o_O
NPR pulled no punches this morning in this takedown of beltway commentators:
I have a huge problem with— some of them are good at their job, and I’ve been looking at— there are people who have done studies, you know, who are the good prognosticators, and some of them are pretty good, but a lot of them are terrible and there is no accountability. No one ever goes back and says “oh remember how certain you were?”
haha just kidding, that was Mike Pesca talking about the NFL draft
listening to this NPR segment about how Twitter screwed up the breaking news in Boston and i can’t help but compare all those goofballs retweeting scanner reports to this byline from the Saturday morning A1 story in the Times
Ambitious clans, or individuals within clans, secured power by manipulating cosmologies to claim a closer relationship with the supernatural elite than the one enjoyed by other clans or clan leaders. Flannery and Marcus argue that this phenomenon has been pervasive throughout human history, reaching an extreme with the Egyptian pharaohs, who claimed divine status. Such manipulation wasn’t so difficult when cosmologies were passed on by word of mouth, since they could easily be modified to maintain their consistency with developments in other areas of knowledge, including technology. Not so today: Flannery and Marcus blame the printing press for the current antagonism between science and religion. Had sacred propositions continued to be transmitted orally rather than being fixed in print they would have been gradually remoulded to render them compatible with the scientific thought of Galileo and Darwin.
Commodity based, e.g. Gold
Politically based, e.g. Dollar
Math based, e.g. Bitcoin
what
The politics of the deal are so fragile that Mr. Toomey asked that one of the Democratic co-sponsors of the amendment, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, not appear at a news conference Wednesday morning, Senate aides said. Mr. Schumer agreed, and told Mr. Manchin at the 50th-birthday party of the television host Joe Scarborough that he would not be attending.
this:
Peretti usually presents a cheerful exterior, but that kind of talk inflames his ego. “Could you make a list of cute animals that gets 5 million views?” he snapped when I mentioned Graf’s comment that night at the bar. “It’s actually really hard.”
is the new this:
“‘Thirty-three Animals Who Are Disappointed in You’ is a work of literature,” Mr. Smith said defiantly, referring to an April BuzzFeed post that has so far received 2.5 million views. “I’m totally not joking.” The author of the piece “spent like 15 hours finding images of animals that would express the particular palette of human emotion he was going for and wrote really witty captions for them,” he added. “And that in some ways is harder and more competitive than, say, political reporting.”
On the left: my hackernews account, logged in, showing Adrian’s Gawker story about the Michael Arrington abuse charges shortly after I submitted it.
On the right: another browser, logged out, not showing it.
Anyway! A pretty good object lesson in what the tech community considers “off-topic.”
Andrew McLaughlin of Digg was kind enough to respond last night to my blog post from Tuesday asking Digg to stop stealing writing from other websites. Andrew took care to explain both how Digg’s mobile apps work as well as the various difficulties facing app developers looking to provide great user experiences. He also touched on some of the long-term ideas Digg is kicking around for portable ad units.