jonmwords

He wouldn't give me any specifics at all, but I can tell you that the challenge was related to the extremely low tolerance for lag on a search result page that's treated as law company-wide. He had to do it without slowing down the search page AT ALL, for anybody. Check it out; it even works on mobile.

Hehehe

Meeeeee, too. Me, too. Believe me, I tried.

Glad you liked it. I'm glad people are finding out about this and think it's as cool as I do.

Here's the interview I published with the creator! http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/how-a-google-engineer-b...

Thanks for that, Matt! I've replaced the promo video with the actual demo in the post.

The guarantee that App.net won't kneecap its developers is that its developers are paying customers.

I don't know. Twitter said they were going to launch annotations in the API, too, and that never materialized.

It's not for common users. It's for people who want to pay for this service. Developers will build federation out to Twitter to reach those who don't want to participate.

The whole spec is there on GitHub for your perusal and criticism, though. https://github.com/appdotnet/api-spec

That doesn't have to happen. Even though the conversation has barely begun, most of the people who are behind this are already concentrating on federation with Twitter. That's how the reach problem will be solved.

Fair points, but the fact is that the app was selling more when it was visible in search. When it dropped out of search, it stopped selling.

Key points from interview with Google engineering director Peter Magnusson during Google I/O. He explained their cloud direction. He insists that the future is toward completely managed services. Do you think so?

RWW has just posted a stark counterpoint to this article from another guest contributor. http://www.readwriteweb.com/start/2012/06/is-there-a-better-...

;^)

There will always be next week!

Oh, yeah, that's a good one. That was a long time ago.

It's not just a button, either. You can opt out entirely from preferences.

I see what you mean. But at that time, Google results weren't tied to personal identities, which had no clear definition yet, and that's what this whole Google+ project has been about.

But here's the thing: this actually lifts the lid on the echo chamber to be more open than it was yesterday. Google recognizes that global search is a necessary option. Before this update, it looked like G+ was just going to be rammed down every Google user's throat. Now we can opt out without having to log out!

I can't think of an example of Facebook taking away a preference setting that users have adopted. Even Facebook doesn't take away controls it has freely given. It would be one thing to take away the toggle button. That might happen, and it would suck if it did. But to go in and pull out a user setting that people are using, that would be astonishing.

Well, if you read my post last week, you know I'd be the last person to let them off easily, but now that they've put this opt-out control in, they can't well take it way. That would be suicide.

Hi everybody. Sorry I can't respond to everyone, but this conversation has been very productive, I think. Thanks so much.

Totally fair. Bloggers are professional trolls, but, as I think you've conceded (correct me if I'm wrong), I only trolled to get people in the door, and there are substantive arguments waiting when you get there.

I just want to point out that you absolutely can permalink to Disqus comments. The timestamp is the link, just like on Twitter.

Well put, sir. tl;dr accepted.

It's "almost-attributed" because he included my name, but there was no link or mention of my site. I don't care about the name. I care about the site. That's what the whole rant is about.

Of course I knew that Google tailored results. How would I have been able to include any context in this post otherwise? You took a human-written sentence out of context and made it make less sense than it does in the body of the post.

Me, too. This is the crux of the problem. Allowing such huge posts and so many media types makes the stream impossible to scan. All the reactions the post is getting from G+ worshippers skip over this point, so I guess some people like being assaulted.

Do you have any way of capturing the actual JAR? Our Sophos security friend wants to analyze it, but we don't know how to get it.

OOH. Good point. I'll update the post.

Totally. With that name, they probably don't have much SEO work to do at all.