Still can’t FTP; posting anyway. If the much hyped “Nines Day” is a problem (ha!), this will all have been for naught. [insert rant about clueless media and y2k hype and how (obviously, dammit!) 09/09/99 == 090909 not 9999 or 999999.]

Today on Scripting News, Dave said:

And after the writing is “finished” I take the [In Progress] disclaimer off and then people respond. And to my surprise, the writing isn’t finished! I get more ideas. I incorporate other people’s ideas into the piece. Add some links and a screen shot. The writing is tweaked, in real time, it’s a fast process. I have a feeling that I’m using the most advanced editorial system in existence. I love that feeling. (It pays to click on Reload.)

[ quote from piece entitled ‘The Evangelist Is In’, from 08 Sept 1999. Given the above, it may or may not still contain the above quote. Sorry, but that’s the best I can do. ]

Dave’s description of his posting style disturbs me. I realize link rot is a real problem, I realize that expecting things to hang around at the same spots on the web is at best naive, but I do have a certain expectation that if something I point at changes, it will be relatively obvious to the casual observer that it changed. I could point to something Dave said, following which he could change the text, which might remove the reason I pointed at it in the first place. Hell, he could totally invert his position on something, which could make it look as if I didn’t understand what he was saying! Note that I don’t object to changes while the ‘[In Progress]’ disclaimer is present; it’s the changes afterwards that bother me. Maybe I’m too old-fashioned, or not cutting-edge enough, but I don’t think I’ll be pointing at Dave’s stuff anymore, because I can’t be arsed to keep checking that it stays the same (and maybe now the reason for the large pull quote is apparent). In fact, I’m not sure if I’ll even keep reading Scripting News , given that I have to assume an implicit [In Progress] disclaimer on the whole site, given the above description.

This is kinda cool: highschoolalumni.com will track the people you went to high school with. If they’ve got the tiny little school I attended (~100 people in four grades), they’ve probably got yours too. It’s basically like a really dumbed-down version of sixdegrees.com , but probably a bit easier to explain to non-net people.

Speaking of relationships, how come friendfinder.com doesn’t have options for anything other than couples? Suppose you’re looking for a third, fourth, or fifth?

Many many moons ago, I used to see a band called Rex Daisy whenever they played in Iowa City. Apparently they’re still around, after surviving a label screw job. Anybody in that part of the world seen them play lately?

usenet.startshere could be very useful. I’d love to read usenet at work (the faster connection is nice), but the UA news server is seriously lagged. This might be a solution…

You can tell I’ve been posting too much on the weblogs egroup mailing list when GeneHack is at the top of this list. 8^)=

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: http://genehack.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/162