that’s our niche, and we’re stickin’ to it While looking for <META> tag information on the web, I ran across a Christian guide to using <META> tags to bring visitors to your evangelical web site.. The site raises the interesting question of exactly how small a topic niche can be found on the web. For example, is there a web page describing the special left-handed Yavapi lesbian way to scale fish? Prehaps more importantly, is there a portal targeted at left-handed Yavapi lesbians that will cross-market special fish scaling tools?
(The Yavapi are a tribe of Native Americans that live in the southwest portion of the United States; they were the first ethnic group that sprang to mind; no offense intended.)

meme grokking Over on Flutterby, Dan’s got a rant up on May/17Brandsaslifestyles.html”

brands as lifestyles, about the coming merger (convergence?) of marketing and individual point-of-view. The web log phenomomon may or may not be a harbinger of this. I don’t quite grok the ‘brand’ meme; maybe I’m not operating at an abstract enough level. After a little more thought, I think I see where Dan’s headed with the brand as lifestyle argument. However, it seems that the web-log-style of hitting a bunch of individual viewpoints to assemble your own brand is going to be too much work for the trendoids who buy into the ‘brand’ thing — opportunity for specialized portals and tie-ins, I guess.

one person’s junk is another person’s chimp New Scientist has a nice article about the genetic differences between humans and other primates, which touches on issues such as xenotransplantation, the nature of the genetic differences between chimps and humans, and efforts to understand what that means in terms of evolution and speciation. According to the article (and elsewhere), curent estimates put human and chimp DNA at 98.5% identical. ‘Identical’ in this context is a slippery concept, but it appears as if most of the differences are concentrated in non-protein-coding parts of the genome. Concentrating on those non-coding-parts will be crucial to answering the questions raised by the article. Of course, propagating the ‘junk DNA’ meme (which the article does) doesn’t help at all…

it’s an editor! it’s an OS! it’s XEmacs! I re-compiled XEmacs a few more times today. Fortunately, Jörg Rambau posted to the LinuxPPC user list noting how to fix the problem. Compiled normally, the application builds and installs, but trying to switch or kill buffers from the keyboard (C-x b or C-x k) doesn’t work. Compiling at a lower optimization level (-O2 or lower) fixes the problem.

fnord I added a little ‘please turn on CSS’ blurb to the header of the GeneHack template. If you’re using CSS, you shouldn’t be able to see it. If you’ve got CSS turned on and the blurb is visible, please mail me. If you’ve got CSS turned off, or you’re a Lynx user, and the text bothers you, let me know.

Leave a comment

Please note You're welcome to use this comment form to respond to this post -- but I'd greatly prefer if you instead responded via a post on your own weblog or journal. thanks

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL: