As you may know, Windows Live Messenger is in an invitation-only beta. I can’t imagine this is terribly exclusive, but I have some extra invitations.
There is information about Live Messenger here. I will say that it is, by default, more orange than the previous one. This is a great benefit. Unlike Michael Arrington, I like the color orange.
If you would like one, contact me through this form: Contact Me.
Note: I have no more invitations!
Earlier today, I posted on upgrading to Visio for Enterprise Architects. It occurred to me that it might be helpful to quickly document the newer versions of Visio for the developer.
Hope this helps.
I have made a change in my RSS feed. Several months back I thought I would experiment with FeedBurner Item Stats. To get this feature to work, you turn on the Feed item link clicks (“clickthrough” tracking) feature.
This allows publishers to track clickthroughs from their RSS feed. This is accomplished by redirect-links added by FeedBurner. My permalink was replaced with a redirect that increments a counter and then redirects the user back to my site.
Cool.
However, I recently noticed that some links to my posts were linking through the FeedBurner link and not directly to my own permalink. This greatly skews the per-item stats, because I cannot tell the difference between actual RSS click-throughs and other links. While this makes the stats less useful, a bigger problem is it seems to disable automatic trackbacking.
So, I turned it off. My feed is full-text anyway, so I don’t really care about clickthroughs.
If your news-reader caches posts (and therefore the item link), those redirected links will now link to my nicely-formatted FeedBurner RSS page. Not so perfect, but good enough.
Tags: blog, feedburner
In a picture here, you can see a part of AT&Ts new ad campaign.
Reading through the comments, some bloggers seem to like it. Others don’t. Robert Scoble humorously suggests that blogging has jumped the shark. Tara Hunt says to AT&T, kiss my RSS.
Outside of my office is a “Close friends delivered” billboard. Aren’t they just saying that they provide connectivity?
The way I see it, if this is the “Year of RSS” it must also be the year of blogging which implies more silly ads by the big companies.
At least now your grandmother might ask you what a blog is.
P.S.: It seems there is no consensus that this is the year of RSS. Maybe it was last year and the year of the blog was the year before that, I don’t know. Anyway, it sure is hitting mainstream now. Heck, I’m even doing it 😉
Several people have asked me how the launch of our baking soda / vinegar rocket went (see my previous post, How I Spent My Day Off).
I have no good pictures of the rocket in air; however, it worked quite well. My son was really excited about it. We launched it three times and got it up to about 50 or 60 feet. I’ll bet we’ll get it higher on the next launch.
After we repair the fuselage tube, that is.
Tags: Model_Rockets
Joel Spolsky recently wrote about what he calls The Perils of Java Schools.
His main point is that Computer Science departments have dumbed-down their curriculum to increase their enrollment and graduation rates. One way this has been done, he argues, is by replacing the teaching of multiple languages with Java. Instead of teaching functional languages (think Lisp) and using a low-level languages (like C or C++), the student does all coursework in a managed object-oriented language. Not only does this mean that students aren’t as well educated, but that is harder to interview new graduates to find the really good ones.
Some people have bridled at the article because they see it as slamming Java. Others suggest that he should update his interviewing style because he says it is harder to evaluate people. These comments miss the point of his article.
I agree with him fundamentally that learning with a high-level language is just not enough. Kang Su Gatlin has a post about this as well: What Should Change in Comp Sci Education. I agree with him too (though would like to hear more from him regarding MapReduce).
I went to UC Berkeley when Computer Science departments were primarily interested in training Computer Scientists. No language courses were included as a part of the required curriculum — it was expected that we would learn the required languages on our own time (note: I’m sure the teachers-assistants must of helped students with languages and environments, but I either skipped those sections or have blocked it out because it was no help to me). In our classes, we used Scheme (to learn functional programming), assembly, and primarily C.
One of Mr. Spolsky’s main points is that routinely using a low-level language (like C) provides the student with critical experience. C is closer to the machine than Java or C# and forces the programmer to work harder. C forces the programmer to use pointers. Programming and debugging pointer-based programs develop and hone debugging skills. The experience of using these over my years in school was quite beneficial. Better to learn that at school than in industry.
So without fully condemning nor claiming to even grok what is motivating the universities to this end, I will say this:
I have heard from many people over my life that “pointers are hard.” If you have a Computer Science degree and you think pointers are hard then one thing is for sure: your Computer Science program failed you.
Tags: c#, Computer_Science, Java, JavaSchools
My son and I built a rocket fueled on baking soda & vinegar.
We haven’t fired it yet — we missed the weekend launch window due to weather.
Tags: Model_Rockets
Happy New Year and a warm welcome to the year 2006. Time does have a tendency to fly.
Here is an uncomprehensive list of some things I’m looking forward to this year:
I’m sure there are some other things that I’m not thinking about today.
This will be an exciting year for Digipede and for me and my family as well as for the greater tech industry at large.
Happy New Year!
Tags: Digipede
A couple of weeks ago Robert Scoble announced a geek dinner on Friday, 12/30. He posted details here.
I won’t be able to make it to this one — have a beer for me. Or some cheesecake.
Tags: blog
I have posted several times about the Microsoft / Google debate, making the point that the trust / faith people give to Google is beginning to wane. The news in the NYT about the AOL / Google agreement brings me back to this same point.
Like many, I am surprised at the deal Google struck with Time Warner for AOL. It isn’t the $1 Billion for 5% of AOL. That seems like a lot, but hey, they print money at the “plex”, don’t they?
But, preferential placement for AOL content throughout the Google services?
What?
One of the things that got people to trust Google in the first place was their stance on preferential treatment. So Google search users will get directed to AOL content instead of more-relevant content? John Batelle reports that (essentially) sponsored AOL links won’t be marked as such. (For those who don’t subscribe to the NYT, Nicholas Carr excerpts some of the article).
Google taught us that sponsored links should be marked; and so, have trained us to trust them. With AOL, they will violate this trust — go against what they have trained us to believe.
So, can we trust Google search if the AOL deal is consummated?
Can we trust it now?
FriendFeed Status
About me
Main feed
Email subscriptions