clearly a flamebait ...
Kill your blog
41–50 of 56 posts
Re: Kill your blog
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that books have lost prominence, though. People have found that there are mediums that convey their messages far better. The book isn't dead. But it's not as used now as it was in the past. People with visions and dreams find that it's easier to make movies, or form bands. Some people write, yes, but the book is not as dominant as it was in 1900. The same stands for the play and the concerto. Blogs still have…
" People with visions and dreams find that it's easier to make movies, or form bands. Some people write, yes, but the book is not as dominant as it was in 1900. The same stands for the play and the concerto." Any references to back this up? I bet it's easier to self-publish a book than it is to make a movie.
Yes. I used to get nearly all of my programming information from books or at least tutorials. Now I get nearly all of it just from resources scattered around the web.
Re: Kill your blog
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
" People with visions and dreams find that it's easier to make movies, or form bands. Some people write, yes, but the book is not as dominant as it was in 1900. The same stands for the play and the concerto." Any references to back this up? I bet it's easier to self-publish a book than it is to make a movie.
Yes. I used to get nearly all of my programming information from books or at least tutorials. Now I get nearly all of it just from resources scattered around the web.
I've never read a book on programming. I read books for certain things: I love books on marketing and I'll probably read Tufte in hard form, I have a copy of his stuff. But for programming I learned almost exclusively online: nowadays, I use the online books that Coda provides.
To be fair, I'm not a brilliant programmer. So I don't know if I'm missing out by learning online.
Re: Kill your blog
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> write in your blog for your great-great-great-grandkids You think stuff we are producing these days will last? I'm dubious. Paper lasts a decent amount of time, but digital media?
I do. In fact, I think blogging is the next best thing to a resurrection machine. I'll guess there are ten places on the net that cache this stuff (including this comment) Even now, you'll see people post an article here from five or six years ago. It might have 100 comments on it. Five or Six commenters might already be dead -- including the article's author. Now multiply that by 50. Most of the net will end up bein…
Yes, I've had this thought: that this is the beginning of the "high density" version of recorded history.
That, barring a cataclysmic implosion of civilization, the internet archives being populated now will likely be available for perusal 10,000 years from now.
As a corollary thought, an interesting exercise might be to only generate content -- movies, essays, fiction, non-fiction, whatever -- that you think people 10,000 years from now will find interesting. How does this constrain what projects to undertake?
Re: Kill your blog
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do. In fact, I think blogging is the next best thing to a resurrection machine. I'll guess there are ten places on the net that cache this stuff (including this comment) Even now, you'll see people post an article here from five or six years ago. It might have 100 comments on it. Five or Six commenters might already be dead -- including the article's author. Now multiply that by 50. Most of the net will end up bein…
Yes, I've had this thought: that this is the beginning of the "high density" version of recorded history. That, barring a cataclysmic implosion of civilization, the internet archives being populated now will likely be available for perusal 10,000 years from now. As a corollary thought, an interesting exercise might be to only generate content -- movies, essays, fiction, non-fiction, whatever -- that you think people…
Or as a variation on the Turing Test, create a program that reviews all of your published material, then continues to comment and participate in discussions long after you are gone based on the material you consumed and the comments you made while you were alive -- in effect, transforming you into some sort of virtual living dead.
Somehow I feel compelled to add an evil laugh at this point.
Re: Kill your blog
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ugh. I dislike that advice very much. I'm not a fan of people who use social networking to advertise. I know there are practical benefits, but the idealist in me wishes that people wouldn't pick up media just to abuse it. Some things are great: I remember there was a comment here about somebody who complained about Comcast on Twitter and got an instant response. But I've seen too many people who use Twitter and Jaiku…
Disclaimer: TicketStumbler uses Twitter, Facebook and Blogging What if you have people come to you instead of vice versa? For example, you never follow anyone on twitter you make people follow you. I agree that the spammers are a huge problem, but I think some of these tools can be used for good. I raged about Comcast on Twitter yesterday and they haven't done anything. Bastards.
The ones you mentioned are okay if you're using them decently. I can see why TicketStumbler would benefit from Twitter, absolutely. And Facebook and blogs are different: blogs help you reach out to your current users, and Facebook Pages are built to let you attract fans. I guess that's not the misusage I was thinking about: I referred more to the spammers and the people who sign up for every service imaginable just to attract people. (The owner of AllFacebook, which I used to write for, did that a lot on Twitter, and it always just seemed slightly wannabe to me.)
Re: Kill your blog
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do. In fact, I think blogging is the next best thing to a resurrection machine. I'll guess there are ten places on the net that cache this stuff (including this comment) Even now, you'll see people post an article here from five or six years ago. It might have 100 comments on it. Five or Six commenters might already be dead -- including the article's author. Now multiply that by 50. Most of the net will end up bein…
Yes, I've had this thought: that this is the beginning of the "high density" version of recorded history. That, barring a cataclysmic implosion of civilization, the internet archives being populated now will likely be available for perusal 10,000 years from now. As a corollary thought, an interesting exercise might be to only generate content -- movies, essays, fiction, non-fiction, whatever -- that you think people…
One way to make things that will be interesting in the future is to make things that are interesting now and would have been interesting in the past. If you can span a few thousand years back in time, there's a good chance you have something fairly universal.
This is another reason to study history: so you can imagine what people a thousand years ago would have liked.
Re: Kill your blog
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I've had this thought: that this is the beginning of the "high density" version of recorded history. That, barring a cataclysmic implosion of civilization, the internet archives being populated now will likely be available for perusal 10,000 years from now. As a corollary thought, an interesting exercise might be to only generate content -- movies, essays, fiction, non-fiction, whatever -- that you think people…
One way to make things that will be interesting in the future is to make things that are interesting now and would have been interesting in the past. If you can span a few thousand years back in time, there's a good chance you have something fairly universal. This is another reason to study history: so you can imagine what people a thousand years ago would have liked.
Along those lines, looking back at the Greeks -- many of the same subjects we talk about today they discussed 2,000 years ago.
Re: Kill your blog
#49Shiny object!!!
Re: Kill your blog
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
" People with visions and dreams find that it's easier to make movies, or form bands. Some people write, yes, but the book is not as dominant as it was in 1900. The same stands for the play and the concerto." Any references to back this up? I bet it's easier to self-publish a book than it is to make a movie.
I self-published a book in my senior year of high school, so yes. That's possible. However, I referred to the set of genres overall. The book certainly is not dead. However, it takes up less of the "fine arts" market proportionally than it did a hundred years ago, and that's because other genres exist that allow people certain other freedoms. It is easier to form a band now than it was a hundred years ago. A hundred…
"I self-published a book in my senior year of high school."
I'm curious, what did you write about? Fiction/non-fiction? Still writing or just hacking?
Putting a book together at that age is a respectable achievement.