Some Thoughts about flickr vs. Websites
Otto Yamamoto
--
Comrade Otto Yamamoto
http://mryamamoto.50megs.com
Guaranteed 100% Fabricated!
k_f...@lycos.com
Didn’t you have some stuff on Flickr way early on? ISTR that I heard
of Flickr from viewing some stuff you’d put up there. I began using it
and got the pro account (it’s cheap compared to what you get) and now
I don’t even email photos to family anymore; I upload them in a slide
show and email them the link. I agree it’s easy to use and I am
intrigued by your digicam program, because I have to go back to Flickr
and rename and describe everything. All the tags are there of course
from the upload, but I can also go back and add specific tags to
certain photos.
Like this one (hot air balloon ride in Cali last month):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kflynncolo/sets/72157605596495433/
WHen I do Google or Yahoo image searches on a topic, frequently most
of the hits are off individuals’ Flickr pages. I also use the world
map to check out what places look like from user photos. All in all, a
real deal. I thought I had you to thank for my finding it; maybe not,
but I agree with your comments.
abda53
> http://theexperience1.ottoyamamoto.net/index.php?p=88
>
> --
> Guaranteed 100% Fabricated!
So basically you are saying that much like your experience with women,
you are inept to creating a website that is.. well. basically sucks.
I guess that should be apparent considering the fact that you claim
you have a website, but you can't code even a shitty one yourself, so
you have to a piece of shit script like Wordpress to do it for you.
What next? Use another script to manage your crappy pictures? Sure
looks like it. At least I have to give you credit for warning people
that your site is "100% fabricated".
Keep up the "good work"
cal...@gmail.com
> On Jul 4, 11:02 am, Otto Yamamoto <mryamam...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >http://theexperience1.ottoyamamoto.net/index.php?p=88
>
> > --
> > Comrade Otto Yamamotohttp://mryamamoto.50megs.com
> > Guaranteed 100% Fabricated!
>
> So basically you are saying that much like your experience with women,
> you are inept to creating a website that is.. well. basically sucks.
Yup, Charles has problems in both areas. First, he couldn't create
the <html> tag w/o screwing up. Second, his wife left him and he wants
to make sure that all other people he works w/ never feels the love of
a woman. It's quite infectious, considering how his fellow East Coast
trolls get together to "socialise"... Oh well, he can disperse love
to his several cats. Who am I to judge?
argatla...@yahoo.com.mx
> I agree it’s easy to use and I am
> intrigued by your digicam program, because I have to go back to Flickr
> and rename and describe everything. All the tags are there of course
> from the upload, but I can also go back and add specific tags to
> certain photos.
Not digicam: 'DigiKam'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digikam
Personally, my major objection to Flickr is that it forces me to
generate metadata for my pictures and does not make it easy for me to
keep an offline record of my own work (this is really my general
objection to Web 2.0 features like blogs etc.). If there were an easy
mechanism to generate the metadata while keeping a local copy which
could be worked with by other programs, this objection would vanish.
Otto Yamamoto
> Second, his wife left him
How soon we forget: http://mryamamoto.50megs.com/errors/gail01.avi
Incidentally, you still haven't answered her questions. That's awfully
rude.
Otto Yamamoto
2 899 390 vs my network ranking of 1 776 851. Yr all into the numbers and
that, they equate to success to you, so what d'ya think of that?
H.B. Elkins
(moronic idiotic drivel deleted)
You never stop being a sniveling cunt, do you Erica?
No wonder you and he are getting married now that it's legal in California. You
two are made for each other.
--
To reply by e-mail, remove the "restrictor plate"
H.B. Elkins
>So basically you are saying that much like your experience with women,
>you are inept to creating a website that is.. well. basically sucks.
>
>I guess that should be apparent considering the fact that you claim
>you have a website, but you can't code even a shitty one yourself, so
>you have to a piece of shit script like Wordpress to do it for you.
>What next? Use another script to manage your crappy pictures? Sure
>looks like it. At least I have to give you credit for warning people
>that your site is "100% fabricated".
Now for a serious comment.
Why would anyone want to waste time typing stuff like <a href="blahbahblah"> or
<b> or <img src="some picture somewhere"> when that can be automated?
I can hand code but quite frankly, I find it a waste of time and useful only for
tweaking a site automatically generated by something like GoLive or Dreamweaver.
Why do all the grunt work when software can do it for you?
What if you had to hand-place all the formatting codes that used to show up in
the old "reveal codes" command of an ancient version of Word Perfect instead of
using keyboard shortcuts?
Most of us care about the finished result and don't care how much, or how
little, effort goes into it. Personally I prefer not to hand-code because I find
it a waste of time and keystrokes. And it still irks me that there is not a good
WYSIWYG HTML editor out there comparable to Quark XPress or InDesign (or the old
PageMaker) for the desktop publishing world. There is a market for such
software.
Jason Pawloski
> cal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Second, his wife left him
>
> How soon we forget:http://mryamamoto.50megs.com/errors/gail01.avi
> Incidentally, you still haven't answered her questions. That's awfully
> rude.
>
> --
> Guaranteed 100% Fabricated!
I have to agree with Carl on this one. It's unfathomable that any
female - after actually getting to know Chuck Slater - would stick
with him for a month, let alone (allegedly) multiple years! I just
don't see it happening. I mean, what does he have to offer? Using
tired Internet meme's day in and day out? Making lengthy and frequent
speeches about how he's soooooophisticated enough to hold beliefs from
both major political parties? Accusing people of pedophilia without
proof? Doesn't sound like a good catch to me.
On the other hand, if you look at his friends in a certain chat room,
you get a good idea of the, erm, "quality" of woman Chuck's alleged
wife is. She probably just didn't have too many choices besides Chuck.
Loneliness and desparation can do horrible things to one's life.
Otto Yamamoto
not inclined to dump my website by any means as it stands just now, simply
because if flickr evaporates tomorrow, I'll still have someplace to
store/show my snaps online.
With flickr, I'm trading basically style control for an enhanced social
aspect-I'm inclined to prefer the latter; because I'm getting hits from
people who are not just in the MTR social circle-and more importantly,
people are also hitting on the band pictures-which may be helpful to the
bands I photograph. It would be nice to know that someone decided to
investigate a band that I've photographed, found they liked them, and
bought their CD. I'm really big on supporting my music-perhaps moreso than
anything else.
H.B. Elkins
>> cal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > Second, his wife left him
>>
>> How soon we forget:http://mryamamoto.50megs.com/errors/gail01.avi
>> Incidentally, you still haven't answered her questions. That's awfully
>> rude.
Unfortunately, I tried to listen to that video to see what questions he's
avoiding, and I didn't get any audio whatsoever.
So maybe he hasn't answered because he can't hear them :-p
Otto Yamamoto
> On Jul 4, 4:57=A0pm, Otto Yamamoto <mryamam...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>> cal...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> > Second, his wife left him
>>>
>>> How soon we forget:http://mryamamoto.50megs.com/errors/gail01.avi
>>> Incidentally, you still haven't answered her questions. That's awfully
>>> rude.
>
> Unfortunately, I tried to listen to that video to see what questions he's
> avoiding, and I didn't get any audio whatsoever.
>
> So maybe he hasn't answered because he can't hear them :-p
>
>
Ah, bulls pizzles. I'll have to see if I can find the original, and
reconstruct it in Avidemux. Or just reshoot the damn thing w/my Not So
Cheap Cam.
Otto Yamamoto
>
> I have to agree with Carl on this one. It's unfathomable that any
> female - after actually getting to know Chuck Slater - would stick
> with him for a month, let alone (allegedly) multiple years! I just
> don't see it happening. I mean, what does he have to offer? Using
> tired Internet meme's day in and day out? Making lengthy and frequent
> speeches about how he's soooooophisticated enough to hold beliefs from
> both major political parties? Accusing people of pedophilia without
> proof? Doesn't sound like a good catch to me.
>
Rilly jonsing for that blog entry, aren't you? You're getting to be a broken
record. I really thought you were capable of more. Guess not. That's a
disappointment. Incidentally, I don't hold any beliefs from any
political 'party'. I'm not a member of any 'party', as far as I can see
they're just the same bullshit with two different brand names, and nothing
more. Something I think I've said a few hundred times before. Guess that
won't sink in this time either.
> On the other hand, if you look at his friends in a certain chat room,
> you get a good idea of the, erm, "quality" of woman Chuck's alleged
> wife is. She probably just didn't have too many choices besides Chuck.
> Loneliness and desparation can do horrible things to one's life.
What would you know about my wife? Have you ever met her? No. She's got her
problems, but petty maliciousness and random destruction of things aren't
among them. You know just about as much about my social life. Do you really
think it revolves around the chat room regulars exclusively? Guess you
should take another look at that flickr page. See how many #roadgeek
regulars you can find on there.
Steve A.
> Oh, and incidentally, CalBoggio: latest rankings give wwtl.info a ranking of
> 2 899 390 vs my network ranking of 1 776 851. Yr all into the numbers and
> that, they equate to success to you, so what d'ya think of that?
>
do...
Steve A.
wrote:
>
> Now for a serious comment.
>
> Why would anyone want to waste time typing stuff like <a href="blahbahblah"> or
> <b> or <img src="some picture somewhere"> when that can be automated?
>
> I can hand code but quite frankly, I find it a waste of time and useful only for
> tweaking a site automatically generated by something like GoLive or Dreamweaver.
> Why do all the grunt work when software can do it for you?
>
> What if you had to hand-place all the formatting codes that used to show up in
> the old "reveal codes" command of an ancient version of Word Perfect instead of
> using keyboard shortcuts?
>
> Most of us care about the finished result and don't care how much, or how
> little, effort goes into it. Personally I prefer not to hand-code because I find
> it a waste of time and keystrokes. And it still irks me that there is not a good
> WYSIWYG HTML editor out there comparable to Quark XPress or InDesign (or the old
> PageMaker) for the desktop publishing world. There is a market for such
> software.
>
> --
> To reply by e-mail, remove the "restrictor plate"
Whereas in my case, I much prefer the hand coding. It's all the joy
to me to get it right and learn new tricks in HTML, because deep down
inside I'm a coder at heart.
argatla...@yahoo.com.mx
> Just from the nature of photo files, unless you use a narrowly
> constrained set of metadata that could be obtained through some
> form of optical recognition, such as OCR on sign text, you're
> always going to have to do it manually.
Yes, exactly, and for hundreds of pictures it is a lot of work, which
means I want to do it only once. This means having the metadata on my
computer, in a widely supported format which I can use on multiple
photo-sharing websites on a variety of platforms.
> Of course, since 1998, when I started on my web sites, I have been
> writing text to accompany photos. The elements are all in place
> should I decide to migrate or mirror my photos at Flickr.
> One of the issues for me today is that any migration or
> mirroring would be done manually. I don't have time for that.
I have long suspected user-community sites like Flickr, Facebook,
MySpace, Blogger, etc. grow their user bases by recruiting armies of
people who don't place a high value on the time they spend interacting
with the user interface.
> If I am already creating metadata and descriptive text, then if
> Flickr has any kind of reasonable API, I should be able to transfer
> those metadata and text along with the photo. And it appears that
> I would be able to, given enough time and effort in selecting and
> programming the right methods correctly. (http://www.flickr.com/services/api/)
I hadn't realized Flickr had its own API. This would be a useful way to
upload the photos with metadata already in a widely supported DB format,
except of course you still have the skull labor of programming. I
rather suspect Flickr isn't eager to provide this functionality built-in
because that would turn photo-sharing into a commodity service, thus
allowing easy entry for competitors and limiting long-term growth prospects.
> As an example, I currently use another site for my site journal/blog,
> but I'd like to think about moving it elsewhere. But this thought
> is a big stumbling block: getting entries over from one to the other
> feels about like going through Berlin's Checkpoint Charlie in 1970.
I experimented with a road project blog a year ago but abandoned it
because there was no obvious facility for maintaining a local archive,
and I couldn't be sure how difficult it would be for me to transfer the
entries to a different site at some point in the future.
http://grandi-lavori-stradali.blogspot.com/
Checkpoint Charlie as seen in 'Funeral in Berlin' and 'The Spy who came
in from the Cold' is an apt metaphor. (It is one I will have a chance
to savor in person, since I am flying to Berlin next Wednesday for a
week's holiday.)
> It would be unthinkable for me to do this without being able to do
> the mirroring in an entirely automated fashion. It is an
> intriguing thought. It may take me some time to get around to it,
> though, with many other things on my personal agenda these days
> coming ahead of the line.
Ditto. One idea I may try is just to upload a few of my Fotopic
galleries to Flickr and see how it picks up the image descriptions (my
Fotopic pictures have no captions as such, the brief description being
in the filename after the series identifier). Unlike Fotopic, which is
a bare-bones site, Flickr offers the ability to show the same image at
multiple sizes. Since I have the original-size image files for
everything in my Fotopic picture galleries, I could try transferring the
labeled filenames to them with a batch script (easy-peasy even for me),
applying sharpening using a 'Photoshop' macro, and see how Flickr deals
with the full-size stuff.
> And there is the matter of Flickr's own future. That's tied up with
> Yahoo's future, which is far from clear right now. What is clear is
> that Yahoo's current management has painted a big old target on
> itself. The likely outcome is not remotely predictable yet.
I think Yahoo's future is precarious. I struggle to think of a single
thing, other than Flickr, which Yahoo does better than everyone else.
Although I have a Yahoo account as my MTR spamtrap, I read my email at a
Gmail account because it has always had free POP3 access (and now has
free IMAP access). It has been literally years since I searched for
anything on Yahoo.
> This goes back to what I believe is your fundamental point: on your own
> site, or on a site where you get a blank slate to work with, you
> have nearly total control. Web 2.0 sites are (mostly) not blank
> slates, and you're giving up some control, purportedly in return
> for a more social type of experience and, possibly, wider exposure
> for your work.
The way I see it, the "hot" thing these days is to be part of a
community. As Slater has found, being in Flickr allows him to leverage
his work much more efficiently than putting his pictures on his own
websites. I think the age of the vanity website is pretty much past, so
I would propose a simple rule of thumb: make your own vanity website if
it would be just as useful to you offline as if it were online.
As it happens, I have been considering a vanity website project of my
own. I have an extensive E-collection of sign design sheets from about
30 states, so I have considered putting together a state-by-state
taxonomy which shows what these sheets actually look like, and how their
drafting standards have changed over time. Whether or not I actually
upload the files, this project will be of use to me in better
understanding my collection and the ways in which I can expand it. What
I am less sure about is whether I would get enough out of the project to
commit the hours to it--after all, I have the files on my computer, so
if I want to know something I can just refer directly to the files
instead of going to my write-ups about them. (This mindset is
dangerous, though--I think it's part of the reason there are so many
ABDs out there instead of full-fledged PhDs.)
argatla...@yahoo.com.mx
> Why do all the grunt work when software can do it for you?
You'd be surprised. In my past life doing a math/physics degree, I
encountered many people who simply LOVED writing TeX code.
Cameron Kaiser
>Why would anyone want to waste time typing stuff like <a href="blahbahblah">
>or <b> or <img src="some picture somewhere"> when that can be automated?
Why indeed? :) Except for specific pages, all of my photo pages are built
dynamically off skeleton files by an image browser CGI written specially for
the purpose.
--
Cameron Kaiser * cka...@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
Cameron Kaiser
>>Oh, and incidentally, CalBoggio: latest rankings give wwtl.info a ranking of
>>2 899 390 vs my network ranking of 1 776 851. Yr all into the numbers and
>>that, they equate to success to you, so what d'ya think of that?
>Damn. I'm 1 847 081. Got a few thousand points of catching up to do...
I'm 829 337. You're next, Google, you're NEXT!
So what does that number mean anyway?
Cameron Kaiser
I believe there is a psychiatric diagnosis associated with that.
Andrew Tompkins
Ah, the next MTR flame war: hand coders vs. automated coders. :-D
I'm a hand coder myself. Then again, I use my own language so it's kind
of hard to find automated coders for that. There are XML coders out
there, but I've never found one that wasn't a pain in the ass to use.
And they always screw up the indentation.
--
--Andy
Otto Yamamoto
> "Steve A." <webm...@alpsroads.net> writes:
>
>>>Oh, and incidentally, CalBoggio: latest rankings give wwtl.info a ranking
>>>of 2 899 390 vs my network ranking of 1 776 851. Yr all into the numbers
>>>and that, they equate to success to you, so what d'ya think of that?
>
>>Damn. I'm 1 847 081. Got a few thousand points of catching up to do...
>
> I'm 829 337. You're next, Google, you're NEXT!
>
> So what does that number mean anyway?
>
It means you're doing better than I am! :) It's your approximate traffic
rank on the web. In my case very approximate, because it doesn't count my
crappy html that infests flickr, Google Maps, gribblenation, Bovverworld
and A Boy and His Computer, not to mention my own personal blog, which I
know at least 3 people read for sure(me, myself and I). HAW! HAW! HAW!
Otto Yamamoto
> As an aside, the great thing about the way things are now is that
> Macs are running a form of Unix under the skin. After my travails
> this weekend with a botched Fedora upgrade, I'm beginning to wonder
> if I shouldn't move more of my development work over the the Mac.
Holy cow. Fedora? No wonder you're gettin the grief. I've been using Open
SUSE for the last 4 years. I'm pretty happy w/it-it upgrades nicesly.
Jason Pawloski
> Jason Pawloski wrote:
>
> > I have to agree with Carl on this one. It's unfathomable that any
> > female - after actually getting to know Chuck Slater - would stick
> > with him for a month, let alone (allegedly) multiple years! I just
> > don't see it happening. I mean, what does he have to offer? Using
> > tired Internet meme's day in and day out? Making lengthy and frequent
> > speeches about how he's soooooophisticated enough to hold beliefs from
> > both major political parties? Accusing people of pedophilia without
> > proof? Doesn't sound like a good catch to me.
>
> Rilly jonsing for that blog entry, aren't you?
You just don't get it. Your blog is a JOKE. No one reads it, no one
cares about it. When I, and others, say they want to be in your blog,
it's a JOKE. No one would read it if you didn't spam MTR with updates
(or upd*tes as you say, LOL!). It's a JOKE. Do you understand?
> You're getting to be a broken
> record. I really thought you were capable of more. Guess not. That's a
> disappointment.
Pot, kettle.
> Incidentally, I don't hold any beliefs from any
> political 'party'. I'm not a member of any 'party', as far as I can see
> they're just the same bullshit with two different brand names, and nothing
> more. Something I think I've said a few hundred times before. Guess that
> won't sink in this time either.
LOL - you're so stupid you don't even know when I'm making fun of you.
You've made this speech for at least a year, as it turns out. You try
so hard to give off the impression that you are some sort of
intellectual sophisticate when your actions completely belie the image
you portray. These speeches, which appear here, on your blog, and on
your Myspace, are just a pathetic attempt by a pathetic human to sound
smart. Sorry, it's not working.
>
> > On the other hand, if you look at his friends in a certain chat room,
> > you get a good idea of the, erm, "quality" of woman Chuck's alleged
> > wife is. She probably just didn't have too many choices besides Chuck.
> > Loneliness and desparation can do horrible things to one's life.
>
> What would you know about my wife? Have you ever met her? No. She's got her
> problems, but petty maliciousness and random destruction of things aren't
> among them.
You imply I know nothing about your wife. But, I do know one extremely
important fact about her - she chose (presumably) to marry you. And
from that, I can discern a ton of information. (See below about the
"people tend to hang out with people similar" bit)
> You know just about as much about my social life. Do you really
> think it revolves around the chat room regulars exclusively? Guess you
> should take another look at that flickr page. See how many #roadgeek
> regulars you can find on there.
You seem to indicate that your friends outside of the chat room are
different than your friends inside of the chat room. I have no reason
to believe this is true. People tend to hang out with people similar
to themselves. And, well, the chatroom has a 24 year old (or so)
unemployed college dropout virgin (Seth), and an individual who admits
he has no friends (Steve). I'm not sure who the others are, so I can't
speak to their abnormalities, but their behavior is identical to those
who I do know. And that's enough for me.
Steve Sobol
> You just don't get it. Your blog is a JOKE. No one reads it, no one
> cares about it. When I, and others, say they want to be in your blog,
> it's a JOKE. No one would read it if you didn't spam MTR with updates
> (or upd*tes as you say, LOL!). It's a JOKE. Do you understand?
So why the protracted fights? You did the same thing with Randy.
(That question is directed at both of you.)
--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol
Otto Yamamoto
> On 2008-07-06, Jason Pawloski <jpaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You just don't get it. Your blog is a JOKE. No one reads it, no one
>> cares about it. When I, and others, say they want to be in your blog,
>> it's a JOKE. No one would read it if you didn't spam MTR with updates
>> (or upd*tes as you say, LOL!). It's a JOKE. Do you understand?
>
> So why the protracted fights? You did the same thing with Randy.
>
> (That question is directed at both of you.)
>
>
Jason's pathetic attempt to 'take me down a peg' is good for a few laughs.
Steve Sobol
>> So why the protracted fights? You did the same thing with Randy.
>>
>> (That question is directed at both of you.)
>>
> Jason's pathetic attempt to 'take me down a peg' is good for a few laughs.
Yeah, but your continued squabbling makes you both look stupid. I know
y'all aren't 8 years old, and neither is Jason. You both contribute
actual content to this newsgroup, so I'd rather not killfile either of
you. I'd rather you just ignored each other.
Otto Yamamoto
> On 2008-07-07, Otto Yamamoto <mryam...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>> So why the protracted fights? You did the same thing with Randy.
>>>
>>> (That question is directed at both of you.)
>>>
>> Jason's pathetic attempt to 'take me down a peg' is good for a few
>> laughs.
>
> Yeah, but your continued squabbling makes you both look stupid. I know
> y'all aren't 8 years old, and neither is Jason. You both contribute
> actual content to this newsgroup, so I'd rather not killfile either of
> you. I'd rather you just ignored each other.
>
Fair enough.
East Coast Hive Mind
Manager is from Debian. SUSE bunged it in around v 10.2 or so and it
works ok.
I'm meh on Debian. It works okay, but root access is console only;
otherwise you sudo. It's easy to wreck a Debian distro with
injudicious use of APT.