you mean queue ;)

i'll show myself out

Pure ad-hominem imho. Chen has a vendetta and he is using gawker to pursue it.

"Worrying that Disney will ruin Star Wars is like worrying that a second iceberg will dive down to hit the Titanic." - Zach Weiner

I kinda agree with that :)

What are the specific errors you are seeing? I am in hubski irc channel, you can give me a shout there.

Ok, if anyone wants to put almost all of the albums mentioned in this thread on shuffle, here they are in a single, humongous, grooveshark playlist

1. Read http://hubski.com/pub?id=59754 and http://hubski.com/pub?id=59396

2. have fun

3. ....

4. Profit!

In improv there's a concept of 'yes, and'.

The idea is that, when improvising a scene, the natural tendency is to try to control the flow of the story, especially if you think of something hilarious that needs some set up. You can't do that, because you have to work with your partner, you are not in sole control. If you keep trying to force your idea of the story, you break the flow and ruin the whole thing. The way to work around this tendency is to force yourself to always accept whatever the partner gave you, and build upon it - no matter if it goes in a completely unexpected direction. So, if your partner says "and then, we walk into the bar and see an octopus", you don't say "no, actually it was man in octopus costume", you say "yes, and he was the best damn bartender I ever saw".

I think the principle applies to everyday life as well :)

Wow, no TV I can understand, but no Internet? I'd feel lobotomized, the internet is my outboard memory.

Anyway, good luck and hope you get things sorted soon :)

So, perhaps, if this point keeps coming up again and again and again, it is an indicator that it is a real pain point for the users?

I suppose I just don't understand from any of the discussion I've read so far what the theoretical drawbacks are going to be. So, the tag space expands, so what? It's just adding dimensionality to the content space, adding far more aspects to view the feeds through.

As you say, I want to follow the tags that are relevant to me to catch what I think is interesting - but if everyone tags every music post with #music, even if I follow #triphop, it is useless because nobody uses it. It's a chicken and egg problem in that case. Alternatively, if I am interested in #elections but not #politics, I am going to miss out on any posts that are relevant to both because the original poster decided to use the more broad category. Or what if there is a great #NASA #comedy music video?

In short, with the current system I see only limitations, but no advantages. As an engineer, building this type of system I feel that I would either remove the tag system altogether and try to work out some other approach, or remove the crippling limitations :)

This is a fascinating reminder that sometimes it takes a generational change for new technology to really take hold

I love that they find puns we miss because of the modern pronunciation... People forget that Shakespeare was not "high literature" in those days, he wrote for the common crowd, and his plays are full of dirty jokes and references to events of the day that we completely miss.

Ahh... wish you strength.

Self-censorship basically leads to a situation where you only share links that appear to the broadest-possible audience. Your followers might as well read top-ranked posts on r/all if you are going that route. Stumbling on fascinating things that I had no idea I could ever be interested in is why I read hubski.

Besides, how can you know what I am or am not interested in? Your image of your followers is undoubtedly one-sided - I am certain that even people I know in real life have sides and interests I know nothing about, so how much more likely is it that you have no real idea what your followers truly like when we are talking about names behind a screen?

With that in mind, it is pointless trying to fit your interests to some imaginary "broad" standard.

The genius of your comment is that you are insinuating that all of those things are false without showing any example of how they are false :)

I don't really understand why people love to hate on Apple. Sure, they're not perfect - but what do you expect them to say - "Yeah, here's our new phone, it's so-so". Of course they're going to say it's awesome, as does every other company when they release a new product. In fact as far as I know Apple is the one company that tends to advertise their product (at least lately) by showing what it can do, as opposed to denigrating the opponent's products.

And yeah, Apple stores are damn successful for a good reason - they don't just make them "appear" welcoming, they actually spend a lot of effort on making them welcoming. Try going to a Best Buy and get the kind of support you get at an Apple store :)

P.S. Lest you think I'm an Apple fan blind to their weaknesses, let me say that I agree that the new Maps is a disaster, I think Galaxy S3 is an awesome phone and I think that Android finally caught up to iOS in terms of polish and user experience which is an excellent thing since it'll force all sides to keep getting better instead of stagnating.

Anyway, I'd be curious to hear, why the implied assumption that Apple is lying about everything? Or am I misreading your comments?

I agree with mk as to his description of Pavlina. I don't see Steve having great success in anything except self-help, and as the old saying goes, to make a million dollars, write a book about how to make a million dollars and sell it to a million suckers.

The passive income stream idea is great, but it's harder to do it successfully than people think. Of course that shouldn't discourage you, but don't expect to find a magic bullet that everyone else somehow missed - if it was easy, everyone would be doing it :)

I personally look up to Derek Sivers, founder of cdbaby. His blog has some great advice about life.

As for my work, I'm happy with what I do. It's intellectually challenging and I get paid reasonably well.

Learning how to move my body through space and time :)

nice work

I posted this the other day, you might enjoy it :) She Za - Tащит

Dark Souls, eh? :)

Huzzah! Thanks for the changes, it will be interesting to see how it works in practice.

Seeing these people in positions of power is terrifying to me. Worse yet, I'm almost positive they don't _really_ believe it, they just profess to do so in order to gain power, but in doing so they do very real damage to our world.

I think they accounted for that, it wouldn't be much of a study otherwise. I am going to guess that they did not ask "How would you defend this position", but rather something like "Can you explain your answer to this question in detail".

In first case, yes the person would play devil's advocate, but that's not really news worth publishing as a study. The interesting part is that when they do it the second way, it basically seems to trigger the mental shortcut where the mind essentially says "oh, I already thought about this question and came up with the answer, there's no reason to think about it deeply again" and simply justifies the answer instead of re-examining the question.

Our minds are much less logical, consistent, or rational than we like to imagine. The concept of cognitive shortcuts is not new, analytical thinking requires effort and energy, so our minds tend to filter out majority of input and process it subconsciously instead of expending energy on consciously analyzing and processing every little decision. Unfortunately the filtering mechanisms are automatic and kick in even for things that should be considered thoughtfully.

Some further reading on cognitive biases and shortcuts: - Motivated Tactician model tries to explain why people use stereotyping, biases, and categorization in some situations and more analytical thinking in others. - Framing) of problem/question affects how we process it, and even the answer we arrive at. - Affect heuristic is "going with your gut", or deciding based on emotion evoked by the question. - Availability heuristic is the "if you can think of it, it must be important" heuristic, which leads people to fear flying more than driving and terrorism more than flying, even though their chances of dying from a car accident are far higher than ever being involved in a plane crash or a terrorist attack.

It's an easy fix, I've done it before :)

stranger than fiction if true :)

I lost it at this picture. Just brilliant.

They have a bunch of videos on youtube under user NottinghamCaves.

How is a company forcing its workers to campaign/act in favor of a certain candidate essentially different from straight-up vote-buying by the powerful? Ridiculous and terrifying.

Ha! Thanks, I actually haven't been back to visit here in ages, nice to see a mention.

If you are not opposed to text-based games, I highly recommend checking out Twine-based games - howling dogs is a great example.

Also, generally speaking the Ludum Dare competitions have quite a few excellent entries worth investigating every year.

If you like interactive fiction, you should definitely read Emily Short's blog and go through archives of IFComp - there is some brilliant, brilliant stuff in there.