editing comments. Some people are quick to jump on the drama, I suppose. I share in the same sentiment expressed here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43650
As an aside about Arc, but not to harass you:
If you don't mind my asking of silly questions, I have noticed that in provided snippets the syntax you seem to make use of the most is the [_] notation even though you had some additional ideas kicking around originally (e.g., x:y for (x 'y), allowing infix math, letting users define syntax). Are you still planning to include / already have these (and possibly more) syntactical forms? What of parentheses inference (not as a matter of hating parens, but just as something included in your initial writings that hasn't seemed to surface in code snippets)? Any new thoughts about such things?
I know that Paul's offered that Arc is terser - to the point of having the terseness standardized. I really do see the value in that and don't share in the "just make CL macros" sentiment that seems to pervade people lately. In fact, I'm excited to perhaps someday be able to use Arc. However, I WOULD like to know what Paul (and other commentators, though again there are more over at reddit so far as that goes) thinks about the vitriolic remarks. Are they even worth paying attention to? There always seems to be wanton backlash against things that get posted to sufficiently large news sites (Slashdot, reddit, etc.). Yet it also seems like a legitimate matter to consider, though it could just be the case that the public-at-large doesn't see the entire picture for not having access to the language. So, thoughts on this phenomenon, anyone?
This leaves H, Q, R, T, U, W, Y, and Z, of which I can supply Qi ( http://www.lambdassociates.org/ ) and T ( http://mumble.net/~jar/tproject/ ). Bringing the list of unnamed (for me) to:
H, R, U, W, Y, Z.
That's the best I can do. Anyone else?
"I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind." - Alan Kay
GMail -- they aren't the only email provider, but certainly a leader. You can't really go wrong with using it, unless you have major privacy concerns. But then, why are you using email to begin with?
Google Reader -- There used to be feeds.reddit.com, but now that I check it seems to have been taken down; what a shame. I thought it was a really good idea, though it had been freaking slow when I last used it. Using Firefox or Opera, there are already means to just integrate feed-reading into the browser. I find that this has suffices. It's no more or less centralized than opening a webpage to use a reader when you're already in your browser in the first place.
Google Calendar -- kiko.com seems to still up and running, though of course they ran into trouble at the hands of Google Calendar. Then there's http://www.30boxes.com among several others.
Google Talk -- meebo.com doesn't suffer from problems he mentioned with Google Talk, so it actually beats Google in my opinion. There are others, but they don't seem to be as good as meebo, in my opinion.
Google Docs & Spreadsheets -- this is a tougher one when looking for actual online solutions, I think, just because the current online suites aren't as full-featured as the desktop equivalents. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_office_suites#Online_office_suites seems to be a good place to start, though. Plus, I hear those zenter.com guys will be killing PowerPoint. ;) If, however, you're looking for interoperability then OpenOffice.org works wonders.
Google Page Creator -- not mentioned in the post, but weebly.com seems to excel in this field anyway, so they're (more than) worth a mention.
Really, I think a lesson to be learned is that just as there are different apps you could use on the desktop, there are a lot of webapps to choose from. I would think this would be particularly apparent as ubiquity in desktop applications seems to be flawed. If it weren't, people would be more inclined to use pre-bundled software on Windows instead of OpenOffice, AbiWord, The GIMP, Pidgin (still have to get used to that), Trillian, Firefox, Thunderbird, Opera, and so on. Moreover, if it weren't flawed then some webapps might not exist! That, and the thinking that somehow there has to be an ultimatum between desktop & online applications seems fundamentally silly. Not to say that what can be implemented in one can't be implemented in the other to some extent, but you don't need to have all of your applications be solely on one platform. Freedom of choice and all that fun stuff. Certainly the internet provides a platform that has several distinct advantages to the desktop, but that doesn't mean you absolutely must lock yourself into it; though, more likely than not, as webapps continue to become more advanced the preference shifts mostly towards them instead of the desktop.
In the meantime, he and I are stating what most people should already know. And if they don't, that's probably why he did this story (and why I'm commenting about it) in the first place. I didn't really mean for this to turn into a list, but proof by counterexample is a quick & easy method in this case.
Poignant Summary: webapps are immensely useful, and you don't need Google to prove it.