dcdan

7 ms·

1.
by dcdan 14y ago
Couldn't you just move the iFrame and not need to have access to its elements?
2.
by dcdan 16y ago
It's not a terrible argument. To put it differently, the value to the end user is not a direct function of the degree of openness, but the utility of the degree of openness. The narrative of Sophie measures this utility.
3.
by dcdan 16y ago
I have a similar side project. How do you guys respond to seeing something similar launched? Assure yourself that you have better execution?
4.
by dcdan 16y ago
I've thought it made some sense to weight domain keywords considering the number of people I observe using the google search box as an address bar.
5.
by dcdan 16y ago
Numbers of committers sampled per language might be helpful in identifying potential bias.
6.
by dcdan 16y ago
It is against the terms. http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/static.py?hl=en&#38... "...advertisers cannot use destination URLs that automatically redirect to another website or that act as a bridge page."
7.
by dcdan 16y ago
This is ending up on marketwatch.com only after a JS redirect from the ad landing page. http://www.goldfellow.com/currentmarketwatchlink/
8.
by dcdan 16y ago
This algorithm change could come across as more editorial and less empirical. It's publicized as highly targeted ("slightly over 2% of queries"), responding to small tech discussion (Atwood, SO, HN, quality launch meeting), and seemingly r
9.
by dcdan 16y ago
At what point does Google cross over from "ranked by algorithm" to "ranked by algorithm selection as editorialized by Googlers and bloggers?" Publicly discussing algorithms changes like this seems like a potential PR problem.
10.
by dcdan 16y ago
It also pains me to see how the web has forced us back a decade in terms of what's an impressive UI feat. When your hands are tied, undoing a knot becomes notable.
11.
by dcdan 16y ago
What is the technical difference between Google being able to accurately measure the volume of spam, and Google removing the spam?
12.
by dcdan 16y ago
But the idea that it’s doing something better, new or innovative is largely PR and faffery. Facebook is incredibly innovative at growing its user base. No other social network has concentrated on and succeeded at this like Facebook.
13.
by dcdan 16y ago
This feels like mostly a PR piece to me. And reports seem conflicting. Google doesn't seem to say what they did beyond that they "developed an algorithmic solution which detects the merchant from the Times article along with hundreds of ot
14.
by dcdan 16y ago
What if my ideas are smaller parts of different things (i.e. a cycle, which can not be in a tree)? Maybe I'm thinking about it the wrong way.
15.
by dcdan 16y ago
I've been working on a similar project, but I've been moving away from the tree structure lately because I found it too rigid. I don't think all my ideas fit into a tree.
16.
by dcdan 16y ago
I can confirm that there were foxit references in pre-beta source code edit: i think this was the reference i was thinking of, is it for this feature, or is it unrelated? http://www.google.com/codesearch/p#OAMlx_jo-ck/src/third_par...