mdevere

Ah, just found the deck settings and corrected this. Thanks. I've played around a bit more and have some further feedback.

Something that is really key for me: When I create cards, sometimes I want the audio to play on the front, sometimes on the back (and perhaps sometimes both). But there is just one audio value and I need to decide whether I want it to play on the front or the back across the entire deck.

For example, card 1: FRONT: Text says "écureuil", audio reads out "écureuil" BACK: Text says "écureuil", audio reads out "écureuil", and there's a picture of a squirrel

That's good for vocab comprehension, but what if I want the converse exercise?

Card 2: FRONT: Picture of a squirrel BACK: Text says "écureuil", audio reads out "écureuil", and there's a picture of a squirrel

At the moment there's no way for me to create both cards at once. I would need two separate decks because it's one template to a deck. And I would need to make the card twice.

I realise this is jumping ahead to 'power user' territory but it's definitely a feature I would use.

Hi. I actually had it in mind to create something like this myself -- a mobile-first, nicer-designed version of Anki. But it looks like you already started on this, 2.5 years ago. Always the way..

It definitely looks nicer than Anki. It's also better for creating simple cards, something which I haven't really been able to do on the Anki app. The workflow for adding a new card is a great experience. I do think that creating my own cards is an important part of the memorisation process. I've downloaded pre-made cards before, but the stuff I use in conversation is almost always the stuff where I've created the card. Those are the words/phrases that leap to mind.

One issue - my recorded audio didn't play when I reviewed the card (either on the front side or the back side). Maybe a bug?

Based on just 5 minutes of experimentation, I expect that this will become my "on the go" card creator, while I'll keep Anki around for the time being because, when I create cards on my laptop, I can import Forvo pronunciations etc.

Have you thought about how to monetise this?

why are these articles always so pointlessly long. who wants to read all this meandering tangential bullshit when it can be distilled down into two paragraphs at most.

how does this compare to chess.com ? that site also has a post-game analyse feature which presents alternative lines

damn what a shame

play playstation all day for 30 days

Udacity is awesome and almost entirely free to use. Through Udacity I have learned the basics of computer science, lowish-level web development (python/webapp2), ... then later some more advanced web dev tooling (Gulp, linting, etc.)

It's what I recommend to anyone who asks, what's the best way to learn how to code. It's: 1. Udacity - Intro to computer science 2. Udacity - Steve's Huffman's web development course 3. and from there you're up and running and can make your own path

This is an opportunity to MS to reply in kind and demonstrate a sense of humour.

i love it!

lmao. the whole library is worthless then?

seconded

yep, had to reboot

i enjoyed his portrayal of steve jobs

That's not a problem, that's a product

Er, what happened here? Parse was a great product.

Sorry for the clickbait title but couldn't resist. This is one of the best videos on game breaking I've ever seen. Hilarious and interesting for anyone remotely interested in how videogame engines are coded.

Ok I'm watching stories now and it's awesome. thanks justin

Amusing that they went for $599. The PS3 was launched at $599 during a much-ridiculed E3 keynote and the price tag was ultimately looked back on as a huge strategic error.

The Oculus is a different kettle of fish, of course. But $599 seems almost like a deliberate reference.

And, might I add, that this business appears to be a net job creator... jobs funded by the 1%.

And the proposition makes way way way more sense than the vanilla Magic.

This honestly looks awesome and easily worth the money.

Have to say, this reads like he's self-deriving micro-economics for the first time. My very simplistic way of looking at this (not having hired anyone myself) is as follows. If the company has a good strategy and is being run well, than Kent should probably not worry about value created by his new hire because it will dwarf any employee salary. Just make sure you hire the best one you can find and offer him/her a market-beating proposition (which comprises salary, culture, etc.)

I'm a big fan of uDacity, which only appears once in that list.

For a novice, their 'Intro to Computer Science' course is fantastic, as is the follow-on 'Web Development' course, led by Steve Huffman.

Techcrunch clearly very worried about this. Josh Constine just uploaded a fairly hysterical rant about it here: http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/20/smoothing-publishers-out-of...

The publishing economy has been broken for a long time, promoting quickly-produced, attention-grabbing content. I actually wonder if big platforms like Facebook and Twitter can play a role in fixing that, perhaps via some sort of micro-tipping system where consumers pay directly for content. There are startups already trying to do this by creating plug-ins for publishers ('tip' buttons) but I expect it would be easier to drive adoption for something like that when you're Facebook or Twitter. Personally, I'm excited to see where this goes.

fuck pie charts

Strongly dislike this trend. Comments are audit in a badly-regulated industry. Open discussion of content will undoubtedly play a role in the future of journalism. This is clearly a step backwards, not forwards.

I don't think this is really about trolls for trolling's sake. I think this is about being called out on sloppy content.

We all know that online journalism is a seriously tough business, especially for anyone trying to maintain some sort of reputation for quality. For these guys, it's economically infeasible to make sure every article is high quality because the headline is <insert very big number here> times more important than the body and there are plenty of competitors taking advantage of that.

So when a site starts publishing empty content because they feel that they have to, comments are rightfully merciless on calling BS. Writers get demoralised and publications look for ways to save face. As pointed out, removing a comments section is far preferable to heavily moderating against unfavourable comments. But still, I hate the trend we're seeing.

The Verge is an interesting one. They selectively open comments but many articles remain closed. It's not entirely clear how they decide which articles to open but there at least seems to be a tendency to open comments on the longform stuff they're proud of.

Longer term, everyone is looking for a model where quality is rewarded or at least some sort of rebalancing for the internet publishing economy. Blendle wrote a nice article about their experience getting consumers to pay: https://medium.com/on-blendle/blendle-a-radical-experiment-w...

you should also check out Let's Gaze. https://letsgaze.com/#/

it works for YouTube and local files.

Deleting comments, locking threads created by reasonable people - in general, over-zealous mods suppressing the voices of users who don't toe the party line - is an unforgivable sin if you're trying to manage an online community, and The Verge is really terrible at this.

Temporarily disabled by default but they turn them on for certain articles.

They claimed this was because comments had become too negative. It is possible they are genuinely just trying to protect the mental health of their staff who are usually the targets of more aggressive comments but somehow I doubt it.

Sorry to read about this.

I too regarded Frontback as a feature rather than a new messaging paradigm. But I can see how you might say the same about Snapchat.