zach

107 ms·

421.
by zach 16y ago
You beat me to it! Fantastic article from a former startup CEO (I worked for him about 10 years ago). I thought I had heard all the arguments before I read it.
422.
by zach 16y ago
It's a domain fad that (as far as I can tell) started with Writely becoming popular five years ago. Here's a rundown of recent domain fads as I recall them: 2003: del.icio.us con.fuses.us 2004: 37signals helps create 43 Things and Jay-Z ha
423.
by zach 16y ago
Oh, have mercy. Do not want. I can't imagine cluttering up my Google search result page with a Nascar-like line of logos and data. This is really interesting information but that's a pretty noisy presentation of it. At least make me clic
424.
by zach 16y ago
Wonderful explanation. I never run SSH on port 22 on a publicly-visible computer when I can help it. I thought it astounding that the idea sometimes meets with scoffing, seemingly with a presumption that such a practice must be the sum tota
425.
by zach 16y ago
Discussing obscurity in the security community is like talking to coffee aficionados about Starbucks. Noneleless, if you can choose between being obscure or being a prominent potential target...
426.
by zach 16y ago
San Francisco used to spend generously on direct payments to homeless individuals, until Proposition N was passed in 2002, redirecting the money to services for the homeless. This measure was championed by Supervisor Gavin Newsom who, as w
427.
by zach 16y ago
I would prefer a shirt with the seven primitive operators of Lisp myself.
428.
by zach 16y ago
Yeah; I had a blast. At least that's my excuse for following Ken Jennings' forum so closely. I ended up 72 victories short of Ken, though. http://www.j-archive.com/showplayer.php?player_id=3965
429.
by zach 16y ago
I agree this is a reasonable although surprising interpretation, as I posted yesterday: http://zachbaker.com/apple-releases-new-rules-for-subscripti... Apple has really confused myself and a lot of folks with this ambiguity.
430.
by zach 16y ago
He mentioned it on his forums once, way back in 2007 when I was preparing to be on the show myself: http://www.ken-jennings.com/messageboards/viewtopic.php?p=12... (Tuesday Trivia is his weekly email trivia contest.)
431.
by zach 16y ago
Exactly. It pops on the screen instantly, even if there's a video attached. A contestant with a bad eyeglass prescription is a goner. Waiting to hear to the clue puts a player at a major disadvantage, especially on really short clues. How
432.
by zach 16y ago
Well, opinions differ then, because Ken Jennings said halfway through an NPR interview yesterday Watson has the "advantage of speed which no human reflexes can match." Plus, come on, everyone who watched the match so far knows they're just
433.
by zach 16y ago
Ken is super-great. He was a fun and friendly guy when I met him at a book signing. I've become a regular reader of his blog, where he shares random trivia and his love of cinema, hipster bands and the 1980's era of Games Magazine. And if
434.
by zach 16y ago
Kind of disappointing to hear that Watson basically ignores the FJ! category, if true. Especially when being far in the lead on a first-day tournament. That is a great chance to rack up some serious points depending on the confidence in t
435.
by zach 16y ago
I thought the engineers might be trying to make its score end in a particular number if Watson was correct, as a sort of Easter egg. It looked like it might be 658, which spells "BSG" upside-down on a calculator. Now that would be a great
436.
by zach 16y ago
It just seems like what I would expect, although I give them full credit for tackling this challenge in the first place. I'm not the only one: http://www.madpickles.org/rokjoo/2011/02/14/ibm-watson-vs-go...
437.
by zach 16y ago
Is it heretical to say that for a project that researchers have been working on for six years, Watson performs as well as I would expect? They have a ton of priors, a ton of specific optimizations, and a lot of resources. It's pretty impres
438.
by zach 16y ago
Instead, the game has been crippled. Watson has to press the button, naturally, but they're not going to require Watson to write out the answer with a pen, of course. And forget about audio clues, much less a picture-based Final Jeopardy
439.
by zach 16y ago
Sure, but I believe the average Jeopardy contestant could probably win this match handily if they had Watson buzzing in for them. Therefore they've made a machine that plays Jeopardy about as well as an average Jeopardy contestant. That's s
440.
by zach 16y ago
I'm just cracking wise. Watson is a very impressive project. Nonetheless, throw four to seven Google researchers and engineers at this project and you'd achieve comparable results. They've been cornering the market in this area. But inst
441.
by zach 16y ago
Of course. This isn't a match of equals, this is one of man versus machine. As fans know, most responses in a game of Jeopardy! are known by multiple players. That's especially so in a game of this caliber, so the knowledge aspect is rea
442.
by zach 16y ago
And yet we have this link on the front page which suggests that Rhapsody will have to consider pulling out of the App Store, even though they currently have no in-app purchasing: http://technologizer.com/2011/02/15/rhapsody-iphone/
443.
Apple releases new rules for subscriptions, but what exactly do they mean?(zachbaker.com)
1 points by zach 16y ago|2 comments
444.
by zach 16y ago
I would be surprised if the thought of using in-app purchasing for subscriptions even moved their needle of interest at Netflix. Again, if you're just providing a conduit for your subscription service, all this means is that you can't provi
445.
by zach 16y ago
Pretty much. Apple is pretty well known for being a one-size-fits-most company. They don't seem interested in stretching to make things work out for certain sets of customers and potential partners, and it can seem maddening. And they alw
446.
by zach 16y ago
Bookbaby makes it pretty easy, but I don't see how that even matters. You're just arguing that there should be more middlemen, sub-platform-providers who get a special deal with Apple compared to original app authors. We can all foresee wha
447.
by zach 16y ago
I'm comparing it to a retail model. So I included sales but not advertising. Every retail outlet is different, and App Store purchasing has a very particular set of advantages. If you don't need those advantages, the App Store still provi
448.
by zach 16y ago
And yet there seem to be a lot of books as apps on the App Store considering there's this 30% cut. What kind of inside track should Amazon have on the poor shlubs who sell their books as apps?
449.
by zach 16y ago
My point is that Apple doesn't see in-app payments as merely payment processing. They see them as App Store purchases which are delayed in time. Everyone keeps anticipating Apple becoming a payment processor, but it hasn't happened yet. T
450.
by zach 16y ago
Of course Rhapsody can't sell their stuff for a 30% margin. It's not their own stuff! They're trying to be the last link in a chain of 90/10 (or more) splits. They repackage record labels' repackaging of artists' content. Do you think th

More ›