I understand the whole "networking" and staying "connected" thing but how has this site taken off? I mean its nothing but status; no pictures; messages; walls and features like the other sites so why has the media given it so much attention? why does cnn use it for most of their news? anybody can say anything on there and who knows if its true?
6/20/2009 6:04:39 PM
you obviously have not heard of the country named "iran"
6/20/2009 6:05:05 PM
OMG GIVE IT TO MEGIVE IT TO ME NOWGIVE ME MORE FASTERYOURE NOT GIVING IT TO ME FAST ENOUGH
6/20/2009 6:05:40 PM
6/20/2009 6:09:14 PM
This thread is now for discussing whether the savings from clipping and using coupons is worth, in your opinion, the inconvenience.The Sunday coupons are pretty much the only reason I subscribe to the N&O. Our grocery savings pay for the paper and then some. It's pretty awesome. More money in my retirement fund, no doubt. I think that if you don't use coupons, you're a chump.
6/20/2009 6:09:30 PM
yeah i think its a fadtheir retention rate is shit
6/20/2009 6:09:51 PM
do you think that sense of savings is enhanced due to saving on items that you wouldn't spend money on at all sans-coupon?
6/20/2009 6:13:40 PM
Twitter kind of sucks. I really tried to get into it, just to see what the hype was about. The only interesting person I found to follow was the Dalai Lama and he quit posting last I checked.It's not technically interesting, in fact it's rather juvenile from that perspective as well.Why is it popular? I don't know. It shouldn't be.
6/20/2009 6:15:02 PM
I think we could crash the siteTWW!
6/20/2009 6:16:18 PM
An interesting point! It's true that we've picked up items we otherwise might not have bought just because we perceived an irresistible deal. Of course, with a little restraint and common sense, that can actually be a plus. Coupons can motivate you to try something new!Just gotta be careful you ain't clipping coupons for processed & packaged shit. Don't be buying Pop-Tarts just 'cause you got 99 cents off. Don't buy anything ready to eat out of the box. That's the trick.
6/20/2009 6:18:09 PM
message_topic.aspx?topic=297214 is a fad
6/20/2009 6:19:52 PM
ok fine you have a point
6/20/2009 6:21:14 PM
what do you think about their choice of Ruby, qntmfred?I think it's interesting that they have an application which could easily be less than 1000 lines of Ruby... and that instead of porting from Ruby to a more mature language over a long weekend, they shrug and double up their infrastructure investments while hiring additional staff to rewrite Ruby. It makes absolutely no sense from a business perspective, from what I can see
6/20/2009 6:25:21 PM
i'm not familiar enough with ruby to know its strengths and weaknesses. i have from time to time seen talk about that choice though and whether they might port it. i think in general though, at a certain point of scale, the choice of language becomes less and less impactful. that is to say, the more important choices are the architecture and implementation choices, in which case different languages may lend themselves as more suitable to those choices[Edited on June 20, 2009 at 6:38 PM. Reason : .]
6/20/2009 6:34:43 PM
There's nothing in there about Ruby..
6/20/2009 6:41:11 PM
my friend won a guitar pedal.another friend won NIN tix.it has its moments.
6/20/2009 6:43:36 PM
as far as I know Ruby's main weakness is that it has received practically no attention at all with regard to performance, and benchmarks of common algorithms paint a very bleak picture of its capability to handle volume transactionsTwitter is the single largest application running on Ruby and from what I understand pretty much all work towards optimizing Ruby has come from Twitter itselfthe economies of scale argument for language choice has become pretty much accepted at this point, indeed, but it seems to me that there are limits to this reasoning. as in, when you're literally the first and only champion of a platform at that scale and have no vested interest in the platform.also, I really don't like the attitude of the Rails developer [Edited on June 20, 2009 at 6:45 PM. Reason : .]
6/20/2009 6:43:50 PM
i dont get it either,why are iran protestors using this instead of a website, or blog, or message board?why limit a revolution to 140 characters?i dont get it.. i still to this day have never read or wrote a tweet, and im proud of it.but i cant stand how all the old people on tv are all over this, since when did old people get ahead or keep up with young people on technology?it seems like they are adapting to new technology at our rate or faster.like iphone and blackberry has been mastered not by youngins, but by old business people.
6/20/2009 10:07:03 PM
the revolution will not be televised tweeted^ I'm also not exactly sure old people are competent with those devices. They do tend to have higher disposable incomes and/or ability to expense them, though [Edited on June 20, 2009 at 10:23 PM. Reason : .]
6/20/2009 10:21:38 PM
6/20/2009 10:21:56 PM
Marry me?
6/20/2009 10:34:19 PM
6/20/2009 10:45:28 PM
Twitter is not important or impressive because of the technology - nothing about the software is special or new, really. What's impressive and important about it is how it's been used and how many (important) people are using it regularly. I can sign on and read updates, within just a few minutes, from tons of people whose thoughts and opinions I care about.Then, if they link to or mention something else going on, I can spend more time looking into that, but only if I want to.With a blog, I have to read the whole post, basically, or at least start reading it. I read tons of blogs - my google reader subscriptions number in the 100s. It's nice, though, to follow people who are GOOD AT giving you the gist of an idea in 140 characters. It takes an intelligent person to portray an important idea that way.That doesn't mean there aren't thousands (millions?) who just post "I'm eatin' eggs!," but I don't follow those people, and I don't have to. I can choose. It's fun, and I've gotten a ton from it.
6/20/2009 11:48:39 PM
6/20/2009 11:55:47 PM
snakes. why did it have to be snakes.
6/20/2009 11:57:22 PM
SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE OHHHHHH ITS A SNAAAAAKE!BADJA BADJA BADJA BADJA
6/21/2009 12:00:52 AM
i don't have one
6/21/2009 12:06:04 AM
it gives people a sensation of self importance and unfortunately others buy into it. I'M NUMBER ONE!! EVERYONE CARES ABOUT ME SO MUCH!! THEY MUST KNOW WHAT I'M DOING ALL OF THE TIME!
6/21/2009 2:08:53 AM
that's a stereotype. stop being racist against the internet
6/21/2009 7:56:21 AM
6/21/2009 8:29:51 AM
I've still never been on Twitter's website. Is this a good or bad thing?
6/21/2009 8:36:39 AM
I've never been on this twat website you speak of.^^ Why is that garbage amanita in this thread?]
6/21/2009 8:38:21 AM
6/21/2009 9:14:05 AM
this thread has never been done before
6/21/2009 9:39:08 AM
Tibby, if I'm not mistaken, Facebook is a RoR application, too. So I'm not really seeing your whole point about moving to a more "mature" platform.And to get this thread back on topic, I'll illustrate the value of saving and using coupons when making purchases:I bought The Sopranos full box set yesterday from Costco while using a $50 off coupon. This is a box set that has a full MSRP of $400. $400. I like the Sopranos. I don't know about you, but $400 seems a bit steep to me in today's economy. Even a cursory search on the intertron yielded me a best (reliable) price of $200 from Amazon.com. Sure, there are other less reputable sites out there selling it for sub $100 prices, but something tells me those sites are intrinsically linked to a country that puts melamine in infant formula, and lead into children's toys, and as such should have the legitimacy of all of their products called into question.To make a long story short, I managed to acquire this box set, listed at $400 MSRP, for the paltry (comparably) sum of $130, using a coupon.
6/21/2009 10:36:56 AM
some people are born followers, i.e. twits
6/21/2009 3:34:17 PM