5 ms·
Apr 2004 [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail
by x0x0 12y ago
Apr 2004 [1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail
- adventured 12y agoI have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Or what it has to do with what I said. I've been a user of Gmail since it entered beta. What's your point exactly? If you have something to say, say it, don't be smug by linking to a wikipedia entry for Gmail, as though I don't already know what year it was created.
- unreal37 12y agoHis not so subtle point is that it's been 10 years since Gmail, and if that was the last successful non-bundled product, that was a long time ago.
- Ensorceled 12y ago> I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Or what it has to do with what I said. Look at the comment you replied to: > When was the last time ... You brought up a VERY old product and he called you out.
- tsunamifury 12y agoYou know, if its a list of one item, its not really a list, so there is no need to pretend to footnote. This silly over-use of citation markup when it is completely unneeded adds to the smarmy faux-studiousness of comments on HN. Just say Apr 2004, according to Wikipedia, was a long time ago. Don't pretend to use extra markup, don't imply a list of citations where there isn't one, and don't make a sentence for a human look like its been formatted for a computer.
- pessimizer 12y agoIf you're so concerned about the waste of space represented by two "[1]"s, why'd you waste so much space typing this? >if its a list of one item, its not really a list unless you're a programmer.
- Turing_Machine 12y agoYes. If you're a programmer, even lists with zero elements shouldn't bother you.