I can see a thread folding algorithm needing to be developed.
Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
51–60 of 66 posts
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#52I can see a thread folding algorithm needing to be developed.
No. Please no.
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, spelling/grammar nazi time. The accent over cache would be only slightly pretentious if you didn't have it pointing the wrong way (caché is the slightly archaic spelling you're struggling to remember). But the fact that the word you're looking for is "cachet" makes it a double fail.
Who is being pretentious now?
I don't see how pointing out poor english is pretentious. Especially when it's not a case of someone speaking it as their second language, but someone trying to put on airs and getting it wrong.
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#54Makes sense: twitter is a great awesome search tool. For instance, I find myself searching "media temple" when my server is crawling just to see if anyone else is experiencing the same issues.
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#55If Google will make my entire twitstream searchable, then I am all for this even though I expect that Google will stagger Twitter's innovation. I lose info I need in tweets, and it annoys me.
[deleted]
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meh. Start a site, like longbets, where you retroactively compare pundits' predictions with what actually happened.
One of those just started: http://wrongtomorrow.com/ I should start adding Mike Arrington quotes, he's almost as bad as Scoble.
"But discussions between the companies are confirmed."
Strictly speaking, there is no prediction in the article. This is a claim about the present. Granted, he has already had to amend the original claim ("late stage" vs. "early stage" talks), so take him to task over that rather than imply a prediction is being made.
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hah - I had a similar idea, except it wasn't pundits that you measured, it was regular people. You could make predictions, for the future, and people could vote up the "truthfulness" of them as time went by. You'd need some sort of penalty to discourage people from predicting everything under the sun though. Of course, ideas are cheap...
http://www.hubdub.com/ ?
[deleted]
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#58I wonder if Twitter would have to re-write all their Ruby on Rails code into Java since Ruby is not a supported language at Google.
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I just wanted to create a site where people can submit articles, blog posts or just any predictions about the future and a maturity date. At the maturity date, you can mark it correct or incorrect. Only then can you sort out intelligent predictions from noise.
See Derren Brown's "The System". You wouldn't sort out intelligent predictions from noise, you'd sort out (intelligent and/or lucky) predictions from noise. Which still wouldn't give you any idea which future predictions to trust.
Discount the value of a correct prediction by how many predictions were made by that person. You'd need some way to prevent making a lot of sock puppet accounts, but that's probably doable.
Re: Sources: Google In Talks To Acquire Twitter
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you say that in person? No? Then don't say it here. By the way, I think Mike has posted here once or twice.
What if he would say it in person? 'just saying! But, if he would, then he can say it here and did.
Then he's rude and won't be invited to my birthday party. The point is to be cordial to one another.