Eric Sink posted an article bemoaning the current state of the web. In his footnotes is this observation:
I think we need to stop saying that the spammers only continue because they make money doing it. Virus writers don’t make money. They write viruses simply for the joy of causing harm to others. I don’t see much reason to believe that spam would stop if the financial incentive were magically removed somehow.
I agree with him. The idea that spammers will quit if they can’t find any more suckers is yet another piece of conventional wisdom I get tired of hearing. I also think it’s fairly useless to talk about something that’s not going to happen. As long as there are people, there will always be people getting suckered into making bad decisions. It’s human nature.
No longer am I going to cringe every time I hear the word “enterprise”.
Before looking it up, enterprise to me meant “big” or “expensive”, as in Visual Studio Enterprise Edition.
But today after wondering what kind of a software developer people are looking for when they use the word “enterprise”, I had a look in the dictionary. The fourth meaning in The American Heritage Dictionary’s definition is:
Willingness to undertake new ventures; initiative
This is a great quality to have, on both the large scale and the small scale.
I found a good example today of large-scale enterprise today, from the Daily Sun’s (Flagstaff’s local newspaper) revamped online job listings. A year ago, they were using their own setup. It worked, but had poor search functionality and a clunky UI. Now they’re simply linking to a customized portal by NowHiring.com. They have their logo up there, some generic graphics, and a website that works well. I applaud the developers of this software for seeing the problem the newspapers had and coming up with a elegant solution.
A good example of small-scale enterprise might be taking on a project to document or refactor some code, or implementing one of the things on The Joel Test.
Now when I hear people talking enterprise, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and listen to what they say, in hopes that they’re talking about true initiative, and not just trying to sound big.
I’ve been using Gmail lately. Overall it’s a great user experience, but two kinds of windows popping up annoy me.
First, why do links in the message body pop up in new windows, and why is there no way to change that?
I think there’s a geek consensus about the annoyingness of pop-up windows. Why is Google going with the stuffy, professional way of doing things?
Right now I’m reading David Heinemeier Hansson’s Blog back to front, and it got me thinking:
It’s a common practice to close down blog comments after a certain amount of time, especially on popular sites. I noticed that DHH’s site still allows people to enter a comment and press submit, even on the oldest entries. I think it’s a good idea to encourage commenting on old posts, because someone who’s reading an old post might have some insight about it. But on the other hand, people just aren’t going to notice comments from an old post.
My idea is that after a month, instead of allowing someone to add to the old post, or just saying “comments are closed”, the old post should have a form for e-mailing the author. It could say something like this before the form:
The time has expired to leave comments on this page. However, you can still fill out a comment form and your comment will be sent to me via e-mail (with an automatic link to this post). It may even inspire a new blog entry!
I’m going to implement this for my blog after I change my blog engine (I’m planning to either grow my own in Ruby or move to Typo), but if you like this idea, feel free to implement it yourself.
Also, thank you elzr for giving me the idea to read DHH’s blog back to front.