Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Why your Movable Type blog must die

By James A C Joyce in Internet
Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:22:25 AM EST
Tags: Internet (all tags)
Internet

In the past, blogging was an interesting pastime. Now, with the advent of the ridiculously popular weblog package Movable Type, the Web is in risk of drowning under a tidal wave of morons who throttle search engines with writing that has no purpose and such PageRank-destroying features as "TrackBack".


You are all pretentious twats

Every last one of you. You're all latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky. Most of you think that you're writing original content and that you're making a contribution by licensing your spewings under Creative Commons "Some Rights Reserved" licences, just because it's the hip thing to do. You think you know all there is to say about blogging because you understand the concept of HTML and CSS, but the horrible truth is that 40% of you are all using the same shitty default layout. Then you take pictures of yourselves looking pensive or making vague allusions to mythology.

You make up irritating jargon for the sake of it

The word 'weblog' is acceptable. 'Blog' is just about tolerable. The following are simply galling:

  • Blogosphere
  • Travelblog
  • Blogroll
  • Moblog
  • Blogstream

The puns just make them worse.

All of your blogs talk about the same crap

It's worthwhile to have one blog about a subject. It may be worthwhile to have twenty blogs about a subject. However, having 20,000 blogs about a small number of subjects is absolutely useless. See, the vast majority of all Movable Type blogs are written by those living in the United States. And the content of virtually any US citizen's Movable Type blog is about these subjects, in order of precedence:

  • Presidential elections
  • The economy
  • Political parties
  • Blogging
  • Open source software

You read a couple of blogs, and you can get all of the "grassroots" information about North America's politics and economy that you need to know. All the rest are superfluous.

Remember, Salam Pax got popular because his blog was fresh and didn't just contain the same rubbish which your blog does.

Movable Type is badly designed

Movable Type is written by web designers, not programmers. It looks good, but unfortunately falls apart under the slightest touch. There are scripts out there which can automatically hammer your blog into tiny, tiny bits by someone with a room-temperature IQ and just a few keystrokes of effort.

Movable Type's bad design makes it easier to DoS you

Every time you post a new item or someone posts a new comment, Movable Type spawns a little instance of perl. It then zips through and builds a new static page from the dynamic data since it's now changed. This process consumes your server's processor power. Movable Type's search feature in particular seems to be a processor hog for some reason.

In addition to this, most of you have email notification on new comments turned on. If (when) someone crapfloods you or decides to flood you with searches, you might be lucky enough to get 100, 300 or maybe even 10,000 emails in your inbox. If you're not so lucky, the server which runs your blog will crash and/or your hosting company will go apeshit. In this case, the load average of the hosting server reached 200. Two hundred. This was caused by a mere 350 searches per day over a two day period. No comment.

You are fucking stupid

The idiocy of Movable Type bloggers is most evident when they become emotional about a topic. When this occurs, they tend to make all kinds of massive, grating rhetorical faux pas such as false analogies. For instance, one fatuous journaller made the following claim after being crapflooded and having lots of search requests made on her blog:

Even the most asinine of hackers would not be in the least bit surprised to find themselves pressed with charges were they to enter a cement-and-mortar library and begin wantonly destroying books, ripping out their pages, defacing their covers, rendering them unusable by anyone else. Yet that is precisely what they are doing when they attack weblogs and sites containing original, creative content.

Congratulations, you dumb bint. You've just equated the useless babblings of millions of ostentatious retards around the world to a valuable free source of information available to all. Crapflooding is nothing like ripping up most of the books in a library. It's more likely scribbling on several thousands of pieces of paper and then stuffing them all into the "Comments and Suggestions" box hung up on the wall. This will hardly interfere at all with the experience of other library (blog) users. So shut the fuck up before you make a fool of yourself again by making nonsensical comparisons.

You are all sheep

Whenever you discuss a subject about which you all fake your knowledge, such as "metablogging", the lot of you tend to throw out random and completely false opinions and then temperately argue each other down to a single, unified viewpoint. Which is completely wrong.

Your blog is fucking up Google

This is what makes your blogs worse than useless. Previously, they were merely bundles of listless rambling scattered around the Web. Now their effects are positively toxic, choking search engines as they grow continuously and invasively.

If you try to search Google on any kind of nonmainstream topic which has been discussed amongst yourselves, it's entirely possible that all of the top search results are from a few well-connected bloggers who have blabbed about a subject and then been TrackBacked over and over again by hundreds of other people. TrackBack and "other related blog entries" are hypertextual viruses for fucking up Google, I swear. PageRank was not designed for this sort of linking where each in a series of a thousand pages links to all of the other 999 pages.

In conclusion

Move your shit over to LiveJournal. At least then we can pretend that it doesn't exist and you can stop pretending that your shit doesn't stink.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Movable Type blogs: are they good, or are they wack?
o I use Movable Type, guiltlessly 12%
o I use Movable Type, guiltily 2%
o You're talking out of your arse. 34%
o I agree. Movable Type must be stopped before it kills the Web. 50%

Votes: 226
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Google
o Movable Type
o TrackBack
o Creative Commons
o looking pensive
o making vague allusions to mythology
o scripts out there
o In this case
o one fatuous journaller
o search Google
o hypertextu al viruses for fucking up Google
o LiveJourna l
o Also by James A C Joyce


Display: Sort:
Why your Movable Type blog must die | 438 comments (397 topical, 41 editorial, 10 hidden)
Um dude, (1.80 / 25) (#2)
by Run4YourLives on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 05:21:23 PM EST

If you're not interested, don't read it.

It's slightly Japanese, but without all of that fanatical devotion to the workplace. - CheeseburgerBrown
I don't think you read the whole thing. (1.60 / 10) (#5)
by James A C Joyce on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 05:25:47 PM EST

Namely, the section "Your blog is fucking up Google". I can't help but read these butthats' crappy little blogs when every search I do throws up hundreds of trackbacks. God I hate TrackBack.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Hey, he was just following his own advice. (nt) (1.40 / 5) (#63)
by mcc on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:03:45 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Learn to Google better... (2.57 / 7) (#90)
by dlec on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:10:28 AM EST

If you don't like blogs then remove them from your search. -blog would probably do you, or if it is just MovableType you hate then -trackback or -"movable type".

I myself hade PDFs and refuse to use them. I wish Google wouldn't show them in search queries. So I just add -pdf when I am getting lots of PDFs in the results.

Simple!

[ Parent ]

It's a competitive market (1.50 / 4) (#95)
by saxmatt on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:56:42 AM EST

Or don't use Google at all. Take your searching business elsewhere.

[ Parent ]
Because someone's holding a gun to your head? (2.16 / 6) (#113)
by Karmakaze on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:23:33 AM EST

As many a poster has pointed out, if blogs are "fucking up Google" just by existing as designed in a non-abusive way, then the problem's with the search engine.

If you're not interested in what they have to say, well, it's because they're not talking to you.  You're not the center of the universe, nor are you the sole arbiter of what is 'worthwhile'.  

Every time I see one of these rants I see a petulant child angry that there are people out there doing things that don't revolve around him and his interests.  I've got no use for football as a spectator sport, but I don't go on a crusade to stop the Superbowl just because it eats realtime conversational space for a week on either side.
--
Karmakaze
[ Parent ]

Almost convincing (none / 3) (#151)
by superstring on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:51:44 AM EST

I would have believed you if you hadn't made the shameless plug for LiveJournal at the end of that beautiful piece.

[ Parent ]
Damn good writing for a ranting maniac (2.11 / 18) (#6)
by StephenThompson on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 05:29:02 PM EST

Eventhough I've never heard of movable type, I like your second paragraph; it pretty much describes half the internet with the other half being porn and spam.  So, I won't push this over the cliff it is doomed to fall over.

HAHAHAHA (none / 1) (#355)
by James A C Joyce on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 02:29:44 PM EST

This got on the front page! Suck it, Trebek!

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

With you up until the google rant (2.73 / 38) (#7)
by squigly on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 05:32:32 PM EST

This is what makes your blogs worse than useless. Previously, they were merely bundles of listless rambling scattered around the Web. Now their effects are positively toxic, choking search engines as they grow continuously and invasively.

Surely this is a problem with the search engines.  The web is about publishing and linking, and always has been.  Moveabletype is simply an extension of this.  If Google fails to handle this, then it is a fault with Google.

I DISAGREE. (1.42 / 19) (#8)
by James A C Joyce on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 05:44:35 PM EST

I don't think any search engine could reasonably be expected to deal with the hundreds of trackbacks, pings, archives, mirroring, quoting and renaming of script URLs which Movable Type users are constantly doing. God I fucking hate Movable Type.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Why Google must die. (2.78 / 23) (#16)
by ubernostrum on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:16:15 PM EST

If a bunch of bloggers with room-temperature IQs can automatically hammer Google into tiny, tiny bits with just a few keystrokes of effort, then obviously Google is a horrendous steaming pile of badly-designed shit and you should be thankful to MT-based Googleflooding for exposing this fact.


--
You cooin' with my bird?
[ Parent ]
Funny, but facetious. (1.76 / 17) (#40)
by James A C Joyce on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 07:43:53 PM EST

You say "a bunch of bloggers". You're using meiosis invalidly. You're implying that it's only a small number of bloggers who can bring down Google. Wrong. It's tens of thousands of bloggers. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups using software that doesn't scale.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Uh, Dude... (2.00 / 5) (#351)
by SQL Error on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 11:38:48 AM EST

Movable Type scales perfectly well. It's not having any problems at all with those tens of thousands of bloggers with all their links and comments and trackbacks. Google is the one with the scaling problem.

[ Parent ]
bwa... (1.46 / 15) (#9)
by gr3y on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 05:51:26 PM EST

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

+1 FP.

And a righteous rant.

I am a disruptive technology.

Google will eventually catch up (2.40 / 15) (#14)
by nkyad on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:07:36 PM EST

It always did - Google has always been only a tiny step behind anything they felt would make it less useful. If and when they feel their engine is being "fucked up", they will change the rating process to reflect a fairer reality.

Don't believe in anything you can't see, smell, touch or at the very least infer from a good particle accelerator run


google (2.42 / 7) (#32)
by horny smurf on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 07:28:26 PM EST

I heard rumors that google would remove blog searches from the main search a year ago. I'd say their engine has been "fucked up" for quite some time now -- many of my searches result in pages of links to online stores or porn redirects which have nothing to do with the search terms except that they happen to use the right keywords.

[ Parent ]
Quality (2.67 / 28) (#18)
by Tatarigami on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:24:31 PM EST

The good thing about the internet is that it gives everyone a voice.

The bad thing about the internet is that it gives everyone a voice.

Admittedly, finding that one blog with something sensible to say is like wading through a chest-high river of raw sewage looking for flowers, but in the end, clutching those precious flowers to your chest makes you forget all about being covered in human filth.

What if you have hayfever like me? (2.26 / 15) (#20)
by James A C Joyce on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:41:13 PM EST

That's like going down into a sewer, staggering into the filth, batting microturds out of my eyes and having my limbs cut by suspended shards of glass and plastic. Then I finally grab the flower, inhale its beautiful aroma, and start sneezing and getting painfully itchy eyes. Then I try to relieve the itching by plucking out my eyebrows but just wind up getting sewage into my eyes. So I wind up with infected cuts on my arms and legs and shit in my eyes. Then someone flushes a toilet, causing me to be drowned in another person's faecal matter.

That's what looking at people's Movable Type blogs is like for me.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Yikes (2.42 / 7) (#30)
by Tatarigami on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 07:27:45 PM EST

I officially concede ownership of that metaphor to you.

[ Parent ]
It's a shame (1.80 / 5) (#128)
by godix on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:40:02 AM EST

that your comment is entirely too long for a sig. That's the best description of pretty much anything on the internet I've ever seen. Especially if you'd add a bit about seeing someone sitting on the toliet, that'd be the tubgirl trolls.

I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid.
- General Qaddafi
[ Parent ]
Oh yeah (1.75 / 8) (#21)
by polish surprise on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:46:36 PM EST

Stupid fucking flowers are going to make me forget that I'm chest-high in shit.

--
Controversy is my middle name.
[ Parent ]

Poorly behaved men... (2.62 / 8) (#76)
by rusty on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:25:25 AM EST

...have depended on just that theory for centuries.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
what ever happened to personal websites? (2.70 / 10) (#25)
by janra on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:57:52 PM EST

Not blogs, not pictures of somebody's dog - websites with descriptions of somebody's interests and hobbies? tips and tricks for people who share those interests and hobbies? instructions for repeating something cool in said hobby, so other people can try it out just for fun?

They still exist, but are sadly in the minority. Now everybody has a voice, and they haven't realized yet that not everybody has anything to say...

And however much I think those overclockers who post instructions for supercooling a cpu and speeding it up 10x faster than it's rated for have way too much time on their hands, I find those pages far more interesting than the endless cross-linking and trivia of most blogs.
--
Discuss the art and craft of writing
That's the problem with world domination... Nobody is willing to wait for it anymore, work slowly towards it, drink more and enjoy the ride more.
[ Parent ]

Gah, kids these days. (2.31 / 29) (#19)
by Russell Dovey on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 06:29:45 PM EST

Look, young man, you should be thankful for what you've got!

In my day, when we used mainframes, we had to write our own blog programs, in assembly code!

Of course we also had to carry the cards containing individual posts to the telegraph station individually, uphill, through dense jungle, and carry the replies back, uphill, in the snow!

And we were bloody well thankful for it! Today's layabouts don't know what's good for them!

"Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light." - Spike Milligan

You don't need any kind of blog software. (2.33 / 6) (#29)
by James A C Joyce on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 07:27:22 PM EST

Blog software is a crutch for people who are too wussy to use m4.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

you had cards? (2.42 / 7) (#72)
by kobayashi on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:47:59 AM EST

you were lucky! in my day we had to throw individaul electrons at phosphor screens ourselves, one at a time, till the message got through. and we loved it.

[ Parent ]
You had electrons? (2.20 / 5) (#127)
by godix on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:31:55 AM EST

In my day we'd gather up a couple quarks and build our own electrons to throw at a phosphor screen. You just try to tell that to young people today and they ignore you.

I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid.
- General Qaddafi
[ Parent ]
you were lucky ... (1.80 / 5) (#190)
by akb on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:03:05 PM EST

... we only had 0's and 1's and sometimes we didn't even have 1's.

Collaborative Video Blog demandmedia.net
[ Parent ]

we didn't even have bits (none / 0) (#390)
by benoit on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 05:43:41 PM EST

But try telling that to a kid nowadays, and they won't believe you.


[ Parent ]
+1 FP (1.75 / 12) (#26)
by SkArcher on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 07:09:16 PM EST

A Righteous Rant - I agree, not on Google grounds but simply on the inanity of most weblogs. Even the good blogs are impossible to find in the morass of crap.
If God didn't want us to eat people, why did he make them out of MEAT?
Yes. (2.10 / 30) (#31)
by Michael Moore on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 07:27:52 PM EST

Movable Type is tearing away the very fabric of our society. It represents the "blogger", the most self-obsessed and yet most banal creation of the internet age. By giving everyone a voice, we have given them the illusion that their voice is worth something. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. The most frightening aspect of all of this is that the blog continues to grow. Slowly, it is becoming the human side of the internet, every loser's refuge in which the only important thing in the world is them, what they think, what they do. These people swarm together in their internet subculture, spending all their time reading about the utterly boring adventures of their fellow members of the Harry Potter Fanfic web-ring. As they feed and perpetuate the diseased social infection that is the blogger culture, its rules and ethics become more and more entrenched in their psyches. Soon, they're spending even more time "blogging", scrawling their vile idiocy all over the internet in some pathetic attempt to be a better blogger, one who updates more often, gets more hits, has more link-backs, has a Flash banner made by that other blogger they know from Connecticut (who is a graphic designer).

Do the world a favor. If you ever meet a blogger, let them know how you feel about blogging, and then kick them in the fucking face a few times. Even if you get in trouble with the Law, it's worth it just to know that you've made a blogger question the way they live their life.

--
"My life was more improved by a single use of [ecstasy] than someone's life is made worse by becoming a heroin addict." -- aphrael

You mean they aren't? (1.66 / 9) (#91)
by interactive_civilian on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:26:55 AM EST

Michael Moore said:
By giving everyone a voice, we have given them the illusion that their voice is worth something. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.
Well, this is just about the most conceited thing I have ever read! Who TF are you to say that someone else's voice is not worth anything? Who TF are you to even imply that you had anything to do with giving everyone a voice?

Sorry, but IMNSFHO everyone's voice is worth something, whether you like what that voice is saying or not. I don't like what you are saying in the least, but I will put up with it, because no opinion should be censored, and every person has the right to say what they want whether anyone listens or not.

Get of your high horse! There is nothing that makes your (or my) voice any more or less important than any of the other millions that are out on the internet.

Sorry for the rant, but you have succeeded in pissing me off. Have a nice day.

[ Parent ]

Sorry, (2.25 / 4) (#234)
by toganet on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:18:40 PM EST

You must have missed the part where he said your voice is not worth anything.

Please shut up, and spell out THE FUCK.

Johnson's law: Systems resemble the organizations that create them.


[ Parent ]
All cool, except... (2.38 / 13) (#48)
by gilrain on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 08:38:23 PM EST

I'm in agreement with pretty much everything you said. You might have pointed out that, like anything else, it's not black and white: some blogs *are* good, and some *do* provide useful, interesting information. It's implied, I realize, but it can't hurt to point out (maybe even link to a few good examples), and it would sooth a few egos. In general though, I agree: most blogs are terrible. By most, I mean a vast majority. Including my own, which I really keep intending to tear down, but never get around to.

One thing I disagree with, however. The role of Google is to conform to the internet and make it searchable. The internet should *not* conform to Google. Since the usefulness of trackbacks really is questionable, this isn't a big issue. But what you're saying is that even if trackbacks were an excellent technology, they should be discouraged because they screw up pagerank. Instead, Google should adapt to whatever form the internet takes.

Blogs are like porn sites (2.50 / 16) (#51)
by Tyler Durden on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 09:02:40 PM EST

There are a whole bunch of 'em, but most of them are crap.  More than half of them straight out steal their stuff from other sites.  A few are so disturbing it's just hard to even look, but like a really bad accident, you can't look away either.  Every once in a while though, you find a really good one and everything just falls into place.

Jesus Christ, EVERYONE is a troll here at k5, even the editors, even rusty! -- LilDebbie

Hey! I've seen you before! (1.92 / 14) (#56)
by JayGarner on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 09:51:47 PM EST

You're all latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs ...

The old woman in that anti Howard Dean ad, right? Back to Vermont where it belongs! You go, girl!

The Blogging Menace: A Solution. (1.83 / 18) (#57)
by rmg on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 10:04:00 PM EST

The author presents the case as though only the writers can prevent weblogging. The fact is, only you can prevent blogging.

How? Simple. Find the most popular and useless blog. Troll it into the ground. Then move to the next. Following this simple program, the glamor of blogging can be undermined and the threat blogging poses neutralized.

Democratization of the internet must be opposed at all costs. The infestation ecommerce was bad enough, but to allow regular people to post their diaries online -- well, that's simply intolerable.

Take aim. Take action.

note: should anyone decide to take up this course of action, it will be much more like invading a newsgroup than a site like kuro5hin -- planning and coordination will be needed, otherwise they'll just ban you.

_____ intellectual tiddlywinks

The best part is... (2.69 / 26) (#59)
by El Volio on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 10:44:19 PM EST

...how this is going to shoot to the top of the blogdex (oooh, I bet you hate this term) as soon as it sees the light of day. Heh. And it will be endlessly picked over by "latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs". Double heh.

BTW, if Google can't figure out how to handle weblogs, then the problem is with the search engine. It's pretty good at not catapulting random homepages to the top of the results; they'll figure this one out, too.

At least one point is well-taken, though: have something to say! Not that I always do on my weblog -- in fact, it's probably one of those that you hate even though I run Blosxom and not Movable Type -- but not having anything truly interesting to say about something besides weblogging culture and technology. Metablogging does, indeed, bite.

I add 'blogdex' to the list. (1.25 / 8) (#71)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:23:27 AM EST

And I am speaking solely to moronic Movable Type users. I know this means I'm going to miss some of the blogtards out, but sacrifices have to be made. I hope no one sets Jesse Jackson on me for discriminating against users of a particular kind of blogging software.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Hoo boy (2.37 / 8) (#73)
by rusty on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:18:53 AM EST

this is going to shoot to the top of the blogdex (oooh, I bet you hate this term) as soon as it sees the light of day

That was my first thought too. Well tomorrow should be interesting.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Linking by Blogdex (2.30 / 10) (#86)
by gazbo on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 04:50:11 AM EST

Can you please install the Scoop trackback box so that we can easily see when this happens?

-----
Topless, revealing, nude pics and vids of Zora Suleman! Upskirt and down blouse! Cleavage!
Hardcore ZORA SULEMAN pics!

[ Parent ]

gosh (none / 2) (#342)
by Wah on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 08:43:37 AM EST

that was tough. (as of 8:49 a.m. eastern 2/5).
--
sometimes things just are that way and that's it. They're true. Sure, Popper, et. al., may argue otherwise, but they're dead. You get it? Yet?
[ Parent ]
this whole article your post is metablogging (nt) (2.00 / 7) (#97)
by jacoplane on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:15:15 AM EST



[ Parent ]
I think everybody has it wrong. (2.31 / 16) (#61)
by vyruss on Mon Feb 02, 2004 at 10:58:14 PM EST

It's not the friggin' bloggers who should stop breaking Google, I think it's Google's job to find a way to deal with this.

  • PRINT CHR$(147)

Fight the monoculture! (2.18 / 11) (#64)
by b1t r0t on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:09:42 AM EST

My own web site (on which you won't find the B-word anywhere) is all done in straight vi-edited HTML, except for the mod-perl which automatically builds up the constant parts of pages, and a little text-only nagivation tree. (I hate frames.)

I'm sure there's some way to DoS me by calling up pages (after all, every one has been generated dynamically), but since I'm not using the same crapware that a hundred thousand lemmings are using, it's not worth someone's time to create a DoS tool for the script kiddies. I was shocked a few weeks ago to find out that whoever wrote this thing had apparently never thought about filtering out crapflooders.

So, just as we now have viruses exploiting the most popular idiot operating system, now we have tools to DoS the most popular idiot web log software.

-- Indymedia: the fanfiction.net of journalism.

Preach it brotha (2.68 / 16) (#66)
by bugmaster on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:29:00 AM EST

Being an MT blogger myself, I simply had no choice but to +1FP this. Everything the author says about MT blogs is 100% true -- except maybe for that crapflooding thing; MT has apparently fixed it in their new release. But, in general, MT is still designed pretty poorly.

Fortunately, MT is also really easy to set up and administer. For the price of learning the absolute minimum of Perl, you get your own blog which you can design whatever way you want; this is much better than LiveJournal, which makes you conform to their standards. And of course, since you administer the blog yourself, you can import/export content, browse the error logs, etc. etc. -- all the stuff you can't do on LJ.

For the most part, though, all blogs are crap (including my own). However, there have always been places on the Internet for conceited people who think that the world wants to hear their ideas -- BBSs, Usenet, IRC, discussion forums, non-automated personal webpages... MT is not really all that different. Personally, I just use my blog to share some geeky information to my friends, so that I won't have to repeat myself 10 times -- I have no illusions whatsoever that the world at large cares about my opinion in the slightest.

The one thing I disagree with in this article is the note about Trackback/google. Theoretically, if everyone in the world links to your blog, doesn't this actually mean that the information you posted in your blog entry is important, and therefore should show up at the top of the Google search ? How is trackback any worse than linking to the same entry entirely by hand ?
>|<*:=

You must learn... (2.28 / 7) (#87)
by ti dave on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:00:27 AM EST

the difference between important and popular.

Pause and reflect upon this point.

"If you dial," Iran said, eyes open and watching, "for greater venom, then I'll dial the same."

[ Parent ]
Important Vs. Popular (2.50 / 6) (#92)
by armaghetto on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:39:02 AM EST

It's Google's job to serve up popular. It's your job to pick out the important.
<error in .sig: user too lazy to make one>
[ Parent ]
He said "top of the search". (2.00 / 3) (#101)
by ti dave on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:33:22 AM EST

That's popular, not necessarily important.
"If you dial," Iran said, eyes open and watching, "for greater venom, then I'll dial the same."

[ Parent ]
relevant (2.55 / 9) (#180)
by FieryTaco on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:10:04 PM EST

Actually it's Google's job to serve up relevant. They attempt to identify relevant by correlating that with popular. It's an interesting observation of human nature.

[ Parent ]
The wonders of technology.. (2.20 / 5) (#179)
by geekmug on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:09:31 PM EST

However, there have always been places on the Internet for conceited people who think that the world wants to hear their ideas -- BBSs, Usenet, IRC, discussion forums, non-automated personal webpages... MT is not really all that different.

How is trackback any worse than linking to the same entry entirely by hand?

To both of these I respond with: efficiency. You are right that in both cases, there is no difference between the millions of crappy posts on any other internet medium and the millions of crappy linkbacks on websites. The difference is in the efficiency. MT decreases the signal-to-noise ratio on the internet because it is so much more efficient at letting you post crap and link to other crap.

Another point is the medium, argubaly http served information is supposed to be the most content-full of all public browsed exchanges of information. Usenet, for example, is a discrete exchange, and doesn't leave a hovering shit cloud over the good information to be found, because there simply isn't anything to find. Same applies to LJ and Xanga and discussion forums and etc.. they are easily seperated from the worthwhile information. MT spreads the shit cloud over thousands of domains and possibly domains that are shared with worthwhile information. The inability to distinguish the shit from the gold is another reason why MT is worse.

Advancement of technology serves only to make it easy to stroke our ego and ourselves, automatically.

-- Why reinvent the square wheel?
[ Parent ]
Popularity (none / 3) (#237)
by bugmaster on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:46:00 PM EST

As the other poster pointed out, Google tracks popularity. It would be nice if it could track importance, instead -- but it can't, because it's not a Strong AI yet. Actually, even if it were, its notions of what's important might differ from yours, so you'd probably bitch anyway. Popularity is a nice, neutral heuristic to use when determining relevance of search results.

MT allows people to easily link to each other, thus boosting popularity. You may think these posts are crappy, but clearly the people who link them think otherwise -- because otherwise they won't link to the post, right ?

Yes, it would be nice if Google acted as a sort of enlightened monarch, deciding what's important and what's crap with a gentle wave of its hand (uh... appendage ?). However, history shows us that enlightened monarchs don't tend to last very well; they eventually get replaced by not-so-enlightened dictators.

The bottom line is, if the majority of people online think that Brittney Spears news are the greatest thing ever, then that's what google will show you, MT or no MT. Tough.
>|<*:=
[ Parent ]

LiveJournal (none / 3) (#246)
by Belgand on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:09:29 PM EST

Perhaps it's just me but I got turned on to Livejournal a few years ago before it became popular. I saw the release of the GTK client on Freshmeat and something called "Loser Jabber" sounded interesting. I still use my journal, but only as a journal and rather infrequently. I don't post daily nor do I consider it a "blog". Hell, I hate the term "blog" with a passion and barely tolerate "weblog" or the very fact that people have come up with a stupid name for a very, very obvious and basic form of web page layout. But enough vitriol. LiveJournal is simply a quick, efficient journal that just so happens to be stored online and can be made public if the user so wishes. Commenting is built in, but so what? In my mind at least, they are totally, totally different beasts.

[ Parent ]
+1 FP, J.A.C.J. (1.00 / 16) (#68)
by fae on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:05:29 AM EST



-- fae: but an atom in the great mass of humanity
Joyce th Jackass (1.52 / 17) (#74)
by enmasse on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:19:58 AM EST

Heh, sounds to me like Mr. James Joyce has a case of my-life-is-as-boring-as-everyone-elses and he can't deal with it, so he'll try to tear everybody else down.

The only way an idiot like Joyce gets so worked-up about stupid shit like this is if he tried to blog himself, and then realized his own pathetic self-truth.

What an asshole.

Get a life Joyce. Or wait, is that why you don't have a blog?

Yes. (none / 3) (#219)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:30:04 PM EST

So fuck you too.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Not much has changed (2.63 / 22) (#78)
by adiffer on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:49:36 AM EST

Blogs enable some people to extend their voices further than they would normally reach.  They also reduce the risks we face in expressing our opinions since it is a little harder to shot and killed with an electronic voice compared to standing on a soap box and encouraging revolution in the street.

What we say hasn't changed much.  You're just getting to see the level of intelligence and education that is more common in our population.  Most of us are pretentious.  Most of us are sheep.  Most of us are self absorbed.  Most of us are unable to follow a path not already defined by all the other sheep.

If there is one good service 20,000 blogs on one topic provide it is the brutal realization that real life is nothing like what Hollywood portrays.

Welcome to your adult life.  Now deal with it.  You don't have much choice.
-Dream Big. --Grow Up.

That, sir (1.83 / 6) (#111)
by aphrael on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:59:58 AM EST

is the most intelligent thing i've read on this website all week. My hat is off to you. :)

[ Parent ]
Phooey (2.00 / 4) (#229)
by pyramid termite on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:48:03 PM EST

Most of us are pretentious. Most of us are sheep. Most of us are self absorbed. Most of us are unable to follow a path not already defined by all the other sheep.

And the rest of us are elitist snobs. This reminds me of nothing more than what my parents' generation was saying about rock and roll in the 60s. It made them sound like old farts then - it makes you sound like an old fart now.

What you're really asking people to do is to shut the hell up and let the "better" people speak. I say, if they were really "better", people would have.

On the Internet, anyone can accuse you of being a dog.
[ Parent ]
not at all (none / 0) (#393)
by adiffer on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 12:43:04 AM EST

Go right ahead and speak all you want.  Some day, you too will be an old fart.

As it happens, I am enjoying myself.  
Once the world began to make some sense, it got much better.
-Dream Big. --Grow Up.
[ Parent ]

Ted Sturgeon already said that (2.25 / 4) (#289)
by Gallowglass on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 10:54:29 AM EST

Actually, what he said in a speech at a session of the World Science Fiction Covention in Philadelphia, held over the Labor Day weekend of 1953. was, "when they talk about science fiction, they call it 'that Buck Rogers stuff,' and they say 'ninety percent of science fiction is crud.' Well, they're right. Ninety percent of science fiction is crud. But then ninety percent of everything is crud."

[ Parent ]
understanding (none / 1) (#394)
by adiffer on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 12:51:06 AM EST

Once I began to understand that lesson (it comes in so many forms no one should ever get through early adulthood without encountering it) life began to make so much more sense.  If it really is 90% crud, I should be quite proud of my work if I can cut it down to 89% in my little corner of the world.  My whole sense of scale and relative importance shifted.  My understanding of just how much work society faced to improve our quality of life came into focus.  My sense of purpose for living clicked into place.  It was a spiritual moment, though it wasn't focused into one small time slice.
-Dream Big. --Grow Up.
[ Parent ]
Trackback Alternative (2.09 / 11) (#79)
by saxmatt on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:52:25 AM EST

You can always use Pingback. Why the animosity directed at Movable Type? When I got crapflooded I assumed you hated all blogging software equally.

-1000 Troll (2.14 / 28) (#80)
by sakusha on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:54:31 AM EST

You realize this is the manifesto of the GNAA, the people who are DDoSing MT blogs? And by putting it on the FP, you're giving these fuckwads the publicity they want? These GNAA tards try to post this screed on every site they crapflood. They are easily defeated, MT countermeasures are simple to implement. So, don't you feel like idiots for voting up a storyto FP, written by a group of destructive skript kiddees? What's next, FP for a manifesto by virus writers?

Actually, if well written, then YES. (nt) (2.37 / 8) (#82)
by gilrain on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:58:01 AM EST



[ Parent ]
So you're OK with linking to skript kiddee tools? (1.80 / 10) (#84)
by sakusha on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 04:11:15 AM EST

This screed links to the GNAA toolkit and MTFlood. So you're OK with prominently publishing the address of destructive skript kiddee tools like MTFlood? This isn't just a manifesto, it's providing the tools to destroy communication on the web.

So let me put it another way, if I publish a screed about why Scoop must die, and I put links to tools that any idiot skript kiddee can use to disrupt k5, will you vote it +1 FP?

[ Parent ]
Yup. Can't stop it if you can't see it. (nt) (1.00 / 5) (#201)
by gilrain on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:16:51 PM EST



[ Parent ]
It's called FloodMT, by the way. (1.00 / 4) (#203)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:29:10 PM EST

And you say "This isn't just a manifesto, it's providing the tools to destroy communication on the web." but that's not true, is it? The linked script isn't going to destroy all communication on the whole of the WWW? You were being hyperbolic, weren't you? I thought so.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Guy, bitching about it just makes you ... (1.60 / 5) (#230)
by pyramid termite on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:53:51 PM EST

... a somewhat elitist curmudgeon, which I can tolerate. Reposting an article from an organization devoted to DOS attacks on blogs makes you a fascist creep.

On the Internet, anyone can accuse you of being a dog.
[ Parent ]
Phff! (2.00 / 10) (#81)
by WWWWolf on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:57:59 AM EST

That certainly is a false analogy. A better "public library" analogy for flooding blogs would be that someone asked Agent Smith to go to the library. Yes, all of the Agent Smiths, at once.

(Or was this analogy even more annoying, with its supposedly high-brow pop culture reference?)


-- Weyfour WWWWolf, a lupine technomancer from the cold north...


High-brow? (none / 3) (#121)
by godix on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:04:21 AM EST

The analogy wasn't annoying but if I were you I wouldn't call that a high-brow pop culture reference. In the real world, the one where all the geeks are too busy writing random rants that no more than 5 other people will read and ignore, that is most definately not a high-brow reference. The audience at a Cats show would string you up for thinking so (granted, Cats is on the very low end of 'high-brow' but still)

I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid.
- General Qaddafi
[ Parent ]
Well, I know... (none / 1) (#196)
by WWWWolf on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 04:35:59 PM EST

It's just that The Matrix Trilogy is getting some reputation as "smart movie" - I know a lot of people who (unsuccessfully) tried to look smart by analysing the movies.

I know. The even smarter people tend to favor entirely different kind of stuff =)


-- Weyfour WWWWolf, a lupine technomancer from the cold north...


[ Parent ]
Here's an analogy (1.87 / 8) (#143)
by sllort on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:25:52 AM EST

Crapflooding a moveable type blog is like taking a shit in someone's trash can.
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]
Better even... (none / 3) (#170)
by vyruss on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:51:37 PM EST

...like someone flushing stuff down somebody's toilet.

  • PRINT CHR$(147)

[ Parent ]
Which, translated to English, means (1.20 / 5) (#173)
by vyruss on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:52:59 PM EST

...somebody else's toilet. Shit, am, I, tired. Been spending the past 2.5 hours making Banoffee Pie.

  • PRINT CHR$(147)

[ Parent ]
I wonder where this springs from? (2.36 / 19) (#83)
by GreyGhost on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 04:00:02 AM EST

You are all pretentious twats

Every last one of you. You're all latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky.

This is very like rants I read early on when everybody and their brother started putting up their own website and all the AOL people started showing up in Usenet and irc chat rooms pissing off the people who had been online for longer.

But I feel it is also tinged with the same kind of hatred for one's own class that I saw when I was going to Santa Cruz (which if you do not know - is the whitest campus in the entire University of California system). White boys dredding their hair out and listening to Bob Marley/Jimi Hendrix, and wearing or quoting Malcolm X. Rioting in downtown SC and on campus when the Rodney King verdict was passed down.

So where is that coming from? I read through the author's diary entries - and his diaries could serve as poster-children for the kind of online diatribes he is railing against.

On the other hand - I empathize completely with the completely self-involved nature of most blogs. The worst ones by far have to be those involving the acquisition of some new toy: 'Check out picks of my iPod!' 'Oh my god Hummers rock - I just got one for my birthday!' 'What type of video card should I buy?'

Perhaps a reality tv show where 10 bloggers posting crap like this are selected at random and shot in the back of the head on live tv after being forced to dig their own graves with their keyboards could solve this problem?



Or perhaps "Blog Survivor" (2.00 / 4) (#144)
by sllort on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:35:20 AM EST

But instead of a voting contest, where they would all choose not to vote in "solidarity", we just put them in the desert with knives and a water supply which can only sustain one person.

Might have to make it pay-per-view though.
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]

well, alternatives (1.87 / 8) (#85)
by cronian on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 04:12:01 AM EST

Can you come with something better for all of those people to do? What are those people with a moveable type blog supposed to do? Are they supposed to post articles bitching about it on K5? Commit suicide?

There might something wrong with our society. I don't believe in organized religion, but maybe some more people need to get some sort of religion. Maybe, more people should actually learn something interesting. I'm not into new age stuff, but maybe more people need to get into new agey stuff. Maybe, more people should try creating art, although I'm not sure if I'd look forward to lousy art blogs. Does something give?

We perfect it; Congress kills it; They make it; We Import it; It must be anti-Americanism
DId you miss the last paragraph? (1.75 / 4) (#88)
by sholden on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:03:10 AM EST

Seemed to be an alternative to me...

--
The world's dullest web page


[ Parent ]
commercial plug (1.80 / 5) (#102)
by cronian on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:50:13 AM EST

That just sounded like a plug for livejournal. I didn't take the last paragraph seriously, because I generally filter out things that look like commercial plugs. I did however go along with the premise that there are lots of crappy blogs.

We perfect it; Congress kills it; They make it; We Import it; It must be anti-Americanism
[ Parent ]
That's easy. (none / 2) (#310)
by abracadada on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 03:50:58 PM EST

Instead of talking about their boring day, they should spend the same amount of time doing something that isn't boring.  Even tuning into HGTV would probably be an improvement.  Start training in a martial art; you won't have as much useless spare time, and you won't have to complain about being out of shape.

I'd be all for bad art blogs, because at least then they'd be non-indexable graphics.  Well, probably.  I see all sorts of art that I don't really appreciate (and I'm not even a rabid modern-art hater), and that's OK.  If you enjoy doing it, it has exercised a part of your brain that maybe you weren't using before.  It doesn't necessarily matter if it's "good" or not.  Einstein understood this.

Get a cheap book and build your own robot.  Pay $10 for a guide online and charge people to fix their Playstations.  Get a $50 guitar and hit OLGA.  Learn Python.  There's a ton of cool stuff to do, but I think it's harder than The Great Online Whine.

Organized religion, like many things, is only bad when abused and taken to excess.  However, I'm not sure it would have any effect on blogging one way or the other.

One site I do enjoy is blindwino.com, but that's not really a blog.  The author is writing about his life online, but it's not diary-like in the least.  Buy his book!
WMBC online freeform/independent radio.
[ Parent ]

The real sinner (2.41 / 12) (#93)
by jonaskb on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:53:37 AM EST

While I do agree that software developers should make an attempt to make their software secure, I think we must not forget who the real sinner is: The real sinner is the person who vandalizes a site or hacks his way into it. They're the ones to blame, not the Movable Type authors.

I'm not saying this because I'm a fan of Movable Type. As a matter of fact, I've never used it (I use a blog system I've made myself).

As far as system resource usage go: I don't know if Movable Type is too heavy or not - but keep in mind that a lot of servers are overcrowded. There might be 200-700 sites sharing one CPU and one SQL database. In that kind of situation, no blog system will perform well.

That argument just doesn't work ... (none / 3) (#99)
by SvendTofte on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:28:03 AM EST

While I do agree that software developers should make an attempt to make their software secure, I think we must not forget who the real sinner is: The real sinner is the person who vandalizes a site or hacks his way into it. They're the ones to blame, not the Movable Type authors.

I often see this argument. But it doesn't work. If I put my wallet out on the street, is it then the thiefs "fault", if I come back the next day, and it's not there?

Having utopian images of what "good" people do, should not interfere with ones ability to see the world as it is, and lock your door at night

There is a limit, but one always has to be proactive in securing resources. Blaming the thief, if you fail to secure your resources, just looks like incompetence.



[ Parent ]
I disagree (2.50 / 8) (#100)
by jonaskb on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:32:37 AM EST

If you leave your wallet on the street, you're careless. Nevertheless, it's still your wallet - no person has the right to just take it. If you steal or vandalize someones else's property, you doing something wrong. End of story. Just because the owner of the property is careless, doesn't means it's solely his/her fault.

[ Parent ]
well (none / 2) (#363)
by SvendTofte on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 06:00:47 PM EST

Try telling the insurance company that ...

[ Parent ]
black - white - grey (none / 0) (#395)
by adiffer on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 01:15:46 AM EST

This is sounding like an ethics course... 8)

If the person taking the wallet needs the money to feed their kids, it's not so black and white, right?

If the person vandalizing your blog thinks they are doing the rest of us a service, is it black and white?
-Dream Big. --Grow Up.
[ Parent ]

whose wallet? (none / 0) (#429)
by humphree on Tue Feb 24, 2004 at 09:42:37 AM EST

If I find your wallet on the street how do I know that it is your wallet? Or you just forgot one of the oldest rules in the law that "first in time is first in right"? If I find your wallet it is my wallet and it is up to you to prove that it is your wallet, ot that you deserve a wallet.. if you can:))

[ Parent ]
Not quite. (2.20 / 5) (#116)
by mold on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:52:33 AM EST

It's more like leaving your car parked on the side of the street by your house, and coming out the next morning and finding that it's been egged and spraypainted.

---
Beware of peanuts! There's a 0.00001% peanut fatality rate in the USA alone! You could be next!
[ Parent ]
Google (2.28 / 14) (#96)
by jonaskb on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:57:41 AM EST

With regards to your claim that certain blog features screw up Google's search mechanisms: It's Google's job to change their search engine according to the web's ever-changing structure. As web designers and programmers, it's not our job to ensure Google will work.

Why crapflooders should get a clue (2.18 / 16) (#98)
by MonTemplar on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:16:01 AM EST

The biggest problem with your rant is that a lot of your arguments can be applied to all blogs - and, indeed, to all personal websites.
  • Sure, a lot of blogs cover the same stories or events, the same way all the news channels on TV will report on a major story at around the same time (of course, the definition of "major" with regard to blogs is somewhat flexible, and subject to personal beliefs of the author(s)).
  • Sure, blogging is the new "in" thing right now, and has its fair share of "celebrities". But I suspect that such "celebrities" and their devotees are a minority of the overall population of bloggers. The rest probably have their own, more personal groups, and are more interested in what those people have to say.
  • Ok, so we now know (thanks to the recent crapfloods) that MovableType has problems, and SixApart are moving to try and fix those problems. Congratulations, you've made your point. Now either be helpful, or go find something else to check for holes. Further crapflooding won't achieve anything useful. Chances are most bloggers will be wise now, and will back up and then reload their blog after an attack. Worked for me. End result, you're just going round in circles.
  • As for Trackbacks, they may be having an effect on the search engines right now, but I'll bet that the search engines and the writers of blogging software can, between them, come up with a solution. Give it time.
My impression is that you're picking on MovableType because it is an easy target. I daresay that when MovableType 3.0 shows up, you'll be writing another rant on some other blogging software.

-MT.
Karma: Huh? (mainly affected by you not being on Slashdot)

Wrong about Google,perhaps not entirely wrong (2.30 / 10) (#103)
by gpig on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:36:17 AM EST

but you could have put your case a lot better.

Google would probably find it quite easy to avoid MT sites altogether in their indexing, if it's causing them problems. You seem to be arguing that we should all write web pages to make sure they are compatible with Google's engine. I would say (agreeing with other posters here) that it's Google's responsibility to keep their search up to date with the pages people put on the web. If you don't think they're doing their job properly, email them, or use a different search engine.

I agree with you about the irritating jargon. I feel much the same about the pathetic abbreviations which people feel obliged to use on IRC and in text messages. But why do you care? Web browsing is a series of choices; why do you choose to read things which piss you off so much?

I don't agree with your personal abuse of MT users. While MT undoubtedly has its flaws, you could have written a non-troll "What's wrong with Movable Type" article rather than going for personal abuse. Some of your points about the incestuous and vacuous nature of blogs no doubt have merit. You can make those without targeting MT specifically, or MT users.



Talking crap. (2.38 / 18) (#104)
by irrevenant on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:38:28 AM EST

"All of your blogs talk about the same crap"

So what's your solution: officially allocate who's allowed to talk about what topics? Or just don't allow anyone to talk?

Yeh, there's a lot of people talking a lot of crap - guess what, it's the same with TV, it's the same with novels. A lot of people writing crap is how some of them learn to write well.

"Your blog is fucking up Google"

I agree with the others who have said this is Google's responsibility. It's Google's job to sort matches by popularity. If a blog is very popular, it's probably worth looking at. If it isn't, then it should drop to the bottom of the list and not bother anyone.

Considering this got to FP (1.80 / 15) (#105)
by smg on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:40:52 AM EST

Has that mean you have written a script to automatically vote for articles on K5 with legions of fake accounts?

I wish. (none / 2) (#315)
by James A C Joyce on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:12:05 PM EST

Nope, it was all done honestly.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

I don't even have a blog, you fuckwit (1.80 / 15) (#106)
by gr00vey on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:07:08 AM EST

And your angst ridden little rant doesn't impress me one bit, asshat.... And why are you so fucking aggresive motherfucking asshole? You must be a fucking neo-con or something... pussy... ;)

Get A Life! (1.20 / 10) (#107)
by gidds on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:07:28 AM EST

IME, people who have a life
  • don't have time to write much about it.
  • don't need their experiences 'validated' by seeing it on screen and having other people read about it.
  • certainly don't have the need or the time to live others' lives vicariously through their blogs.
I've never understood why people write blogs. Is it a substitute for actually talking to friends and family? "I can't be bothered right now -- if you want to know how I feel, read my blog."? Or is it a self-importance thing -- "when I'm rich and famous, these diaries will be worth millions!"? Or are they simply trying to persuade themselves that they're alive -- "I blog, therefore I am"?

Andy/
Why I blog (2.20 / 5) (#110)
by aphrael on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:57:36 AM EST

I started my blog mostly because my friends and i ave exchanged email about politics for years and some of them were nagging me to move to a blog instead. I tried to nag them to read kuro5hin so I wouldn't have to, but it failed.

It's gone through a couple of stages; part of its content has been mirrored here, part hasn't. It served a useful purpose during the recall election but I haven't been able to find one since then - you're right, the world is overly cluttered with political blogs. Right now it's serving as a virtual travel diary so I don't get hand cramps.

A question for you, though: what's the difference between blog politics and k5 politics? I think it's narrower than you think.

[ Parent ]

A funny link that hits the spot (none / 2) (#146)
by spartaqus on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:41:40 AM EST

http://www.satirewire.com/news/0102/mother.shtml

[ Parent ]
blogging (none / 0) (#396)
by adiffer on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 01:32:03 AM EST

You are right on a few counts, but not all.

I don't have a lot of time to write about what I do, yet I intentionally set aside some time to do it occasionally.

I haven't needed validation since I developed a spine of my own, but it certainly is nice when it shows up anyway.  Humans are social animals, so never discount the power of praise or simple communication.  Learn to interact well and you will find opportunites for improving your life will come to you.

I don't read other blogs to live life vicariously.  I have a life of my own.  Yet I do read them to learn lessons others are willing to share.  In order to get them to expend their resources putting those lessons up for my benefit, I put a few of my own up.  It's a gift economy and works fairly well.

Blogging is asynchronous communication at it's best.  It is self-analysis at its worst.  Some people write blogs.  Some people write books.  Some people sing songs.  Some people create art.  There are interactive and non-interactive ways to do all these things and each creator does so in answer to their own needs.

For the record, I do not maintain a personal blog.  I don't write in my K5 diary much either.  I did set up a Scoop site for space advocates called Frontier Files Online, but I have a definite, external motive for maintaining it.
-Dream Big. --Grow Up.
[ Parent ]

Tell me, who... (2.00 / 11) (#109)
by killmepleez on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:53:29 AM EST

...squatted and dropped a "blog" in your cornflakes this morning?

It must be stories like this that acronyms like STFU, YHBT were created to answer in eight simple characters.

-1

__
"I instantly realized that everything in my life that I thought was unfixable was totally fixable - except for having just jumped."
--from "J
Newsflash (none / 2) (#225)
by Torka on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:56:25 PM EST

You don't get to vote -1 when the story's already been voted up.

[ Parent ]
Oh. (1.50 / 4) (#281)
by killmepleez on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 08:42:40 AM EST

See, these last few years of lurking/posting to K5, I thought "voting" consisted of posting a message with your +1 or -1, and then Rustey goes through each article and tallies the votes and then depending upon what the number is, he presses that button on his imac labelled "Front Page" or "Dump", and then something happens to the article. Now, due to your reply, I finally know and understand the workings of the People's Democracy of K5ia. You are truly a first-class gentleman. Please allow me to buy you a drink today. Thanks!



__
"I instantly realized that everything in my life that I thought was unfixable was totally fixable - except for having just jumped."
--from "J
[ Parent ]
Political weblogs (2.38 / 18) (#112)
by aphrael on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:05:01 AM EST

Yes, they're a dime a dozen. Yes, they're overly repetitious and given to groupthink. But you know what? I'd much rather allow real people - even real people who are arrogant and self-righteous and often have a stick up their butt - the opportunity to exchange and discuss their beliefs, and maybe work out that piece of information that the new york times misrepresented, than be forced to listen only to the politics of the companies that own my local television and radio stations and my local newspapers.

A number of famous people have opined that 99% of everything is crap. That's going to be true online, too. But the other 1% can be golden ... and weblogs, by giving everyday people the power to comment on the events of the day, is the closest thing to the era of pamphleteering and ribald political debate among the educated classes that is is possible in the mass media age.

Its crap (1.81 / 11) (#122)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:05:24 AM EST

Ordinary people don't have the first fucking clue about politics. Yer typical blog is like a bad dinner party where your embarrassing and utterly hateful friends spout off on all manner of topics they know nothing about.

This would not be so bad if the people who write blogs weren't so puffed up with their own self-importance and general genius. They really think they are insightful and interesting when they regurgitate some opinion piece they read somewhere, or link to some BBC article. Here's the thing, none of it is original. Its not anything like the 18th century age of pamphleteering. Then, at least, pamphleteering was restricted to those who mattered and who were educated. Now, any clown can write a blog, and most do.

The sad result is that the typical blog consists of a bunch of links to what other, conventional news sources have said on some topic, then some self-congratulation on how insightful and wonderful this is.

The last reason I hate the "blogosphere" is that it is composed of the same fuckheads who brought us the dotcom boom. You know, they were the ones who, in 1997-99, would blabber on about how the internet was so fucking revolutionary and how it was going to change our lives forever. Since the internet turned out to be a corp-controlled banner-advertised POS, they've moved on to waxing lyrical about other stupid technologies that, just as surely, will end up being a complete waste of time - generally it is wifi and blogs atm. Oh, and friends networks like friendster and such. Tailor made for the overly-optimistic and arrogant, self-absorbed American geek, who dominates these things utterly and totally while also rednering them completely uninteresting.

Blogs are for naval gazers who unjustifiably are convinced they have something original to say. They don't. None of them do. With any luck google will eradicate all blogs from their search results and we can forget about them forever.

[ Parent ]

Naval gazing. (1.80 / 5) (#124)
by Kyle on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:19:04 AM EST

Blogs are for naval gazers...

Some seaman should make a blog called Naval Gazing.

[ Parent ]

You sound very angry, Linux King (1.75 / 4) (#154)
by robson on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:02:57 PM EST

If I were to tell you that your post comes off as self-important, arrogant, and self-absorbed, you'd tell me simply not to read it. Nobody's got a gun to my head, forcing me to consume your rant.

So it is with weblogs. Just don't read them.

What? Google forces you to read weblogs because it indexes them? Whatever, dude. I rarely find my searches returning more than 20% weblog results, and you can generally tell from the context whether it's a subject-oriented page or a weblog.

But really, it sounds like you're just angry at one or more people you've known who fit your over-generalized description of a blogger. And hey, who can blame you? If I'd known a bunch of overly-optimistic, arrogant, self-absorbed American geeks, I'd probably be pretty angry too.
---
It seemed real but wasn't.
[ Parent ]
That's useless (1.80 / 5) (#157)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:11:30 PM EST

This is the same as the OSS nonsense: "You don't need to use the software, so don't criticise it! Its free, so either work to make it better or shut up."

Well, no. Of course I don't need to read it. In fact, I don't, mostly, thank you very much.

But you know what? Its still crap. lots of things are crap, and I don't need to interact with any one of them, but that doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to air my dislike of them.

Gosh, imagine if the reviews section of the paper were full of praise, and anything that reviwers didn't like they just didn't bother to review it. That would be pretty shitty, wouldn't it?

[ Parent ]

counterpoint :: (2.00 / 5) (#172)
by Wah on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:52:39 PM EST

The last reason I hate the "blogosphere" is that it is composed of the same fuckheads who brought us the dotcom boom. You know, they were the ones who, in 1997-99, would blabber on about how the internet was so fucking revolutionary and how it was going to change our lives forever.

Iran.

Since the internet turned out to be a corp-controlled banner-advertised POS, they've moved on to waxing lyrical about other stupid technologies that, just as surely, will end up being a complete waste of time - generally it is wifi and blogs atm.

Oops my bad, hope you enjoyed the meal.  Ranting about independant editors and corp-controlled media in the same sentence sets of the hypocrisy alarm.

HAND.
--
sometimes things just are that way and that's it. They're true. Sure, Popper, et. al., may argue otherwise, but they're dead. You get it? Yet?
[ Parent ]

No (none / 2) (#177)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:02:49 PM EST

I didn't say having a corp-controlled internet is a bad thing. In fact, it really seems like a huge improvement, lets be honest. But there's no doubt that its not exactly how the "blogosphere" twats expected it to turn out.

[ Parent ]
snore (none / 2) (#343)
by Wah on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 08:57:08 AM EST

I didn't say having a corp-controlled internet is a bad thing.

No, of course you didn't. You said.

Since the internet turned out to be a corp-controlled banner-advertised POS.

And everyone knows that Pieces of Shit™ have strong brand recognition in the 18-30 demographic.
--
sometimes things just are that way and that's it. They're true. Sure, Popper, et. al., may argue otherwise, but they're dead. You get it? Yet?
[ Parent ]

Fah! (2.16 / 6) (#263)
by aphrael on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:54:57 AM EST

Ordinary people don't have the first fucking clue about politics.

That may be. But in this country ordinary people vote, and i find something liberating in a technology that allows ordinary people - many of whom voted today - to exchange arguments and views instead of forcing them to listen to the party line.

Then, at least, pamphleteering was restricted to those who mattered and who were educated

Who determines who matters? In any event, it's too early to say how similar it is. If - as market theory predicts - the cream rises to the top, and if ideas are disseminated and the end result is an improvement, however minute, in the way people interact with politics, it's a good thing; and if the use of blogs to discuss politics makes it easier for people to be exposed to ideas, then it is like early modern pamphleteering.

Everyone can be a publisher now. That's a feature even if most of what gets published by them is crap.

You know, they were the ones who, in 1997-99, would blabber on about how the internet was so fucking revolutionary and how it was going to change our lives forever

The internet was revolutionary. Yeah, it's mostly corporate controlled (but not entirely!). But it's totally revolutionary to be able to read a newspaper from anywhere in the world, minutes after it's published; it's revolutionary to be able to plan entire journeys through borderline-third-world countries without ever picking up a telephone.

Blogs are for naval gazers who unjustifiably are convinced they have something original to say. They don't. None of them do

Interesting. You're saying that Lawrence Lessig, for example, or Eugene Volokh (a well-respected UCLA law professor with a blog), have nothing to say?

I think you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater, here.

[ Parent ]

"90", "crud" (2.25 / 3) (#162)
by smithmc on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:23:01 PM EST


A number of famous people have opined that 99% of everything is crap.

It's "90% of everything is crud." - Theodore Sturgeon

[ Parent ]

It's 99% - he was overly optimistic, I'm afraid. (none / 2) (#302)
by skim123 on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:09:30 PM EST


Money is in some respects like fire; it is a very excellent servant but a terrible master.
PT Barnum


[ Parent ]
death to blogs (1.76 / 13) (#114)
by feyr on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:26:42 AM EST

thank you

WTF? (2.27 / 44) (#115)
by Imperfect on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:29:22 AM EST

How did this spite-filled shite-log make it to the front page? Lemme clear a few things up:

You are a retard

Most blogs out there aren't written for you. Ninety-nine point eight percent, probably. It's like... Dove-pure. They're written for audiences that are interested in sharing and discussing that viewpoint. For instance, my blog isn't targetted at you. It's targetting at my friends who may be interested in keeping abreast of my life. Many of them have moved away recently (college and highschool do terrible things to friendships), and having a blog makes it easier to stay friends.

Now if your ass comes by and says my blog is stale and boring and pretentious and you don't like what I say, well then fuck you. You're not my target audience, so piss off. Go read slashdot or something. Jesus.

Screw Google

Yes, I use it. Yes, you use it. Sure, Movable Type fucks with it. Whatever. This means Google is broken.

More industrious spammers have tried to do on purpose what you claim MT is doing by accident. If MT's structure screws with Google that bad, then the guys at Google need to fix their goddamn algorithm, or at the very least weight responses from MT less. This is not beyond their means. They are smart individuals, who have shown themselves to be market-savvy. They have adapted before, and they will adapt now, and everything will be like a fairy land again, and you can go back to dreaming of goatse man like a good little web-retard.

Once again, you are a retard

If this had been an article about MT's failures and deficiencies only, then I'd probably have +1'd and been glad to see it on the front page. However, it's a vitriolic rant of all things, of about the kind of quality that you'd find on one of your hated blogs. Further, you go on to denounce the majority of bloggers everywhere, which is sheer stupidity. I've covered this in my first point, but it's worth repeating. They're not out there to satisfy you, you elitist asshole, they're out there to satisfy themselves, and possibly their coterie of friends. To act like you must be the ultimate content-approver of everything on the goddamn internet is crass and egotistical to the extreme.

In conclusion, what the hell is wrong with you?

Not perfect, not quite.
Nobody (1.66 / 12) (#125)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:20:04 AM EST

Nobody at all, not even your friends, are interested in:
  • What you made for dinner.
  • What it felt like when you took a dump this afternoon.
  • Your useless opinions on George W Bush or elections or anything at all really.
  • How some girl looked at you when you were working in the cubical and you didn't pluck up the courage to look back.
  • etc fucking etc
You will probably protest that you don't write about these things; that you, alone among all bloggers, write things of interest to some target audience. Well, you don't. Stop deluding yourself. Nobody is interested. Nobody

Your friends may feign interest, I'm sure they do. Its only polite to feign interest in a geeky friend's boring burblings about his personal life and opinions, I suppose. Other people may claims to read and like your blog, but chances are they are only doing it so that

  • You will read their blog in return, increasing the wank-rate and their sense of blogging self worth and status.
  • Out of politeness, because they know you IRL or are expected to give a shit about your stupid opinions and boring events in your life.
You are best to stop deluding yourself. Really. Hate to break it to you, but nobody cares at all, nobody likes your blog. So why even bother writing it, really? Oh yes, American geek self-absorbtion.

Sigh.

[ Parent ]

What about Canadian geeks, asshole? (none / 3) (#174)
by Imperfect on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:53:32 PM EST

We like to engage in wankery, too.

Further, there is no way, NO WAY that you can insist that you know what I enjoy reading and what I don't. The same goes for my friends. Sure, you can generalize, but you know what? Fuck you.

I have friends that bake bread, who home cook every meal, and those who are dedicated to trying every new form of junk food imaginable. Since I don't do any of these things, I occasionally find their exploits amusing. And I do enjoy keeping up with their lives, regardless of what happens. It allows me to offer input into what's happing with them, and us to have honest-to-God discourses that we would otherwise not be allowed to have due to scheduling, telephone bills, etc. It allows me to remain in touch, and remain a friend.

Just because you have no friends that bother keeping up with your life doesn't mean it applies to the rest of us.

Not perfect, not quite.
[ Parent ]
Calm down, dude (none / 2) (#253)
by desiderandus on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:23:23 AM EST

As one Canadian to another, you really need to chill a little. If everyone's opinion matters so little to you (as you've stated in other posts, not this one), then keep blogging away. Of course, I don't read blogs (never found reading the details of someone's life or thoughts that interesting, rather too passive), so my opinion likely won't matter to you.

And I hate to point it out, but there are ways beyond blogging to keep in touch with friends, so blogging isn't all that special. My Canadian friends (I'm currently expat) run an online message board, plus there's instant messaging, email, etc.
_________
Our sins catch up to us in the worst possible way; they become part of our essential identities.
[ Parent ]

Fair enough. (none / 2) (#296)
by Imperfect on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:57:31 PM EST

Although I'm not saying it's the only way, it's just a way, and it's a way that I find convenient. It doesn't mean everyone's going to find it convenient, but on the flip side, it doesn't mean that no-one is going to find it convenient.

I just can't stand it when people claim that blogging has no practical uses. The internet was claimed to have not practical uses when it first made its way to the consumer, too. In both cases it was just a load of horseshit from short-sighted individuals who were too resistant to and afraid of change and adaptation.

Not perfect, not quite.
[ Parent ]
Wrong! Nobody wants to read your blog (2.00 / 7) (#135)
by spartaqus on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:03:15 AM EST

Noone cares what the last book you read was. Nobody cares what you made last night for dinner, and your friends don't give a shit about your daily activities regardless of how far they moved away.
Blogging is not a way to stay in touch, it is only a way to come off as a pompous, pseudo-intellectual jackass; if your friends want to stay in touch, send them your email address and your phone number.


[ Parent ]
(Score:5, Insightful) (2.00 / 6) (#137)
by Michael Moore on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:07:58 AM EST

nt.

--
"My life was more improved by a single use of [ecstasy] than someone's life is made worse by becoming a heroin addict." -- aphrael
[ Parent ]
Once again, Mr. Moore tells it like it is. (1.11 / 9) (#168)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:48:07 PM EST

I think I'll buy another copy of Dude, Where's My Country?

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Wow, that was funny. (none / 3) (#266)
by rmg on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:36:08 AM EST

Where did you learn to do that?

_____ intellectual tiddlywinks
[ Parent ]

Some 3-letter crapflooder (none / 3) (#270)
by Michael Moore on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:01:55 AM EST

I forget his name.

--
"My life was more improved by a single use of [ecstasy] than someone's life is made worse by becoming a heroin addict." -- aphrael
[ Parent ]
i vaguely remember him. (none / 2) (#311)
by rmg on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:17:31 PM EST

the guy practically wrote the book on the subject, if i recall.

_____ intellectual tiddlywinks
[ Parent ]

Man, what a coincidence! (1.75 / 4) (#156)
by robson on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:09:48 PM EST

How can you be so pompous as to believe that anyone cares what you think of weblogs?
---
It seemed real but wasn't.
[ Parent ]
Because I'm better than you. (1.75 / 3) (#169)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:48:19 PM EST

DUH!

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Hehehee (1.00 / 4) (#163)
by melia on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:25:44 PM EST

Most blogs out there aren't written for you.

Hmm. I don't mean to annoy you, but have you ever considered that this website/article isn't right for you? I don't know, there's a whole paradox/hypocrite wierd thing going on there huh.
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong
[ Parent ]

Trust me, I consider it from time to time. (none / 3) (#175)
by Imperfect on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:56:26 PM EST

But every time I honestly get close to removing K5 from my bookmarks because of assholes and trolls, some forthright member of the community comes forth and posts something tremendously edifying that I would not have otherwise had the opportunity to view.

Just because a million trolls working together were able to get this piece of shit to float to the top doesn't mean that they express the attitudes of all K5 users.

Not perfect, not quite.
[ Parent ]
Agree (none / 2) (#299)
by mrcsparker on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:13:05 PM EST

But then again, I post some pretty stupid shit myself.

[ Parent ]
Bzzt. Thank you for playing. (1.28 / 7) (#167)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:47:03 PM EST

It's "webtard", not "web-retard". And for some reason you kept misspelling "arse".

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Funniest thing all day (1.80 / 5) (#193)
by pdrap on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:36:30 PM EST

A spelling flame by someone with the name James Joyce. That's so beautiful I had to say thanks.


[ Parent ]
A technical point (none / 3) (#231)
by pyramid termite on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:59:33 PM EST

It's "webtard", not "web-retard".

He wasn't referring to your presence on the web, but to your webbed hands and feet. HTH.

On the Internet, anyone can accuse you of being a dog.
[ Parent ]
This is coming from a guy calling himself Joyce? (2.05 / 20) (#117)
by waxmop on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:53:50 AM EST

I'll tell you what's pretentious -- naming yourself after a writer that everyone is supposed to respect but nobody has actually read.

Bloggers are harmless. Google or another search engine will figure out a solution to the trackback glitch and life will go on.

This reminds me of 1980s BBS snobbery.
--
We are a monoculture of horsecock. Liar

A use of the term 'criticism' with which... (2.07 / 13) (#118)
by 87C751 on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:55:36 AM EST

I was not previously familiar? Gawd, I love this kind of puerile vomitus! It's downright ingratiating to see how upset one clown can get over something that certainly doesn't have as much concern for him as he has for it.

As I blogged way back in 2002, I approach blogging much like Frank Zappa approached music. In an early 90's interview, Frank said:

The crux of the biscuit is: If it entertains you, fine. Enjoy it. If it doesn't, then blow it out your ass. I do it to amuse myself. If I like it, I release it. If somebody else likes it, that's a bonus.
That's how it is with blogs. We do it because we can. If you don't like it, read something else.

And for pete's sake, try decaf!

My ranting place.

Damn it (2.25 / 4) (#126)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:31:34 AM EST

If you don't like it, read something else.

This is why people hate you. Linking to "usatoday" like that as though a professional journalism site is somehow an alternative in the same ballpark as blogs.

Why are bloggers so convinced that they are some sort of alternative media? Why do they always sneer about "mainstream media" then congratulate themselves for linking to *cough* a mainstream media source then writing some puerile pap? That is what "alternative media" blogging is. Its about as credible a journalism source as metafilter or slashdot. Its nothing but news repeated from elsewhere.

You'd have been more credible if you had linked to, I don't know, goatse.cx (RIP) as an alternative in the same ballpark as blogging.

[ Parent ]

Damn this! (none / 1) (#150)
by 87C751 on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:50:11 AM EST

Take a pill, sparky. I could have just as easily said "read something else". The link matters much less than my desire to see all you pompous would-be pundits quit bitching and *coughing* and comparing and just get on with your miserable, self-centered lives. Nowhere in my original post did I even try to assert that blogging == "serious journalism". Quite the opposite: I told you to go elsewhere if you don't want to read a blog. It's that simple. Don't complain. Don't criticize. Don't compare. Just Go Away if you don't like it.

Believe me, your opinion of blog content means bupkis to me. All I'm seeing here is your attempt to act important. It's high time that you and your ilk got the message: your opinion matters only to yourself.

My ranting place.
[ Parent ]

That's fine, (2.25 / 4) (#159)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:18:43 PM EST

I'm not asserting my opinion matters. I haven't created a whole website revolving around myself and my opinions, like bloggers do. A comment on an article is quite different. It is implicit that it is useless and of no interest, after all.

But the "don't criticise, just don't read it" argument is tosh. My God I would hate a world where nobody criticised anything, where rather than useless, crappy things getting the righteous panning they deserve, from the pages of the Times Literary Supplement to even here on k5, people actually accepted this ridiculous notion that no criticism of anything should ever be aired. Instead, people should "just ignore it if they don't like it".

Sod that! The whole "oh, you don't like the nazis? Well just ignore them!" attitude is utterly silly.

[ Parent ]

That's great and all. (none / 2) (#166)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:46:53 PM EST

But Frank Zappa didn't fuck up my Google search results and get arsey when I complained about it.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Frank didn't do that (none / 0) (#411)
by 87C751 on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 02:06:47 PM EST

In fact, only Google can fuck up your Google search results. Except that Google is a web search engine, and so indexes content on the web. That happens to include blogs. If you don't like that, complain to Google. Leave the bloggers alone.

My ranting place.
[ Parent ]

On bloging... (2.00 / 8) (#119)
by X-Nc on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:58:49 AM EST

For the better part of 3 years I had a diary here on K5 that served as my "blog" (a word I hate intensely). Recently I discovered iBlog for my iMac and proceeded to move my ramblings to it. The purpose of my ramblings is not for anyone else to read, just some place where I can blow off a little steam and record what my life is like at that moment. If no other person in the universe ever sees or reads what I've written that's fine with me. I have no pretensions of great postulations. Most of the stuff I write even bores me.

I do, however, feel that it is Google's responsibility to handle the massive amount of blah, blah, blah that is the "blogsphere". How, I neither know nor care. It's there job to make it work.

--
Aaahhhh!!!! My K5 subscription expired. Now I can't spell anymore.

Why make it public? (2.25 / 2) (#140)
by Valdrax on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:13:38 AM EST

The purpose of my ramblings is not for anyone else to read, just some place where I can blow off a little steam and record what my life is like at that moment. If no other person in the universe ever sees or reads what I've written that's fine with me. I have no pretensions of great postulations. Most of the stuff I write even bores me.

You have perfectly captured what I cannot comprehend about blogs.  Why do you post it on the internet instead of keeping it on private text files on your own machine if it's "not for anyone else to read?"  Why put your private thoughts up on the web if you don't have some sort of desire for public attention?

[ Parent ]

Because you can. (none / 2) (#147)
by vericgar on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:43:24 AM EST

Why put it on online instead of leaving it private? Because you can, for one. And you may never know when someone may stumble upon your blog and relate to you and you make a new friend, for another. At least those are the reasons why I put such personal thoughts online.

[ Parent ]
So.. (2.25 / 3) (#161)
by melia on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:22:26 PM EST

...in other, simpler, words, the purpose of putting it online, is so that other people can read it?

Doesn't that contradict the top post in this thread? There is no possibly way to spin this, the only reason for posting something in a public place is because you think other people will want to read it.

Seems not many bloggers posting here will stand up and say "I want people to read it, I think it's good".
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong
[ Parent ]

no (none / 3) (#251)
by vericgar on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:08:22 PM EST

The purpose of putting it online is because you can. The fact that people can read it because it's online is only a side effect. Online is just one of the many mediums available for recording ones personal thoughts. But why choose online vs. say a written journal or a private blog that can't be read by the world? It really comes down to that it's my freedom to do so, and so I do. The fact that people might read it is just a small side effect. Thats the same with my website as well. I know nobody finds anything interesting in my website. It's there simply because I can have one. I'm a geek and do geeky things like setting up a website or setting up a blog, or a million other things.

[ Parent ]
Not everything is published for you. (none / 2) (#305)
by kirkjobsluder on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:44:48 PM EST

Seems not many bloggers posting here will stand up and say "I want people to read it, I think it's good".

Almost all of the projects I've worked on have had meeting notes online.  These notes are not entertaining.  They are not understandable to someone from outside of the project, and they are frequently not very informative for members of the project that just happened to miss that meeting.

There are tons of stuff online that is really only of interest to a small population.  Class notes, power-point slides (which I would argue make up worse clutter in google than blogs).  And yet, nobody aruges that it is highly pretentious to put these things online.

The monthly baby picture of my niece is probably not interesting to you, but it is interesting to me and going to her father's web journal is less annoying than getting email.

From where comes this assumption that if it is on the web, it must be personally interesting to large numbers of people or there is no point in doing it?

[ Parent ]

Whoops. (none / 2) (#307)
by melia on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 03:06:37 PM EST

From where comes this assumption that if it is on the web, it must be personally interesting to large numbers of people or there is no point in doing it?

I have absolutely no idea. If you had actually read my comment, you'd realise that at no point did I actually say or even imply this. Here's my comment, just to save your clicking mouse.
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong
[ Parent ]

Brains (1.50 / 4) (#155)
by rustv on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:06:35 PM EST

My brain makes me publish useless information on the internet.  It feels good.  If it wasn't publicly available, I wouldn't write it.  Because of my brain.

____
"Don't tase me, bro." --Andrew Meyer
[ Parent ]
Re: Why make it public? (none / 1) (#240)
by X-Nc on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:17:37 PM EST

> Why do you post it on the internet instead of keeping it on private text files on your
> own machine if it's "not for anyone else to read?"

As someone said further on in this thread, because I can.

However, the primary reason, though, is that I am incapable of keeping a journal in either hardcopy or softcopy when I am the one who has to manage it. I have tried writing an old fassion journal or keeping a "Dear Diary" but I lose the book within a month. Writing text files on my computer is even less stable. I have a very bad habit of delete first, ask questions later. I have trashed so many good things, including programs and even once deleted COMMAND.COM on my old DOS box back in the day. Keeping an online journal gives me some security because I'm less likely to delete something accedently.

That's why I use iBlog with my .Mac account. I can't comment on anyone elses reasons.

--
Aaahhhh!!!! My K5 subscription expired. Now I can't spell anymore.
[ Parent ]

You won't get a valid answer (none / 2) (#308)
by Baldrson Neutralizer on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 03:10:04 PM EST

Because as far as I can tell, people who uses that argument are in denial about their reasons for doing it.

X-nc is probably an exception to that (and also, I enjoyed a lot of his diaries), but the pretentious, self-absorbed, I'm a tortured genius look-at-me types are going through the motions of "self-reflection" because it's trendy and I guess it feels good to them, but without any actual self-reflection or introspective thought at all.


Modern life, in EVERY ASPECT, is a cult of mediocrity.-trhurler
[ Parent ]

You've inspired me! (2.38 / 18) (#120)
by mold on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:59:00 AM EST

I'm going to start a blog!

---
Beware of peanuts! There's a 0.00001% peanut fatality rate in the USA alone! You could be next!
Bad Design?? (2.00 / 6) (#123)
by FortKnox on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:14:03 AM EST

Show me one blogging webapp (hell, anything similar, a la slashcode) that is designed well!

Honestly, most of these applications are open source (aka 'scratching an itch'). They aren't thought out and designed first, then implemented using patterns and best practices, then put through a QA cycle. Its the nature of the net. Throw something out there fast, get a few people to use it, have your fifteen minutes, die off.

Bad design is a poor excuse if you point directly to MT, cause most things out in the net are badly designed.
--
Yes, shrubberies are my trade. I am a shrubber. My name is Roger the Shrubber. I arrange, design, and sell shrubberies.
That may be true (none / 2) (#131)
by ffrinch on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:51:11 AM EST

but MovableType really is bad. It doesn't really deserve its popularity. Funny as it seems, I actually think that LiveJournal is better. It's sure as hell better than Blogger.

And at least slashcode has threaded comments. MT's way behind on the usability curve.

-◊-
"I learned the hard way that rock music ... is a powerful demonic force controlled by Satan." — Jack Chick
[ Parent ]

I agree. (none / 3) (#286)
by bhearsum on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 09:47:32 AM EST

Anything that requires you to 'generate' your pages everytime you do something is utter fucking crap. If MT wants to use a database it can damn well use it right and be dynamic -- configuration information belongs in files.

[ Parent ]
Since when... (2.34 / 23) (#129)
by proles on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:42:21 AM EST

...did trolls make it to the front page?  This fellow makes a few legitimate points, but they're lost in generalizations and unnecessary vitriol.  And I'm not just saying that because I run an MT site: I agree with a lot of what he's saying (e.g. the stupidity of making up "blog" based words, the redundancy of many blogs, the poor design of MT and the effect on search engines).

But the thing is, placing all the blame on the users of MT is silly.  I run an MT site but I shy away from using words like "blogroll" and such because I think they're stupid.  And while it's true that many MT sites talk about similar stuff (mine included), that's more of a comment on society than anything else and isn't necessarily a bad thing.  MT may be poorly designed, but most of us small-time users don't have to particularly worry about being DOSed or anything and as such don't care about the limitations (and it isn't as if we programmed MT).  And has been pointed out many times, if MT confuses Google then it's up to Google to fix it.  We shouldn't limit the internet based on how well we can index it: the internet is going to grow and change, and it is up to the search engines to keep up.

I use MT because I like maintaining a website and because it's a relatively easy means of doing so.    It worked on the shell I use to host, it is easy to install and update with, and so forth.  If my site every becomes more successful I'll likely move to something else.  Sure, I focus on politics, which is hardly an original topic, but what do you want me to talk about, hair lice?

Sigh.  K5 really has jumped the shark, I guess.  This is potentially a very interesting subject that could be discussed.  There are many ramifications of the fact that technology has enabled people to update websites nearly constantly (which is all I view "blogs" as, really).  But instead, an angrily written one-sided rant (ironically, against the very act of ranting) appears on the front page.  Oh well.
If there is hope, it lies in the proles.

PS (2.25 / 3) (#130)
by proles on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:48:52 AM EST

A bit more on the originality issue: as I said, I agree that "blogs" are redundant.  Then again, so are websites in general.  Then again, so are humans and life and expression in general.  Newspapers and radio stations and so forth all tend to focus on the same topics.  Does that mean that we should kill off all but one radio station and all but one newspaper?

Striving for originality is an admirable goal, but demanding constant originality is just silly at best.  Even James Joyce, your apparent namesake (which is a tad arrogant of you as somebody pointed out earlier), was hardly original 24/7 (although I must admit he likely came about as close as a human could hope).

So, in conclusion, get over yourself.  If you don't like "blogs" then the solution is simple: don't read them.  And Google will figure out a way around the MT glut sooner or later, or be replaced by another search engine that does.
If there is hope, it lies in the proles.
[ Parent ]

k5 is an opinion site (1.25 / 8) (#133)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:56:17 AM EST

If you want balanced, boring articles that don't bring up the author's opinion at any point, pump yourself full of oestrogen, drink lots of milk and eat rusks, wear a nappy, and then become a BBC journalist (you'll be well qualified).

There's absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with an article being grossly one-sided and opinionated. k5 is not a site of record, its not the New York Times for god's sakes. Its supposed to be a place where people can have fun arguments and dicussion I thought, not a place where people have to throttle back their opinions and not air them for fear of being seen as biased by the homosexual set.

Incidentally, UK newspapers have never been of the strange USian opinion that they must be unbiased to be at all credible. They are full of slurs, bias, and gross missrepresentation of the facts, and that makes them a fuckload more interesting than, say, the NYT or whatever, which could bore for America.

Also, trolls have been appearing on the FP of k5 forever, its not a new phenomenon. This is because they are much more interesting and fun than unbiased, anaemic articles, which should be defecated on then burned, honestly.

[ Parent ]

I agree, except (2.25 / 4) (#145)
by eatbolt on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:38:56 AM EST

I agree, except that you wrote, "k5 is not a site of record, its not the New York Times for god's sakes." The implication I read is that k5 is not a site/publication of record, rather it is opinion based (I agree). However, you also assert conversely that the New York Times is a site/publication of record and is not opinion based (I disagree). eb

[ Parent ]
You are right (none / 2) (#160)
by Linux King on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:19:47 PM EST

I would argue, though, that the NYT purports to be unbiased and a newspaper of record, however biased in actual fact it is.

[ Parent ]
You misunderstand (2.25 / 4) (#186)
by proles on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:13:23 PM EST

I'm not criticizing this article for being biased.  Everybody has their own opinion, mine included, and I realize that people write things on sites like K5 in order to express their opinion.  I'm criticizing this article for using generalizations and unnecessary vitriol.  That's an important distinction.  True, I say it is somewhat one-sided at some point, and I feel that is true as well.  Writing an opinionated piece doesn't necessitate being one-sided: it is possible to write a balanced opinion piece, charitably considering multiple views.  In fact, such writing is generally more conducive to discussion.
If there is hope, it lies in the proles.
[ Parent ]
I disagree (none / 3) (#331)
by Verbophobe on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:09:02 PM EST

An article that takes equally into account all perspectives of an argument is bland, boring, and impeades discussion, if anything.  If it addresses every aspect, what is there to discuss?

Proud member of the Canadian Broadcorping Castration
[ Parent ]
Opinions, of course (none / 0) (#431)
by proles on Fri Mar 05, 2004 at 01:00:24 AM EST

Addressing every aspect (or more realistically, as many aspects as the writer can feasibly address given assorted sundry pragmatic limitations) simply sets down a good field for open conversation regarding such aspects.  Bringing up an aspect doesn't preclude further discussion regarding that same aspect: in fact, it often encourages it, if the original bringing up is done in a mature and intelligent manner.

So, after the facts are brought up, people can still discuss opinions.  I could write something addressing most every major aspect of types of religious belief for example, yet people would still be able to talk about religion for ages because they have opinions which differ regardless of the facts.
If there is hope, it lies in the proles.
[ Parent ]

So, what? (1.75 / 8) (#132)
by realtag on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:54:12 AM EST

After you have finished your raving, please join me for a brief moment and turn your brain on to reflect if your hateful babbling does any good to the world. We should be grateful, that people for once accept that the internet is a bidirectional medium. This is sociological progress, rather than technical. And as for the Trackback feature - PLEEEZE spare me with these childish, narrow minded excuses of yours to stop technical progress - you are just copy&pasting yesterdays news anyway. ( Boy, am I afraid that my Server launches a perl script and my Trackbacks are clogging an ageing search algorithm *lol* )

Had me, then lost me (none / 2) (#141)
by Valdrax on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:19:41 AM EST

Okay, I was with you on the first half of your comment, but you lost me when you described the problems with Trackback as "childish, narrow minded excuses" and decried concerns about it as an attempt "to stop technical progress."

You know, bad code is exactly that -- BAD CODE.  The problems MT causes with search algorithms is a major design flaw since it lowers the signal to noise ratio of trying to use the Internet for anything other than finding blogs.  It's really irritating when I want to search for something in political news and all I can find is vitriolic rants with no links to the supporting material that I'm looking for.  Sometimes, good Search Fu can help you duck around the MT poisoning, but other times it just can't.

(Also, you should be concerned about the server launching a perl script each time someone touches your site if you host your site somewhere that you can be booted from.  DoS'ing other users of your hosting site with a public diary just isn't cool.)

[ Parent ]

and so it goes... (1.50 / 3) (#149)
by realtag on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:46:07 AM EST

Well actually I have to admit that I am a supporter of Web Services (never mind the hype) where appropriate. And it seems perfectly reasonable to find related material on other websites. The circumstance, that these sites are mostly blogs is true. Well Trackbacks were invented alongside the blogs. I think this whole thing follows the spirit of Tim Berners Lee's vision of a semantic Internet. Maybe Trackback wouldn't have such a bad reputation if it was implemented in a way that doesn't interfere with search engines (actually I came across a couple of blogs that made Trackbacks look just like normal links with a tiny excerpt of the new article). This would definately make some sense, simply because so many people keep bashing Trackback for that, but basically I insist that it's not MT's fault. I like to think that the "Bad Code" is on Google's side here.

And as for the Perl scripts...there seems to be a misunderstanding about the actual event when perl is lauched on your site. It is only started (as stated in the article) if you add a Comment, Trackback or do a search. You have the choice to disable all of these features but unless you do not reach Slashdottesque visit (or rather comment) counts on your site, you really should not worry about perl (or php or Tomcat)'s footprint.



[ Parent ]
This just has to be a troll (2.22 / 18) (#134)
by mavrc on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:58:56 AM EST

I mean, the sheer stupidity level of someone writing a giant rant about people that write things and post them on the Internet and then posting it on the Internet has got to have created some sort of space-time hole that will eventually devour us all whole. And every time someone posts a reply - "Oh, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of idiots posting things on the Internet!" (post) - is making that whole a little bit bigger. It's all the same stupidity. (Besides, in all truthfulness, Usenet's done it bigger and louder a thousand times over.)

The only valid points in this whole article are:

  1. MovableType is insecure

  2. TrackBack is fucknig up Google

MT might be a security hole, but if the admin has his head somewhere other than his ass, odds are the only thing that's going to get destroyed is the user's precious blog. Which it is not the admin's business to be backing up anyway. So who cares.

As far as Google and TrackBack, technological natural selectioni surely must apply here. If PageRank can't grow to respond to a freakin' weblogging product, then it needs to die and be succeeded by something better.

Is it a troll? It's in the eye of the beholder. (2.25 / 4) (#176)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:56:31 PM EST

This story, your comment, all of the responses; it's all just one big conceptual artpiece which I call The Madhouse. I'm going to enter it into the Turner competition so I can win twenty grand.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Great, isn't it... (none / 3) (#227)
by sholden on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:16:54 PM EST

I mean, the sheer stupidity level of someone writing a giant rant about people that write things and post them on the Internet and then posting it on the Internet has got to have created some sort of space-time hole that will eventually devour us all whole.

That was precisely the reason I voted +1 FP.

--
The world's dullest web page


[ Parent ]
A sort of unmade point... (none / 2) (#236)
by malfunct on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:42:26 PM EST

The author does a poor job of addressing the point that information on the web was vastly diluted by blogs. Unfortunately our tools for delving through this worthless noise are not yet good enough. Google will just have to adjust pagerank and all will be right in his world. I have a "blog" if you want to call it that not because I post in the normal blog fashion, but instead because its the easiest way to get the few things of interest to my friends (mainly people that play games with me who want info about that game, and no its not really available elsewhere).

[ Parent ]
+1, EXTREMELY GOTH ENOUGH (1.11 / 17) (#136)
by suicidal ideation on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:06:16 AM EST

The irony here is entertaining, since most MT users are, themselves, goths.

"Repetitive guitar growing increasingly louder followed by pause." -- Trent Reznor
99% Of *insert media type here* Is Crap (2.40 / 10) (#138)
by EXTomar on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:08:31 AM EST

Where have I heard this complaint before? blogs don't escape this trend either.

In any event, I find the "blogs screws up Google!" a weak argument. If 99% of blogs are crap or contain no useful information why would Google bother searching them? Think about it: what would the relevancy score be for Joe Blow who think president is a bum? Unless he is an expert his words are just a much worth (or worthless) as they next guy.

blogs are like that guy at the station who plays guitar. Although he might not be any good, let them do their kicks and if they can get people to pay attention thats great. No matter how badly they play I am not going to stop them from doing so.

You worry to much. Kick back and relax. Nothing is forcing you to look at anyone's blog.



centrally ignored blogs (1.50 / 3) (#183)
by eudas on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:36:27 PM EST

well, if blogs were centralized on domains like blogspot.com or livejournal.com, then google.com could just not index those sites and would be less screwed up on search results. it's independent blogs linked into webrings that screw up google's Pagerank algorithms, because it's useless, meaningless content cross-linked to/from thousands of other pages of useless, meaningless content.

i voted +1sp; the author has a point.

eudas
"We're placing this wood in your ass for the good of the world" -- mrgoat
[ Parent ]

funny thing is... (none / 3) (#214)
by danwillis on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:15:38 PM EST

...google own blogger(hence blogspot) I'd figure that google would want as much stuff in their searchbase as possible. How you search it is up to you - if you don't want blog content, thats not their problem.

[ Parent ]
Duh. (none / 1) (#205)
by Estanislao Martínez on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:36:57 PM EST

In any event, I find the "blogs screws up Google!" a weak argument. If 99% of blogs are crap or contain no useful information why would Google bother searching them?

Because there is no algorithmic decision procedure for deciding whether something is crap.

--em
[ Parent ]

I know what you mean (2.35 / 20) (#139)
by interjay on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:08:46 AM EST

I'm sick of seeing some pretentious moron post their boring opinions of some subject nobody cares about, and do it badly at that. There's never anything I haven't seen before, and they always seem to think they know what's best for everyone.

An that's just this article. Blogs are pretty bad too.

Wow, what a twist in your last paragraph! (1.26 / 15) (#165)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:42:24 PM EST

Truly amazing! Oh, wait, no it's not. You suck. I saw that coming by the end of the first sentence. That's how lame your opinions are.

Remember: You may disagree with what I say, but I'll kill you for my right to say it.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

This just in... (2.30 / 10) (#142)
by skyknight on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:21:56 AM EST

anything that is cool will be totally bastardized sooner or later by the process of mass-marketing to the mainstream population (read: morons). I wish that I had thought of this first.

It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
My thoughts too, but with less swearing [n/t] (1.62 / 8) (#148)
by nutate on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:45:43 AM EST



PS (none / 1) (#200)
by nutate on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:09:25 PM EST

I only posted here cause my blog is down and k5 doesn't do trackbacks... yet.

[ Parent ]
good article (2.58 / 17) (#158)
by melia on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:16:51 PM EST

I like that all these people are complaining about a "troll" (seems like almost everything slightly controversial is name-called a "troll" these days) or "rant" getting to the front page. Here's a couple of your own little catchphrases right back 'atcha - "it's not for you to read" "he didn't write it just for you" "you don't have to read it if you don't want to".

I think this article is good. It rants, yes, and it's slightly overly-protective of Google, but it's funny, it's engaging, and there's many elements of truth to it. If you're putting your writing up for public consumption, you have to think it's worth putting up, you have to have confidence in it, you have to be pretentious. The fact is, for many blogs that confidence is badly misplaced. The whole thing reminds me of Pop Idol to be quite honest - there's loads of people who simply could be told "you're crap".

Whether it's necessary to tell them they're crap is a different matter. I for one would love to have the self-confidence to write a blog, but I know for a fact that if I did write a blog, I would have nothing to write about, and if I did, it would be crap. That's why the fact that other people are writing awful, boring crap, whilst thinking that i'm interested in it, pisses me off, because I truly believe it's a flaw in their personality that they cannot recognise this particular flaw, which is painfully and embarrasingly obvious. It's good to be self-confident, but completely different to be up your own arse. Some people can't draw, some people can't sing, some people can't write blogs.

These people would do much better in a place like K5, because articles are focussed - you know what subject you're writing about. They're of fixed length, so you don't feel you have to post anything just because you "have" to post once a day. Also, you get criticised. All the time. Offensively. Blogs don't "help you write" because there's rarely any criticism posted. If your blog is crap, people just don't read it, so they don't post. If your blog is good, you are fawned over by the 'blogging community'.

The last annoying thing about blogging is its own bizarre sense of over-hyped self-importance. Not so strange really, that an activity which in the micro is allowed only by supreme self-belief, should present itself in the same way when considered from a distance.

So anyway, that's why I gave this a +1, and that's why i'm getting annoyed by these defensive comments, because they bring to mind those awful pop idol contestants, who just refuse to believe that any criticism might possibly be valid. Not that i'm saying blogging doesn't have good points, but it's quite evident that people need to be ranted at if they're to understand the bad points.
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong

Mostly agree; Final assumption incorrect. (2.72 / 11) (#178)
by Imperfect on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:07:20 PM EST

"but it's quite evident that people need to be ranted at if they're to understand the bad points."

Rants preach to the choir. They are effective for that purpose only. They are absolutely useless for converting those on "the other side." This is evidenced by the huge influx of defensive comments, mine included. If that article had been phrased less like a rant against weblogging and more of a dissertation about the issues involved with the weblog Movable Type, then I would have been a lot more likely to engage with a more reasonable discourse.

If you engage a person with emotion, they respond with emotion.

This is basically the motto of trolls everywhere, and is why while I believe the article has salient points, it failed in its intent to draw criticism to Movable Type and instead drew criticism to itself.

My apologies for any spelling errors, but I am typing one handed while eating my sandwich at work -- which, incidentally, is a pastrami on rye with some very good lettuce. =)

Not perfect, not quite.
[ Parent ]
Eh... not so much (2.20 / 5) (#197)
by Karmakaze on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 04:44:30 PM EST

Mostly I'm tired of seeing this rant.  People have been complaining about the banal self-importance of blogs since forever, and it's pretty much the same complaints over and over.  
--
Karmakaze
[ Parent ]
The world does not revolve around you. (none / 3) (#303)
by kirkjobsluder on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:16:06 PM EST

That's why the fact that other people are writing awful, boring crap, whilst thinking that i'm interested in it, pisses me off, because I truly believe it's a flaw in their personality that they cannot recognise this particular flaw, which is painfully and embarrasingly obvious.

Isn't it an equally large flaw to assume that most weblogs are written to interest you?  Reading the endless criticisms of weblogs I think the critics are more deeply flawed than the bloggers.  Most bloggers know that they are writing off-the-cuff crap that will only be interesting to a small audience of friends, family and peers. It contrast, critics dismiss the entire communications mode because 99% of it is not personally interesting to them.

Perhaps I'm a bit old and jaded on this, but it seems like that this is the same old stuff that was being said about static personal web pages 10 years ago.  And then, as now, the response is that personal web pages, journals, and web logs are not about "pop idol" mass distribution or entertainment, but about social networking.  The "pop idol" comparison is interesting.  Most musicians decide that making the "big time" is too much work, and are quite happy performing just for an audience of family and friends.  No one is under any illusion that high school band concerts are high-quality art, what draws people in, and makes them fun are the personal connections to the performers.

Nobody I know writes a weblog expecting you, as a random person out of millions of internet users, to be interested.  Instead, we write weblogs because it is a good medium to trade stories, links, drafts of papers, and baby pictures between family and friends.  

[ Parent ]

Hmm (none / 2) (#326)
by melia on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 07:23:56 PM EST

Most bloggers know that they are writing off-the-cuff crap that will only be interesting to a small audience of friends, family and peers.

First of all, there are a great deal who write for the world, and if I could take the time, it would very likely be possible to find a few (good or bad) who explicitly state so. Of course, it's bad form not to give such evidence, but there you go.

Secondly, there are a few blogs for which I am the specific intended audience. That does not mean that the blog is not crap, or that the blogger is not pretentious.

It contrast, critics dismiss the entire communications mode because 99% of it is not personally interesting to them.

Even the parent article does not dismiss the entire communications mode - it targets users of a particular type of software. Whether that is a valid attack or not, this statement is certainly of little factual value, especially since it implies that i'm one of these "critics".

Quick note: expressing irritations at aspects of blogging does not indicate dismissal of blogging as a whole. Perhaps the lady doth protest too much? Could it be this article has touched a nerve?

And then, as now, the response is that personal web pages, journals, and web logs are not about "pop idol" mass distribution or entertainment, but about social networking.

They may well be. You've misinterpreted my pop idol analogy - I was simply referring to the contestants (especially those in the first few rounds) that refuse to believe they cannot sing.

Besides, it might well be that blogs are about "social networking", but even that phrase implies some kind of self-promotion. It's also a peculiar kind of online self-promotion, since it appears to compel people to blog as often as possible.

Most musicians decide that making the "big time" is too much work

There's plenty of bloggers who want to make money out of their blog you know. I never said all bloggers were crap, and I never said all bloggers wanted to be read by thousands. But there are some who are crap, and there are some who want to be read by more than their circle of friends. I'd say that most want to be read by as many people as possible, but as before i'm not prepared to back up that little bit of speculation, take it or leave it.

Nobody I know writes a weblog expecting you, as a random person out of millions of internet users, to be interested. Instead, we write weblogs because it is a good medium to trade stories, links, drafts of papers, and baby pictures between family and friends.

Who's we? Just the people you know? Maybe not everyone feels the same way.

(This is a particularly good link)
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong
[ Parent ]

sweeping broad brush (1.33 / 3) (#329)
by kirkjobsluder on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 10:02:47 PM EST

They may well be. You've misinterpreted my pop idol analogy - I was simply referring to the contestants (especially those in the first few rounds) that refuse to believe they cannot sing.

No, I've pointed out that your analogy is useful for pointing out some key elements of bias on your part.  There certainly may be blog prima donnas out there.  However, I honestly don't know of any.  

And perhaps I'm jaded.  I've seen very few blogs where the person just cannot write.  I rarely see publication quality writing.  But I'm forced to wade through much worse writing on a regular basis.

Besides, it might well be that blogs are about "social networking", but even that phrase implies some kind of self-promotion. It's also a peculiar kind of online self-promotion, since it appears to compel people to blog as often as possible.

Wow, talk about a mercenary view of the world!  But here is the big question.  In what way is posting a link on a blog any more obnoxious an act of "self-promotion" than sending a link to a mailing list, or replying to a BBS (talk about crap writing) such as this one?  I would much rather see people blog the things they find interesting than get it in my mail box.  

I think the problem here is that, neck deep in social networks analysis research, I was using the phrase in a social sciences meaning while you were reading in terms a business "get a job" meaning.  Not a big deal, just shows how much crap the writing here is without a proper look at the audience and minimal revision time.  

Who's we? Just the people you know? (four links added)

Well, actually yes.  I suppose if we wanted to settle this issue, we could try to find a way to do some random sampling, as opposed to me using the sample of people that I talk to and read, and you picking a biased sample that you think shows your point.

The first two links Invade my Privacy! Read this Blog! is pretty sarcastic in its presentation.  The second link to Sanity's Edge is a single post from May 2003 that is obviously sarcastic.  The third link to CANADAGEEK reveals the sort of self-reflection about writing style that you have claimed bloggers don't do in their inability to handle criticism:

Sometimes my writing is lazy and other times it is not. The Internet allows for lazy, quick & dirty writing, but knowing that larger than life figures, whom I admire, could possibly stumble onto my site really makes me reevaluate the kind of impression I want to make with my writing.

Of course, I never claimed that there was nobody out there foolishly trying to make money off of their blog.  Nor did I claim that nobody wants to reach a huge world-wide audience.  What I am claiming is that in my experience, the intended audience for most blogs is small.  

[ Parent ]

and who's holding it? (1.00 / 3) (#349)
by melia on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 10:49:26 AM EST

No, I've pointed out that your analogy is useful for pointing out some key elements of bias on your part.

You've completely lost me. The similarity between over- confident pop-idol contestants who can't sing well, and over-confident bloggers who can't blog well, is that their confidence is misplaced. That's what my analogy was about, there was nothing more to it. Mind you, I often make poor analogies.

In what way is posting a link on a blog any more obnoxious an act of "self-promotion" than sending a link to a mailing list, or replying to a BBS (talk about crap writing) such as this one?

Well, first of all, the "crap writing" here is moderated. Perhaps you might not think it's done very well, granted, but at least in principle, what's here is here because a group of people thought it was good. What's on a blog is there because the person who wrote it thought it was good. Big difference. So people who post here are prepared to put their vapid ramblings up to a bit more scrutiny.

But apart from that, i'm not really too bothered about links, in fact I very much like that aspect of blogs. What i'm on about is this this. To be honest, I don't see any equivalence between that diary, and this kind of conversation. Except of course, the crappy standard of writing :).

I'm pretty sure an important point of the original article is that the reason James dislikes MT blogs so much is that their users have a higher propensity to post that sort of (for want of a better phrase) self-engrossed "my life" stuff. It's not all baby pictures, research papers, or even K5-style asinine political commentary. I think you've got to agree with me on that.

I think the problem here is that, neck deep in social networks analysis research, I was using the phrase in a social sciences meaning while you were reading in terms a business "get a job" meaning.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. By "self-promotion" I meant the selling of self as... someone to communicate with. I'm not exactly "neck deep in social networks analysis" but I would suppose (correct me, please!) that any form of communication involves an element of self-promotion in that you have to promote yourself as worthwhile to communicate with, if you see what I mean.

Well, actually yes. I suppose if we wanted to settle this issue, we could try to find a way to do some random sampling, as opposed to me using the sample of people that I talk to and read, and you picking a biased sample that you think shows your point.

Heh seen as i've said a "great deal" of bloggers want to be widely read that would be a pretty interesting study actually. I just see a complete disjoint when sticking a huge diary up in a very public place that is supposedly intended for "friends and family". Besides, as i've tried to point out, it's completely possible for me to think a friend (who desires me to read his blog) has a crap, pretentious blog.

The first two links Invade my Privacy! Read this Blog! is pretty sarcastic in its presentation. The second link to Sanity's Edge is a single post from May 2003 that is obviously sarcastic.

Well I don't know. I guess it's a difficulty to decide what constitutes a desire to be widely read.

The third link to CANADAGEEK reveals the sort of self-reflection about writing style that you have claimed bloggers don't do in their inability to handle criticism:

Aye, but what about a desire for people to read his weblog? Besides, I never said bloggers don't engage in self-reflection - i'm sure i've said the complete opposite in fact! Then, self reflection doesn't mean you come to the right conclusions, of course.

Incidentally (i.e. i'm not trying to say this has any relevance to the above) - leaving aside the aforementioned K5 diaries, in fact, sticking to movable type - what's the ratio of complementary to critical comments?

Of course, I never claimed that there was nobody out there foolishly trying to make money off of their blog. Nor did I claim that nobody wants to reach a huge world-wide audience.

Phew, because you know, I never claimed that everyone wanted to make money off their blog, nor that everyone wanted to reach a huge world-wide audience.

What I am claiming is that in my experience, the intended audience for most blogs is small.

Well, i'm claiming that in my experience it isn't. So, two people arguing away over something completely subjective with barely a shred of supporting evidence between them. I might as well start blogging :)
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong
[ Parent ]

A partial response to you monkeys. (1.00 / 10) (#171)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 12:52:31 PM EST

Click click click click click click.

I bought this account on eBay

Unfortunate (2.58 / 12) (#182)
by aphasia on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:27:35 PM EST

Unfortunately, I agree with you. I've come across the blogs of several friends and, more often than not, what they're posting is 'tech link of the day' or 'the funny thing someone put on fark yesterday'. It's boring, and it's the same old stuff.

Now, you can find some stuff out there that is original or funny or informative enough to be worth reading. Too bad you have to sort through so much chaff to get to the wheat. Of course, the internet has always been that way: 98% chaff, 2% wheat, and on top of it my wheat is your chaff, and vice versa.

The blogging craze does make me laugh. To me, people have been blogging from the very moment they started putting up personal websites that they updated regularly. Not to turn this into a 'I did it first', because I didn't, and everyone else was doing the same damned thing, but the personal site I put up in 1998 had weekly progress updates in it as well as a public guestbook -- it was what would be called today a blog. But we didn't call it a blog, we called it a personal site, and indeed, that's all it was. There's nothing special about a blog, except that now we've given it a name. Some people say that the ability to respond to entries is what makes a blog special. I would argue that people have had guestbooks forever, too, and also that not all blogs have per-entry feedback or even guestbooks. One has little to do with the other. And blogrolling? They're 'links'. Trackbacks? 'Referrers'. BFD. Thank you.

I find a lot of the self-importance of bloggers and blogs to be laughable. It will go away eventually. I suspect that while blogging is going to be around for a long time, soon it will become less of a buzzword and more of just the ambience, the baseline, something we take for granted and don't think anything about. Kind of like scoopable kitty litter.

"You have *huge* brass balls. Tex would be jealous." --ti dave

I can't believe it... (none / 2) (#317)
by muyuubyou on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:18:04 PM EST

...but I think I agree with you, fellow T-Reporter ;)

[ Parent ]
What the ... (1.27 / 18) (#184)
by Mindcrym on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:51:45 PM EST

How did this shit make it to the front page?  This is the type of 14 year old rant that belongs on Slashdot, not K5.  This is yet another sign that the posting threshold needs to be tweaked.

  -Mindcrym

Amen (1.66 / 6) (#187)
by schergr on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:17:31 PM EST

Amen to that last post.  This sounds like someone who felt like ranting and new he'd find an audience to generate some traffic to his own weblog.
Greg Scher The Epicenter Weblog
[ Parent ]
Blogs are worse than personal web pages (2.47 / 19) (#185)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 01:54:33 PM EST

Actually, It isn't so bad to have a personal web page with content which is static for the most part.

The real problem is people who not only think they have something to say, but think they have something new to say every week.

They've taken an annoying vanity and brought it to the next level.

I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour

Have vs. Want (none / 1) (#373)
by straif on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 08:27:25 AM EST

The real problem is people who not only think they have something to say, but think they have something new to say every week.

I've had a blog at livejournal for a couple years. While I hope that what I write is interesting, that doesn't matter. I write, not because I have something to say, but because there is something I want to say. What I write might not be important to you, but it is important to me. You are not my audience; my friends are.

Unlike K5, Slashdot, and Usenet, a blog's audience is not the whole of the particular forum; it is simply those who care to read it. Many people on K5 will read this comment, but few, if any sought it out. Most of those that read my blog choose to do so.

You are absolutely right. Most blogs are not deep and insightful. I will even go further and say that they are frequently poorly written.

Could someone's thoughts become "worthwhile" by learning to express them? Could the task of writing an opinion help clarify it? How does a bad writer learn to write well?

Which is better: expressing opinions that aren't important, or not having opinions?

[ Parent ]

Hmm... (2.50 / 8) (#188)
by tap dancing lenin puppet on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:27:31 PM EST

Is it alright if I link to this in my blog and write about it?

:)

Seriously though, not all 'blogging' needs to be evil.

I don't keep a blog.  But I do keep a journal.  The reason?  Blog is a stupid word, and I find there's an almost natural (and understandable!) animosity brought on by it's usage.

I keep my journal for one reason: to attempt to get my friends to read the god damned news.  So few of my friends read the news, yet all of them are willing to complain about the topic du jour when it arises.

So I link to the stories (yes, I sin!) I believe will either:

A - Inspire them to actually read the news.
or
B - At least give them a basic understanding of what is occuring in their own world.

Then I usually ask questions and ask for opinions and such.  When an erroneous opinion pops up, I refer them to another article which will inform them a little bit more.  Sometimes, just to fuck with them, I link to pages full of Marxist propaganda ("Communist Russia was great!  Even in 1929!!") and wait to see if they can cut through the bull.  It's about informing a small community of people who choose to talk about things they don't really know much about.

I hold no illusion of my own importance, as I realise I'm not all that important or well informed at all.  Just much better than they tend to be.  Occasionally, they even correct my opinion.

Also, I use a non-MT script which has no idiotic trackback features.  My journal is not linked to on Google, or anywhere on the net, so far as I know.  I intend to keep it that way, because the content is not intended for public consumption.  If it ever did somehow end up on Google, I would most likely remove it.

Will

Fuck! (2.31 / 19) (#189)
by fluxrad on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 02:29:34 PM EST

I'm sorry my blog doesn't meet your criteria for content on the internet. I'll take it down immediately!

--
"It is seldom liberty of any kind that is lost all at once."
-David Hume
You're an idiot (2.47 / 23) (#191)
by awgsilyari on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:03:42 PM EST

You're actually claiming that Google should define the way the web works, not the other way around?

If people are doing things on the web that are screwing up Google's ranking algorithm, then it's Google that needs to change, not the web. If Google can't index the web correctly anymore, then Google will die. Simple.

Does that piss you off? You're just another example of elitism by proxy: "Google is elite. I use Google, therefore I am elite."

Anything that threatens the supremacy of this icon you've instilled your own self worth into must therefore be evil.

--------
Please direct SPAM to john@neuralnw.com

Stop projecting your insecurities onto me. (1.00 / 11) (#202)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:28:25 PM EST

Get some more mature ego defence mechanisms. Thanks.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

What is it I'm insecure about? [nt] (none / 2) (#204)
by awgsilyari on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:35:19 PM EST



--------
Please direct SPAM to john@neuralnw.com
[ Parent ]
The size of your penis? (1.42 / 7) (#261)
by melia on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:48:45 AM EST

Go on, mod me down, I don't care, it was an act of sheer rebellion AND I ENJOYED IT!
Disclaimer: All of the above is probably wrong
[ Parent ]
Google is for lamers. (1.75 / 16) (#192)
by syntactical on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:31:52 PM EST

Look, if you can't write yourself a couple of bots to do your searching for you, you deserve what you get. I adjusted my search bots to filter out this blog crap for regular searches almost a year ago. So search engines don't do a good enough job holding your hand through your search. Quit whining and do something about it. Christ.

As a side note, I should say that there are several blogs out there that regularly point out etremely interesting/useful links and information that you cannot easily get out of Google (or often at all, as much of the stuff I look for is not indexed by Google or really most any other engine for one reason or another. Most of interesting content on the web is deep web, i.e. not accessible by bots that obey robots.txt rules.). If you take advantage of blogs and message boards, you can find some amazing things. If clogging Google is the cost of a few good blogs, that's a price I'm willing to pay.

"Your blog is fucking up Google" ... My precious Google! I'm lost without you! Pathetic...

meow.

What a brilliant parody (2.52 / 25) (#194)
by Greener on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 03:40:18 PM EST

This article comes off sounding exactly like the kinds of weblogs the author is talking about.

Resection to Humour please.

+5, Completely Predictable and Wrong and Stupid (1.50 / 10) (#256)
by br14n on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:57:19 AM EST

It doesn't sound like a blog at all. It's direct. It's to the point. It addresses a topic that needs discussion. BASICALLY YOUR COMMENT IS COMPLETELY WRONG BECAUSE THE ARTICLE IS COMPLETELY UNBLOGLIKE.

But hey, at first glance, your comment seems to point out some deliciously ironic twist, and you spell "humor" with a "u", so clearly you are deserving of 3s.

Watching comments like this getting modded up is so much like watching yet another "I, for one, welcome our new <whatever> overlords" comment on slashdot rocket to +5 it's sickening. Eat a dick and go play with lex grammars.

[ Parent ]

Google's not that special (1.85 / 7) (#198)
by Mysidia on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:00:05 PM EST

Just because something makes your favorite search engine less effective, doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

Shoot, if they're just using the standard moveable type layout, it ought to be trivial to filter out moveable type blogs from your search results

It's a problem with google not the weblogs: maybe they nee special classification for weblogs... i.e. filter on words in the script source like oh 'OpenTrackback'

And as for Moveable type being inefficient that's true. Not a reason to criticize moveable type, sounds like it just has problems that need uh fixing, yeah.



-Mysidia the insane @k5
Generalization (1.22 / 9) (#199)
by sherlock on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:07:06 PM EST

It's difficult to find any insight in a story that is so full of generalization.

I find it intriguing that there is so much self indulgent writing in blogs, too, but i usually don't waste much time reading or visiting those blogs that seem to so inflame Mr. Joyce. This writing is far more offensive to me than anything I read in those occasional blogs I encounter by accident while using Google.  

If this writer (and I'm using that term generously) wants to be taken seriously, he should tighten up his prose, and be more specific.

Sisyphus, meet stone (2.69 / 13) (#207)
by Estanislao Martínez on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:43:34 PM EST

You know, you're just running against one of the natural concommitants of 95% of everything being crap: 99% of bloggers can respond that it's not their fault that 95% of blogs are crap, and that it would be horrible if the world were denied of that good 5%. A 5% which, incidentally, includes them, as they'll likely tell you themselves.

--em

Bravo (1.50 / 8) (#208)
by Argyle on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:47:56 PM EST

Bravo, this is fucking hilarious.

Of course people won't see it for the rant it is and try to dissect it and Mr. Joyce.

Mr. Joyce, I owe you a beer.

but (1.42 / 7) (#209)
by golrien on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:51:15 PM EST

what about the ones that are all just robots and porn jokes??

ps. I also like how you blame the fact that Moveable Type sucks on the people that wrote Moveable Type, then you also blame the fact that Pagerank sucks on the people that wrote Moveable Type.

Wow that was a waste of time. (1.58 / 12) (#210)
by barbaloot on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 05:53:03 PM EST

I can't believe I just spent time reading that. I was so bored at the end. I almost killed myself. Most people that have blogs don't give a flying f**k what anyone else thinks about what they write. They write for ones self and not for some ego bloated person who think he should censor the net of blogs.

Stop putting words into my mouth. (2.20 / 5) (#211)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:00:31 PM EST

Did you not read the article properly? At no point did I say that I, we or anyone else "should censor the net of blogs". I don't give that much of a fuck if you have a blog. I do mind, however, if you start up a Movable Type blog with all of your Sartre-reading friends and trackbacking each other all over my Google search results. Try not to misinterpret me in your eagerness to criticise others' viewpoints.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Translation (2.25 / 4) (#273)
by rusty on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:00:26 AM EST

Most people that have blogs don't give a flying f**k what anyone else thinks about what they write.

Translation: I care so little about your opinion that I made this account specifically to tell you so!

It's ok, we understand. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

"F**k"? (none / 3) (#291)
by RegisteredJustForThisComment on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:06:57 AM EST

Flak?
Fork?
Fink?
Fsck, the Unix filesystem checker?

Assuming that "*" is a wildcard representing any number of characters (though I don't see why you'd use two of them if that was the case)...

Firetruck?
Flank?
Flask?

[ Parent ]

bull (none / 1) (#376)
by ph0rk on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 12:43:33 PM EST

if they wrote for themselves, if wouldn't be online.

They write in the hopes others will read it and send them email or an instant message.  It is like one great big elaborate scheme to fish for compliments.

.
[ f o r k . s c h i z o i d . c o m ]
[ Parent ]

Hilarious; bravo! (1.66 / 6) (#212)
by mmaturo on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:02:58 PM EST

Great article; entertaining and, most unfortunately, true. Set these pretentious bastards straight! lol

it appears to me that... (1.14 / 7) (#216)
by zoarre on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:16:49 PM EST

...pundit is the new rock star.

It's all right Jim (1.57 / 7) (#217)
by mystic cowboy on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:24:03 PM EST

Don't worry Mr. James Joyce. When you get back on your medication it will all seem better.

The stripey pills are especially excellent! (none / 1) (#220)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:32:11 PM EST

clap

clap

BOX!

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Mr Joyce..... (1.50 / 10) (#218)
by Fuzzwah on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:27:16 PM EST

I'm very interested in your opinions, can you please sign me up for your news letter.

--
The best a human can do is to pick a delusion that helps him get through the day. - God's Debris

The Key Is Not Browsing Them (2.00 / 11) (#221)
by NeantHumain on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:37:40 PM EST

Apparently, there's a whole blogging community out there I was only vaguely aware of, and you know why? I don't care about Joe Schmoe's opinion, in general. Now, if you want to waste time reading comments that are not thought provoking, that's fine. Just don't expect anyone else to share your outrage about the downsides of your hobby because it's entirely your choice to read webcrap.


I hate my sig.


WHY WON'T YOU PEOPLE LISTEN. (2.00 / 5) (#222)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:41:25 PM EST

For what is literally the seventh time, it's not merely a matter of ignoring the Movable Type bloggers and letting them continue in their own little world. Their blogs advertise their presence invasively by popping up in my search results. That's why I'm so freakin' mad about it.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Hasn't Bothered Me Yet (2.40 / 5) (#223)
by NeantHumain on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:49:52 PM EST

I haven't noticed a pervasion of blogs in my searches, although sometimes forums with useful things do pop up.

It's just your search technique.


I hate my sig.


[ Parent ]
Of course. (2.25 / 3) (#268)
by codepoet on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 03:41:33 AM EST

Since the majority of MT webloggers have that little tag on the front page "Movable Type x.xx" just tell Google to avoid that...

CSS theme -"movable type"

Tada.  Problem solved, mostly.  You still get to deal with other blog software, but that's easily avoided as you discover them.  When you have a good list of exclusions, save the bookmark and then just change the search words next time.

(This from the maintainer of two blogs, one personal that I expect no one to read, and one topical (Apple-ish) that people do read.  The article was great for the majority of the shit that comes up on weblogs.com or blo.gs but not for the other 5% or so that actually are decent.)

-- The cynical can often see the sinister aspect of a cup of coffee if given enough time.
[ Parent ]

James AC Joyce, You Rock! (2.23 / 17) (#224)
by GoddardBolt on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 06:54:40 PM EST

Please, DON'T take your meds! The internet needs more spiteful yet truthful rants like yours.

You hit a home run and drove it out of the ballpark. The vast majority of blogs are self indulgent, artless twaddle.  

The absolute worst blogs are by attractive teenage and young adult women, who seem to attract a cotery of horny guys furiously masturbating over their every vapid word and their "My Mood" article indicators. They don't need a lick of talent to "compete" for eyeballs, they just have to write about shopping for a new bra that afternoon...

Blog culture is, as you said so well, the domain of "it's all about me" self absorption and narcissism. One thing escapes me, though. How in the world did other people's blogs become such a hot commodity? All I can figure is that our society is filled with lusers who have no real life and who seek out someone else's life story in order to live vicariously.

To be honest, I don't read *anyone's* blog unless it has been referenced by someone or by some media entity that I already respect.

I read blogs on a par with Joel on Software, and I'll pay attention to stuff by Cringely and by other print journalists, and that's about it. 99% of the rest is crap.

99% (none / 2) (#348)
by archivis on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 10:28:45 AM EST

only 1% of anything, at most, is non-crap.

[ Parent ]
Ben Trott <i>is</i> a programmer... (1.77 / 9) (#226)
by tarps on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:14:39 PM EST

Movable Type is written by web designers, not programmers.

Ben Trott, the author of Movable Type is a programmer - and a respectable one at that! Have a look at CPAN, author BTROTT. His modules include a pure perl SSH implementation (which he no longer maintains) and several Crypt modules. He is highly respected in the perl community.

Whatever your beef(s) is(are) with Movable Type, please don't disparage a good programmer's reputation.

You <b>FALE</b> the subject line [nt] (1.80 / 5) (#249)
by flaw on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:42:50 PM EST



--
ピニス, ピニス, everyone loves ピニス!
[ Parent ]
MT Rhetoric (none / 3) (#250)
by blogalvillager on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:55:13 PM EST

At least he didn't call you a twat, Ben.
Language is an archeological vehicle ... the language we speak is a whole palimpsest of human effort and history. [Russell Hoban]
[ Parent ]
being a perl monkey (2.25 / 4) (#277)
by Roast Pork and Eggs on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 07:37:31 AM EST

doesn't make you a programmer.  It makes you a web designer.

[ Parent ]
Ha ha ha! (2.25 / 3) (#284)
by it certainly is on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 09:16:34 AM EST

You mentioned "Perl" and "programmer" in the same sentence.

The last I heard, Ben worked at the latté-sipping über-cool San Fran outpost of a "non-traditional" marketing company. He probably has to write object-oriented new-paradigm Perl/PHP/ASP web scripts all day. If he is a programmer, he's going to be in hell right now.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

Movable Type isn't the bad guy (2.27 / 11) (#228)
by blowout on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 07:22:53 PM EST

I agree that many weblogs out there are useless, but that can hardly be considered Movable Type's fault. Ninety percent of everything is garbage, and I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb in saying that this article is not in the other ten percent. (I think the other commenters will back me up on that, right?)

I do agree that there are too many "blog" words out there and that most of them serve to inflate people's egos, but most of these words will disappear as the novelty of weblogging wears off.

Stop complaining about weblogs messing up Google. Rest assured, if Brin and Page think weblogs are a detriment to their searches, they will adjust Google accordingly. However, if you don't like how Google ranks weblogs, use another search engine and stop whining.

Effectively, your opinion is that the world should simply conform to your image of it, so I am sorry to have to tell you that the world doesn't work like that. All you are doing is tilting at windmills.


------------------------------------
bye bye pride
A recent survey has shown that ... (2.25 / 12) (#232)
by pyramid termite on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:09:53 PM EST

... 99% of K5 posts, articles and diaries are crap also. Unlike the boggers, who are never quite sure they will find their audience, Kurobots are always certain that no matter how lame, sheeplike or pedestrian their musings or artless rantings may be, someone will reply with either simpering agreement or outraged venom. In short, it's a bog for those for whom the hit or miss nature of the bogosphere is not enough.

But I needn't tell you that, right?

BTW, I don't have a bog. I have K5.

On the Internet, anyone can accuse you of being a dog.
You use K5 as your toilet?! (none / 2) (#233)
by James A C Joyce on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:12:48 PM EST

Wow, some people are more addicted to this place than I thought.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

You'll never be able to prove it. (nt) (none / 2) (#235)
by pyramid termite on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:21:04 PM EST


On the Internet, anyone can accuse you of being a dog.
[ Parent ]
do you know what hypocrisy is? (1.75 / 3) (#238)
by circletimessquare on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 08:59:34 PM EST

this is your post:

"hi, i am acting like a troll in this post in order to bring attention to the fact that i don't like trolls, thank you"

or, an allegory for your behavior: "no fucking swearing please!"

get it?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

In reply, I could accuse you of all sorts ... (2.25 / 4) (#241)
by pyramid termite on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:18:23 PM EST

... of things. Having a sense of humor wouldn't be one of them.

On the Internet, anyone can accuse you of being a dog.
[ Parent ]
you win (1.75 / 4) (#242)
by circletimessquare on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:35:54 PM EST

self-derogatory humor is your thing ;-P


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
ROFL (2.14 / 14) (#239)
by circletimessquare on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:01:13 PM EST

thank you james joyce,

i have no fucking clue what moveable type is, but that was hilarious! ;-P


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

Best forum for pretentious twats (2.05 / 19) (#243)
by johnny on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:52:18 PM EST

Why bother with all the hassle of a Moveable Type blog when you can just parade your twaddle in pretentious whiney rants on http://www.kuro5hin.org ?

There (on Kuro5hin), at least, you can be assured that your superior insight will be met by a suitably sophisticated audience! (Unlike moveable type blogs, whose only readers are morons.)

Down with people with enough gumption to start their own weblog! Long live the true custodians of enlightening Internet conversation! Thank you James A C Joyce!

What in the world would we ever do without the wise insight of James A C Joyce--whoever the fuck he is!

P.S. does anybody have a link to his blog?

yr frn,
jrs
Get your free download of prizewinning novels Acts of the Apostles and Che

Let me guess... You have a blog? (nt) (1.25 / 4) (#245)
by Michael Moore on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:04:19 PM EST



--
"My life was more improved by a single use of [ecstasy] than someone's life is made worse by becoming a heroin addict." -- aphrael
[ Parent ]
depend on how you define blog (none / 3) (#248)
by johnny on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:42:03 PM EST

I have a website--which you can find, in theory, by following the link in the sig. However, my website appears to be down tonight so my theory is momentarily suspect. I don't know if this is because my ISP is mometarily fucked up, or if it's because my check bounced.

My website is wetmachine.com, which is a multi-person blog mostly themed around the subject of technoparanoia. So, yes, I do have a blog or at least a bloglike thing, but as a matter of pride and principle I post my most self-obsessed, whiney, and self-referential essays here on K5, just like Mr. Joyce -- hey, more than 200 diaries, going back almost 4 years --

Um, what was the question?

yr frn,
jrs
Get your free download of prizewinning novels Acts of the Apostles and Che
[ Parent ]

Regardless (2.25 / 4) (#264)
by aphrael on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:57:26 AM EST

he has a point: k5 can easily be viewed as a particularly structured group weblog.

[ Parent ]
Whaaaa? (2.25 / 4) (#272)
by rusty on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:56:46 AM EST

I thought that delicious irony was the point? :-)

Not to even mention it's tough to come up with search terms where we don't show up in the first page of google anymore. At least, for things anyone would want to search for, like psychosis or how to make sushi.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

ýt's only the poýnt (none / 2) (#290)
by aphrael on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:00:01 AM EST

ýf you took ýt as a troll. :) ý thought the rant was ýn earnest and want to smack the ranter upsýde the head for beýng exactly what he ýs výlýfyýng. but maybe ýts more fun to laugh. :)

[ Parent ]
Not the same (2.25 / 4) (#257)
by werner on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:01:10 AM EST

Why bother with all the hassle of a Moveable Type blog when you can just parade your twaddle in pretentious whiney rants on http://www.kuro5hin.org

Quite right. If everyone just used a few community sites, there wouldn't be the same problems of Google being overwhelmed by 20000 incestuous, content-free blogs, screwing up the Internet's finest resource for the rest of us.

Thing is, K5 has god knows how many users, and together they manage to produce an interesting and worthwhile site, not devoid of crap, but with a fair amount of perceptive comments. If it takes 1000's of users to produce this, what makes these individuals think that they can produce enough worthwhile material to make a website worthwhile ALL ON THEIR OWN?

[ Parent ]

There is only one solution... (1.30 / 10) (#244)
by GoddardBolt on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 09:56:14 PM EST

James A. C. Joyce must establish his own blog in order to cement his credibility on this important subject.

Protected by Creative Commons, of course.

He already has ... (none / 0) (#438)
by peterg222 on Mon Aug 30, 2004 at 05:36:41 PM EST

I've speculated that his diaries (qv) look suspiciously like a blog :-)


-- If it can't be done mobile it ain't real computing!
[ Parent ]

It's easy to fix. (1.87 / 8) (#247)
by LukeyBoy on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 10:41:24 PM EST

Just use robots.txt:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /mt-tb.cgi

erm, this is a social problem (2.00 / 5) (#260)
by Estanislao Martínez on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:42:27 AM EST

not a technical one. Of course, if the thousands of pretentious, ostentatious twats in question were all to decide simultaneously to not be pretentious and ostentatious, they could set up their blogs not to be indexed. I hope you see the nature of the difficulty from my statement of it.

--em
[ Parent ]

Spam is a social problem too (nt) (none / 0) (#423)
by trejkaz on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 08:05:45 PM EST



[ Parent ]
thanks! (1.14 / 14) (#252)
by wobblie on Tue Feb 03, 2004 at 11:17:51 PM EST

For writing this! I would comment further, but I think you got it all. Great rant! As for the K5 weenies who disliked this nice rant, you are pathetic blogger types yourself.

I feel so... profiled... incorrectly (1.18 / 11) (#254)
by mami on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:30:15 AM EST

sniff ...

Excuse me, mami, (none / 1) (#267)
by rmg on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:38:15 AM EST

The other night you put an article in the queue about who the worthiest man on kuro5hin is, or some such.

I wanted to hear what you finally decided on the matter.

_____ intellectual tiddlywinks
[ Parent ]

hmm, I have found only (none / 1) (#318)
by mami on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:21:24 PM EST

fictional men on K5 ... :-(  

... and therefore I fell asleep and forgot to remove the article from the editing queue.  

So, I declare the worthiest man on K5 the one who removed my article from the queue.  :-)

I am so glad that some few good non-fictional men watch over me and protect me from myself. Thank you, rmg.


[ Parent ]

I think removing the article from the queue (none / 1) (#321)
by rmg on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:37:58 PM EST

Was a group effort. I voted for your article, of course, but others must have felt differently.

I suppose I lose, then. What a shame.

_____ intellectual tiddlywinks
[ Parent ]

aah, don't worry (none / 1) (#322)
by mami on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:53:31 PM EST

have you ever thought about how many women have a tendency to fall in love with losers?

There is hope for you. Don't be all discouraged. God doesn't leave nobody behind, men do and only God knows what women have in mind.  

Don't you love my double negatives? They always make me feel positively about life.

Hope that helps.

[ Parent ]

Let's see (none / 1) (#278)
by STFUYHBT on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 07:49:06 AM EST

Your homepage has never worked, you're kuro5hin's dumbest user, and I'm pretty confident that you'd be completely unable to change the default movable type templates. Who is this article aimed at again?

-
"Of all the myriad forms of life here, the 'troll-diagnostic' is surely the lowest, yes?" -medham
[ Parent ]
You can't see - even if you wanted to (none / 1) (#320)
by mami on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:37:42 PM EST

I never had a homepage, I am definitely the smartest k5 user, because I am absolutely sure  that I will never change any default movable templates whatsoever. Why would I do such thing with a template, huh? Is it helpful for my soul, heart, health, account balance, love life, professionalism?

The article was not aimed at me? What a shame. I feel offended. I am a member of the K5 readership. First I am profiled as stupid and then I am ignored? And you think, that's smart?

You have strange ideas about smartness...tz, tz.

[ Parent ]

spot on (1.60 / 10) (#255)
by werner on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:55:09 AM EST

They should cordon off a corner of the Internet for these asinine, self-promoting, navel-inspecting idiots. Give 'em their own domain. .blog would be possible, I guess, but I think .gobshite or .lookatme would be more appropriate.

Any decent browser these days has a popup blocker. I had forgot that popup ads existed, till I used someone else's Internet Exploder. Maybe someone could build a blog blocker and we could all live our lives completely oblivious to these vapid morons.

Google could implement a new keyword: "worthwhile:<query>" which would exclude blogs from results. These could be spotted by the names of the scripts (mt-search.pl or whatever). They should modify PageRank so it each site gets an "is_blog" flag, and its PageRank should only be based on links to it which don't come from other "is_blog" sites.

Hmmm... (none / 1) (#282)
by bigchris on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 08:47:37 AM EST

Didn't they want to make a domain just for porn? I think it was something like .xxx. I don't remember it taking off though.

---
I Hate Jesus: -1: Bible thumper
kpaul: YAAT. YHL. HAND. btw, YAHWEH wins ;) [mt]
[ Parent ]
Mr. Joyce, "blog" is unacceptable (1.63 / 11) (#258)
by Ezra D C Pound on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:13:20 AM EST

Jimmy J:

Better an inscrutable insane American fascist poet than an insane Irish short story writer whose early good work eventually lapsed into the inscrutable. But I liked "Dubliners" okay, especially the story about the guy who liked spanking little boys. Yeah, I liked that one.

Now, on to your rant about unimportant aspects of our world, excepting of course, nice foamy lattes: Do you get out much any more James? I remember when you were the life of the part in Paris at Shakespeare & Co. Whatever became of you? Did you just up and die?

Gotta go, time for my latest paean to be broadcast to those clueless Allies. And Mussolini can be such a hoppin' Mary when I don't come through . . .

Ezzie in lovely Roma

Modernism is dead (1.75 / 4) (#275)
by James A C Joyce on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:46:33 AM EST

Long live modernism!

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Oh, irony of ironies. (2.50 / 10) (#259)
by Apuleius on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:16:11 AM EST

The text ads next to this superbly written article center on you-know-what.


There is a time and a place for everything, and it's called college. (The South Park chef)
Great rant (2.17 / 17) (#262)
by EphraimT on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:54:30 AM EST

It is an extablished fact that the internet belongs to the elite, the knowledgeable and cool. How dare those filthy little people aspire to knowledge - so many failing so miserably, so few succeeding, climbing, clawing, kicking and screaming to the cool heights?

Suffer the bloggoblins their dark carverns of ignorance and lame excess. Their profundity, though wretched and foul, often hides our own lameness in the fetid wasteland of their collective musings. Besides, if only the truly profound and cool blogged there wouldn't be a whole lot left to bitch about. Can you imagine - whole sites dedicated to people congratulating each other on their piercing insight, their wit, charm and intelligence? It would be like Richard Simmons meets Neil Diamond and Tony Robbins. The horror!

I agree (1.41 / 12) (#265)
by mcbridematt on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:07:46 AM EST

I agree that Movable Type must die. 1. Spawning a new process of perl just to modify a static page is the worst design decision they could make. If your own a shared webhost, kick Movable Type now!, your pissing everybody. 2. I hate the sense of 'community' that Movable Type users have. They seem to proudly dump "Powered by Movable Type" on their pages at will. I simply can't live with Movable Type. So I use WordPress (formerly b2) on my own website. I wasn't really aware that Ping/Trackback fucks up google, so I'll modify my site not to show them to Google.

MT requires you to say "Powered by MT" (2.57 / 7) (#271)
by jesser on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:07:09 AM EST

MT requires you to say "Powered by MT" or otherwise link to movabletype.org, so of course MT users say that.

[ Parent ]
Think about the design for a minute (none / 3) (#332)
by batkiwi on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:09:26 PM EST

What is your ratio of pageviews to posts?

If you're getting more pageviews than posts (which I hope you are, or else there's really no point) then movable type's design is the best (ignoring perl vs php, you could do the same design in either language).

Movable type renders the pages into html on NEW POST, then just uses apache to serve the html.

WordPress (which I like better and use, but that's beside this argument) renders the pages into html ON EVERY PAGEVIEW.

It takes the same amount of cpu power (make a perl version of wordpress, or a php version of mobable type to ignore language) per "render" either way, so it's 1 render per post, or 1 render per view.

Which is more scalable?

[ Parent ]

Watch the groupthink come rolling in (2.38 / 13) (#269)
by cbm5 on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 03:45:20 AM EST

This has already made it out onto the blogs. I have TWO blogs I SOMETIMES read anymore, because I happen to actually know the people. I consider blogs a personal failing. There is supposed to be a book about good blogging, and one of the rules is to not write comment about personal stuff. It's not supposed to be a diary, it's supposed to be online commentary. Not to say that's any better. But most bloggers completely ignore this, and blab on and on about themselves and miniscule stuff. And now they are balling up into a massive clod of hate, Trackbacking themselves in lockstep to defend their mythical cause. Striking out at anyone who suggests that there is little reason for what they're doing...they don't want that. All they want is other bloggers reinforcing them, and vice versa. Regarding blogs and Google: I find that Google increasingly pushes blogs to the back of the search results. I tip my hat to the coders at Google, it's a rough world out there. They have to deal with all these intentional and unintentional attempts at making search results useless.

Supposed? (none / 1) (#387)
by NotZen on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 07:55:59 AM EST

It's not supposed to be a diary, it's supposed to be online commentary.

Supposed to be?

Supposed by whom?

Mine's supposed to be whatever I feel like it being when I use it.

[ Parent ]

Excuse me... (1.44 / 9) (#274)
by rapha on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:30:01 AM EST

Most of you think that you're writing original content and that you're making a contribution by licensing your spewings under Creative Commons "Some Rights Reserved" licences, just because it's the hip thing to do.

...but do you actually believe in your so-called "writing" being creative?


---
NIETS IS ONMOGELIJK!

Who cares (2.14 / 14) (#276)
by oohp on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 06:25:45 AM EST

..that the Internet is plagued with blogs and Google chokes. Yes I use Google and I ran across crap as well but that doesn't mean we start shooting bloggers because they fsck up PageRank.

Yes, most of the blogs are dupes or useless noise but we live in a free world (well, almost) and eyeryone can post whatever they want on the Internet whether you like it or not. And yes, you have a point with the TrackBack thing. But then again, If I had to choose between blogs and shitty commercial sites that pop up ads every click, guess what I'll choose.

We have bigger problems.

This story is now the #1 item on Blodex. (1.69 / 13) (#279)
by James A C Joyce on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 08:29:42 AM EST

The irony is so painful that it hurts.

At least two-thirds of those linking to it must be Movable Type users.
And for those Movable Type users among them, at least half of the corresponding entries have no comments.

HA!

I bought this account on eBay

I can't believe I spelt it Blodex. (1.20 / 5) (#283)
by James A C Joyce on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 09:10:50 AM EST

I meant Blogdex. You know it.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

and now there are 6 (2.40 / 5) (#327)
by SkArcher on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 07:30:28 PM EST

There now appear to be 6 thingts that blogs talk about;

  • Presidential elections
  • The economy
  • Political parties
  • Blogging
  • Open source software
  • James Joyce


Well done, you appear to have made a difference.
If God didn't want us to eat people, why did he make them out of MEAT?
[ Parent ]
Hell, yes (1.80 / 5) (#293)
by Viliam Bur on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:25:07 PM EST

they all put links to it, and write short comments on it.

And none of the comments is any interesting...

[ Parent ]

More pain (2.40 / 5) (#324)
by MrHanky on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 06:15:30 PM EST

Mmmm... and tracking the story goes to a blog that parodies your article with:
You're all Jolt guzzling, Linux-using, city dwelling, unemployed slackers who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky.
That's just so me (but I'm not lucky, so I'm not going to offer any insights into a specialist field. And I don't drink Jolt).

I think this might be my first comment on K5 (although my account is ages old. I just lurk here), so I'm going to celebrate by not doing anything useful for a while.


"This was great, because it was a bunch of mature players who were able to express themselves and talk politics." Lettuce B-Free, on being a total fucking moron for Ron Paul.
[ Parent ]
Irony indeed (none / 2) (#381)
by squigly on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 04:32:11 PM EST

I disagreed with you at first.  Since the bloggers have noticed it, and started commenting on it, I really can see you have a point here.

[ Parent ]
Interesting Post (2.44 / 9) (#280)
by jamesbow on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 08:41:14 AM EST

Do you feel better now that you have it out of your system? A good rant can be refreshing, even if it is about as inaccurate and broad-stroked as a political speech. Indeed, it reminds me of a particularly fanatical science fiction fan, ranting about how his show or viewpoint was the one "true" faith and all the rest were just idiots. But that's probably not the analogy you were going for. I must admit, MT's achilles heel is that it is *darn* hard to install, and you blow out your internal links every time you switch webhosts, but I've yet to break the application, and it's managing more than 1000 posts over on my website. And the points you raise about MT users being obsessed with politics, political parties and stuff, surely applies also to Blogger and Greymatter users. Indeed, some of the most political blogs I know use what appears to be homegrown blogging equipment. As for the Google-clogging, again, that also covers Blogger and Greymatter users, in my experience. It's not our fault that Google appears to lend more weight to websites that are updated frequently and, besides, in my own Google research, I've found the answers I've found on blogs (MT, Blogger or otherwise) to be quite helpful, and I'm a freelance journalist. I don't know who peed in your cornflakes, but my advice is to take a few deep breaths and calm down. If this is how you react to a minor inconvenience in your life, one wonders how well you'd handle a serious disaster.

Living Up to the Criteria (none / 2) (#292)
by jamesbow on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:19:32 AM EST

By the way, I know you wrote this in a deliberately hyperbolic fashion in order to attract attention to yourself (congratulations, you got it), but I still have to chuckle at this quote:

"You're all latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky"

Let's see:

Latte-sipping

Well, yes, guilty as charged, though I drink on average three cups of coffee a day. At that level, I generally can only afford to drink regular coffee, no sugar, but with milk.

iMac-using

I'm on a Duron PC using Windows Millennium. My wife, who blogs, uses an iMac. So, you're 50% there. If I could afford to use an iMac, I'd switch in a minute. What's wrong with that? It's a superior computer (although I realize that it's not the size of the computer that matters, it's what you do with it).

Suburban-living

Dead wrong. I'm a downtown man all the way, and have been for most of my 32 years on this planet.

tertiary-industry-working

Circulation manager at a Canadian magazine. Your call on how to define that.

WASP

My grandfather was Chinese. My wife is Catholic.

who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky

Well, that describes most people on this planet, if you're being mean. It even describes yourself. I can claim some expertise in urban transit issues, young adult writing, the structure of our cities and politics. Well, that last one is a gimmie, since everybody's a pundit given half the chance.



[ Parent ]
I'm fine without my meds, too! (none / 1) (#314)
by Qwaniton on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:51:01 PM EST

Do you feel better now that you have it out of your system?
After reading the article, I felt good. It was an enjoyable experience, unlike many other articles here.

A good rant can be refreshing, even if it is about as inaccurate and broad-stroked as a political speech.
It was quite accurate, actually. I'm personally getting quite sick of finding such self-absorbance in publishing. This is especially the case when I read weblogs suggesting their authors are integral parts of a new social revolution. Especially irritating is the idea expressed in the following quotation by some narcissistic idiot:

To wax philosophic a bit, blogs are the voice of the people. When historians look back on this time, they will have unprecedented insight into the collective mind of the on-line world. Sure they'll care about what CNN said about George Bush, but they'll also care about what I said, and what Gesika said.
It's all too common. Personally, every time I read that kind of drivel I want to flog the author with a bullwhip.

Indeed, it reminds me of a particularly fanatical science fiction fan, ranting about how his show or viewpoint was the one "true" faith and all the rest were just idiots.
Those diatribes are mostly, if not always, in jest. I have the feeling you think they're serious. Even if they are serious, they're not bukkake-ing themselves in some self-referential circle jerk (blogroll).

I must admit, MT's achilles heel is that it is *darn* hard to install,
Unfortunately, as I can tell, it isn't hard enough.

and you blow out your internal links every time you switch webhosts
Good.

but I've yet to break the application, and it's managing more than 1000 posts over on my website.
That means you should get a job. Take the hint, boy.

And the points you raise about MT users being obsessed with politics, political parties and stuff, surely applies also to Blogger and Greymatter users.
Completely true. The worst part of the politics-oriented "blogosphere" (blech, what a pretentious word) is that, no matter what an individual blogger's political viewpoint may be, the rhetoric in which it is conveyed is always painfully reminiscent of the 60s. Get a job, you damn hippies. (Oh, and for an example of a good weblog, try popular open-source advocate and generally radical-but-correct ESR's weblog.

Indeed, some of the most political blogs I know use what appears to be homegrown blogging equipment.
Most of the non-Blogger weblogs I've seen seem to use some other random script. They're rarely "homegrown".

As for the Google-clogging, again, that also covers Blogger and Greymatter users, in my experience. It's not our fault that Google appears to lend more weight to websites that are updated frequently
True. It's Google's fault they haven't fixed it yet. What's up with Google spam anyways?

and, besides, in my own Google research, I've found the answers I've found on blogs (MT, Blogger or otherwise) to be quite helpful,
I haven't. It's usually self-referential sludge. Blogging about blogging is awful enough. It's even worse when every subject a blogger discusses ends up as blogging about blogging. Such drivel makes me physically ill, and I hope its authors come down with leprosy.

and I'm a freelance journalist.
Good for you. You write for a living; it doesn't mean you know anything.

I don't know who peed in your cornflakes, but my advice is to take a few deep breaths and calm down. If this is how you react to a minor inconvenience in your life, one wonders how well you'd handle a serious disaster.
I'm going to +3 your comment just for the flawed analogy. To hell with rational discourse, overdramatization and logical fallacy is what Kuro5hin is all about!


I don't think, therefore I
[ Parent ]
Egos are Everywhere (none / 1) (#336)
by jamesbow on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 12:01:35 AM EST

There is no denying that lots of people have big egos and, get them near a microphone or a soapbox and watch out! But again your strokes are too broad. But not everybody is like that, and it is wrong to condemn the whole without making allowances for the individual.

You've posted one quote from a blogger with an inflated head, and I'm sure you can post a few more, but I think most bloggers realize that there is nothing magical about blogging; it's simply the Internet made faster.

I guess the argument we're having here could be flashed back to 1995 when the Internet started to become popular. Back then, oldtime users started complaining about AOL people or somesuch cluttering up newsgroups and the e-mails, and crappy webpages were going up all over the place. All that blogging has done is given these individuals ready-made templates and the ability to update and archive pages on their behalf.

Perhaps it's a shame that the Internet is being flooded with people who don't appreciate its subtleties, who use it to stare at and post images of their navel, but I think it's a fact of life -- one that's only going to increase as the Internet itself becomes as common a tool for individuals worldwide as the telephone. I don't see it as all that constructive to rant about what is essentially democracy at work.

I've been around long enough to see some of the really good things of the Internet get swamped (I used to be a regular user of the newsgroups until they ceased to be useful and fun), but there are alternatives. There are ways you can still make use of or have fun with the Internet. The communities that you favour will always be there, even as the chattering gets louder. Anything you prescribe to try and limit the chatter itself compromises the very freedoms that made the Internet so enjoyable when we first discovered it.



[ Parent ]
Carrier Return is your friend (nt) (none / 1) (#316)
by muyuubyou on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:12:41 PM EST




----------
It is when I struggle to be brief that I become obscure - Horace, Epistles
[ Parent ]
What about 'Carriage Return'? (nt) (none / 1) (#330)
by Frequanaut on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 10:04:43 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Carriage Return *is* my friend (none / 2) (#334)
by jamesbow on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:25:32 PM EST

Yeah, I hear you. Forgive me, but I've only just started posting here, and I was not used to the HTML codes that were supposed to go into the comments. I'm learning. :-)



[ Parent ]
*ooops* sorry (nt) (none / 1) (#338)
by muyuubyou on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 01:55:28 AM EST



[ Parent ]
I like carrier return (none / 1) (#380)
by squigly on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 04:13:51 PM EST

Have you never posted a comment using pigeon post?  Carrier return is essential for that.

[ Parent ]
First they came for the bloggers (2.47 / 17) (#287)
by it certainly is on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 10:03:03 AM EST

A few days ago, I was reading a SomethingAwful article on how fucked-up and wrong the "furrys" were. I agreed with everything it said until I read the final conclusion:
Don't turn your eyes from their websites, spam their guestbook with a thousand repetitions of "HORRRRRRRRRRSECOCK" displayed in 72 point red letters. Invade their message boards and tell them how detestable they are. Upload insulting illustrations to their art sites. They will draw in on themselves and ossify, while any who might be lured in to their clutches will see the horde clamoring at the gates and turn away.
The problem with this approach to the furry problem is that the furries will withdraw all avenues for public criticism and run in propoganda-only mode, like white supremacy sites already do. Meanwhile, all legitimate criticism of furries begins to look like teenage vandalism.

This delightful article, which I voted +1FP for, is another example of attacking the lowest of the low for our own personal pleasure. But if we condone the destruction of bloggers, are we any better than the pitchforks-and-torches brigade who went after alleged paedophiles?

We could easily draw up a table of the Internet pecking order, for example:

  1. Major internet sites.
  2. Threaded discussion sites.
  3. Unthreaded message boards.
  4. Portals of "cool" content or links.
  5. Personal sites with "cool" content.
  6. Personal sites with genuinely useful or interesting content.
  7. Celebrity bloggers.
  8. Bloggers who are famous for being bloggers.
  9. Bloggers who only talk about themselves.
  10. Bloggers who only talk about blogging.
No matter what criteria is used to create this list, there will always be a "bottom" to the list. Those at the bottom will always be the most vilified. If we always attack the bottom to the point of extinction, we are really moving up the list with our attacks, until we destroy the internet. There are certainly people who want to destroy the internet, but are you one of them?

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.

We're not like the paedophile hunters. (1.62 / 8) (#301)
by James A C Joyce on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:51:13 PM EST

In that we're not whipped up into a frenzy of panic by the newspapers and attacking innocent doctors. Movable Type is a real problem, and instead of chasing after people based on speculation, there's real evidence if someone is a Movable Type blogger.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

curious sidenote (none / 2) (#344)
by Wah on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 09:10:42 AM EST

What level of 'problem' do you see Movable Type to be?  I mean, there's WMD level problems, and there's hangnail level.  Now, I got to assume that this is Internet contextuel (i.e. you can't rationally be comparing it to hunger, on the problem scale), so given that, when measured against other threats, where do you put Movable Type?

If MyDoom (which I've gotten a few hundred of today, but only thanks to being an admin) were, say, a 6 on the scale, and the scale is logarithmic, like Richter, where does Movable Type fit in.  In your humble opinion?

Again, Nukes would be a 10 (although maybe the Net goes up to 11?!) and the Hangnail is a .1

What is Movable Type?
--
sometimes things just are that way and that's it. They're true. Sure, Popper, et. al., may argue otherwise, but they're dead. You get it? Yet?
[ Parent ]

5. (none / 0) (#383)
by bpalmer on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 10:13:48 PM EST

Other Internet trolls would garner a mere 3.

[ Parent ]
Hell, yeah! (1.47 / 17) (#288)
by LKM on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 10:10:53 AM EST

The idiocy (...) is most evident when they become emotional about a topic. When this occurs, they tend to make all kinds of massive, grating rhetorical faux pas such as false analogies.

Good to see you having a good grasp on yourself. Wait, you're talking about Bloggers? I thought that quote was about your own rant. It fits very well.

Seriously, who cares.



Movable Type is very relevant (1.21 / 14) (#294)
by DrAvenarius on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 12:36:40 PM EST

It gives a professional style to blogging. It´s no my proble Google rules, they must do an algorithm for the web and we don´t have to do a web for their algorithm

YAOYDWTR (Yet another opinion you don't want t..) (1.00 / 3) (#346)
by dmw on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 09:42:39 AM EST

The foundations of the Internet grew on cooperation, interoperability, and in general being nice to each other.

Google for the best part of a few years managed to get searching down to an absolute T. Then along came the blogging revolution, and no longer did Google's wonderful little formula work so well.

Times have changed, and to expect cooperation from the average twat you find on the Internet is unreasonable, however, I do not believe it is solely Google's responsibility to make searching the Internet easy.

It is quite blatantly obvious that the software package Moveable Type single-handedly dealt the major blow when it came to fucking up PageRank. I am not sure what options the maintainers of the software had, but I don't think it is solely up to Google to fix up someone elses thoughtlessness.

Personally I think most bloggers need help and Internet searching should be centrally and openly regulated, but that's just me.

</worthless_rant>^U</blog>
-dw
[ Parent ]

How about you: (1.40 / 22) (#298)
by mrcsparker on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:10:32 PM EST

1. Stop reading web blogs;
2. Go fuck yourself;
3. Tell google to write a better search engine;
4. Stop browsing the web.

Write-in vote (1.26 / 15) (#300)
by hardburn on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 01:21:40 PM EST

The Web must die. Go Moveable Type!


----
while($story = K5::Story->new()) { $story->vote(-1) if($story->section() == $POLITICS); }


Why your article on blogs must die (1.40 / 10) (#304)
by instant on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:32:34 PM EST

hate to tell you but all things on the web start out with stupid words, i mean think about "world wide web" for a minute, or e-whatever, or anything, wikis, and wikis rule but the same is lame as fuck. Also blogs have and will continue to change media, and movable type is a fairly easy and nice way to setup blogs. Sure i understand your point but by writing this article you are really no less pretentious you are just angry that you don't have anything worthwhile to blog about. Yeah im angry too, who'da guessed.

What? (none / 2) (#306)
by Qwaniton on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 02:49:27 PM EST

Don't make an argument unless your spelling and grammar are both correct, and your argument is coherent. You have wasted my time.
I don't think, therefore I
[ Parent ]
Changing the media? (none / 1) (#313)
by epburn on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:36:43 PM EST

Changing the media? I'm sick of hearing this.

Blogs aren't the way to improve the media, which is an entirely different issue. Most of you guys get all your information from us! Watching CNN, reading through IndyMedia and then wretching into the digital crease is not changing the media. You refilter the filter. Which is exactly the kind of mass contribution this article is talking about.

[ Parent ]
If 99% of everything is crap... (2.00 / 5) (#312)
by splitpeasoup on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 04:34:11 PM EST

...maybe we should invent a new word for things that are really bad or much worse than average.

I can never figure out remarks like "99% of people are stupid." Stupid relative to who? The remaining 1%? You could just as well say "99% of people are smart."

What's interesting is you don't hear the latter statement as much as the former - it's not a symmetrical thing.

-SPS

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

But WHY do bloggers expose themselves like this? (2.45 / 11) (#319)
by drx on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 05:21:26 PM EST

So, apart from the topic if Moveable Type is bad or not, i would like to know why people are so willing to expose themselves to public in such a way. I can unterstand that probably sometimes it is just carelessness, the deafult setting of all the softwares .... maybe somebody who is writing such an online journal can answer?

  • Everybody can read what you write in your online journal. It's not like nobody is interested and will not read it; people may stumble across it. Or somebody you don't know or don't like will make a search for it. They will gain a look into your privat life. Your teacher can read it, the boss of the company you just sent and application to, etc etc. Why you allow this?
  • Additionally, this data will be available forever. It will be indexed and stored in archives, be it google or archive.org. In 10 years people will read what you wrote now. Maybe you completely changed. Maybe you think that what you wrote is totally embarrassing. Still it will be popping up with some easy search engine query. Do you take that into account?

I know people who were harmed by this and i also am a victim myself, posting to the usenet years ago when i didn't know the group was exported and archived. Back then the net seemed so personal .... but now this idiotic things will be perpetuated forever. Imagine the 99% male computer nerd environment during that time, and now everybody and their mother in-law knows google and the "groups", archives going back to the 80s.

So, in the end, why don't you put some simple password in front of your journal? Why you do not use a locked Yahoo group? There are so many possibilities.

Is it something like people who like to give away their addresses and phone numbers and consuming behavious for bonus point shopping systems? Or the general trend to expose yourself whenever you can, like all the reality TV shows? Is there no desire for privacy or anonymity?



In my case.. (none / 2) (#325)
by Aero Leviathan on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 06:20:23 PM EST

I keep a separate blog and 'real' journal, and each has its uses... I don't reveal anything too personal online. Lots of times the events of my day or whatever are fine to reveal. Not that they're necessarily interesting to read about either, but that's a separate issue..

As for archiving, it's quite easy to stop archiving with a meta tag and/or robots.txt. If I were to set those up tomorrow, all past archives of my website would be deleted the next time the bot scans me, and it would never archive me again..

'Course, posts I make on kuro5hin are archived forever, right? ^_~

~ Aero
[ Parent ]

Not much exposure here... (none / 3) (#333)
by jamesbow on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:22:20 PM EST

Most bloggers don't expose themselves like this. The media only reports the most sensational and the most ridiculous events, and so we all tend to read about the people who got fired for complaining about their company online, but we tend not to notice the 99.9% who act normally or otherwise with a shred of sanity.

Some people, I think, get lulled into a false sense of security around the Internet. Surfing is something they tend to do at home, in private, and a part of their minds thinks that no one is actually looking. And perhaps because that part of the mind doesn't speak up, another part of the mind, the part that likes to be a bit of an exhibitionist, ends up getting free reign. The result: disaster.

I always say, never say anything online that you are not willing to say at normal conversation level out in the general public. Actually, scratch that -- never say anything online that you are not willing to shout from a soapbox, because people will hear you. Worse still, they will keep records of what you've said.

I write online because I am a writer, and keeping an online journal allows me to practise, and getting a (small) audience to read my stuff and comment gives me invaluable feedback and the ability to improve what I write. I don't think I've written anything that I can't defend or need to apologize for, though I need to constantly remind myself that I do need to watch out.



[ Parent ]
The internet is free (1.83 / 12) (#323)
by Aero Leviathan on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 06:09:58 PM EST

I don't care if you like my blog. I like it, and there are one or two other people who like it, and for me that is enough to justify its existence.

I don't care if your search engine gets confused or less effective when it sees my blog. How their tecnhology works is really not my problem. Google, popular as it may be, is not the internet and does not rule the internet.

The internet belongs to everyone and you can't tell me I can't have my own little slice of it, no matter how stupid or seemingly pointless it may be.

Flame away..

~ Aero

Bravo! (1.25 / 8) (#328)
by dmw on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 07:41:59 PM EST

If I could say it so well myself, I would! +1
-dw
Pre10tious Twat (1.00 / 22) (#335)
by commissar on Wed Feb 04, 2004 at 11:28:48 PM EST

Pretentious twats of the world unite! Ask the question! What could be more pre10tious than inserting a number among the letters of your site name? Suburban WASP's unite! You have nothing to lose but your lattes and your iMacs! And your Blogosphere. All Pretentious Twats may steal, without credit or linkage, our proud logo. http://acepilots.com/mt/archives/000472.html

You Tell Him COMRADE!!! (none / 2) (#359)
by Greeblie on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 04:20:46 PM EST

http://www.greeblie.com/arch/015042.html#015042

--

TV is a vast and empty wasteland, not unlike New Jersey...
[ Parent ]

Welcome to the 21st Century, Asshole (2.11 / 18) (#337)
by Gysh on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 01:42:57 AM EST

For the record, I'm not a MoveableType user - I wrote my own blogging software when I decided to start blogging - but I have to say, this is probably the stupidest story I've ever seen on Kuro5hin.

First of all, you're making an ridiculous generalization saying that all MoveableType users are, as you say, "latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky." I'm not even going to waste my time on why that's stupid, if you're as smart as you apparently think you are you should be able to figure it out yourself. Whether or not you'll ever admit it is a totally different matter, of course.

In fact, this story is totally self-contradictory. You hate MoveableType blogs because they're full of garbage that makes it harder to find legitimate content on the internet, and yet you're posting fucking retarded bitchy rants on K5. You know, all you're really saying is that you're a chauvinistic conformist asshole. You assume that if whoever's talking isn't in some position of power in society, they must have no idea what the fuck they're talking about and hence you have no reason to listen to them.

I'm not even sure why I'm posting this. You might as well go on thinking the way you do - after all, ignorance is bliss, and since you're obviously an asshole I really don't give a shit about whether or not you're missing out on some really good content just because you're a narrow-minded jackass.

Hopefully in the future you won't get away with posting this shit on K5. Of course, you could always go get a blog and post your bitching there.

Yes, but I'm on the front page and you're not. (1.42 / 14) (#340)
by James A C Joyce on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 03:36:35 AM EST

Therefore what I have to say is more valid than what you have to say.

HTH, n00b.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Yeah, and... (none / 1) (#382)
by Gysh on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 09:54:13 PM EST

A million flies eat shit, perhaps you should take that up too.

[ Parent ]
I'll go a step further Mr Joyce (1.16 / 12) (#339)
by ph317 on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 02:19:32 AM EST


All blogs suck.  All bloggers suck.  The term blog sucks.  The term weblog sucks.  You suck because your knowledge and interest in the subject is clearly high enough to qualify you as a likely blogger of some sort.

In terms of sites on the net, you can really divide and rank things up about like this:

  1. Major info sites (CNN, Library of Congress, WebMD,..)
  2. Search Engines
  3. Small info sites (Joe's homepage where he details how to reprogram some oddball electronic device, which isn't documented anywhere else in existence)
  4. Discussion forum sites on a particular topic area (like say the Gentoo forums for linux questions)
  5. Commercial Sites (MyCorp Rocks! Buy our Shit! Ugh)
  6. Blogs and other trash like that dancing hamster site.


LiveJournal (2.44 / 9) (#341)
by seebs on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 04:42:14 AM EST

When livejournal gives me complete control over the software, the data storage, and the backups for a blog, I'll give it a thought.

Until then, hell no.  I like the idea that my data is stored on my computer, where I can do something with it.  I like having complete control over the web server, being able to toggle settings galore, and having full and customizable logs.  These things are happy for me.

I like also being able to integrate it a bit with my regular web page, something I expect to do any minute now.  :)

Re: LiveJournal (none / 0) (#398)
by WWWWolf on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 12:25:45 PM EST

Want LiveJournal without trusting the data to someone else? Want all cool frosty features LiveJournal has over all other weblog software? Find Movable Type's software license horrifying? Do you have Perl and are you willing to travel? There may be but only one thing to try...


-- Weyfour WWWWolf, a lupine technomancer from the cold north...


[ Parent ]
But what does that change? (none / 0) (#401)
by seebs on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 04:24:07 PM EST

That doesn't even come close to addressing the original guy's concerns, so far as I can tell; I don't know that a local copy with inevitable bitrot and spec creep would help.

[ Parent ]
Which concern doesn't it satisfy? (none / 0) (#422)
by trejkaz on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 08:02:20 PM EST

Let's have a look:

  1. complete control over the software : satisfied. LJ is open source, if you want to change it, change it.
  2. the data storage, and the backups for a blog : satisfied. The data stays in your own database so you can back it up whenever you want.
  3. and having full and customizable logs : satisfied. There is a complete templating system in LJ which you can add to if you're the one who administers the site. (Actually paying users can add to the list even if they don't administer the site.)
  4. I like also being able to integrate it a bit with my regular web page : satisfied. I have done this for a company web site, although admittedly the simpler the weblog software, the simpler the integration.

If you don't like the code in LJ, just say so. Hey, it's bad code. I know because I've had to customise it. But don't say it doesn't address his concerns because all the ones I could see in the comment were addressed.



[ Parent ]
google search (1.50 / 6) (#345)
by persona 9 on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 09:13:04 AM EST

What's wrong with this google search?

stuff i'm looking for -"Moveable Type"
so why the hell is my account dead?

spelling error (none / 0) (#435)
by RareHeintz on Thu Mar 25, 2004 at 03:58:01 PM EST

What's wrong with that search is that the first word should be "Movable". Not your fault, really - they chose the less common (though still legitimate) spelling of the word.
--
http://www.bradheintz.com/ - updated kind of daily
[ Parent ]
Influential Mishap (2.00 / 11) (#347)
by TheDon on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 10:11:01 AM EST

You say this is a rant. Fine. But to rant on the front page of kuro5hin suggests that you too participate in lobbing useless junk on the Net. If, on the other hand, you're trying to convince people to switch from Movable Type berating them is about the most non-productive method I've seen since--oh I don't know--probably the last kuro5hin "article".

Think back to any speech or article that has persuaded people to act. Anyone that has ever inspired people to change has used far more persuasive language and never insulted the audience they were addressing.

My guess is that you knew the best you could come up with was a rant. You further knew that you couldn't formulate a stirring enough argument to prove your points and so you chose to troll instead, using sweeping generalizations, insults and pandering for the few that might agree with you. This isn't the way to convince those that disagree with you. Furthermore, you accuse these bloggers of being sheep. Sheep are easy to guide and manipulate, so why could you not do so?

Despite all of this I did see a kernel of truth in what you wrote. I am one of those people you've written about and yes I'm guilty of some of the things you mention and that reality stings a bit. Because of this I'm committed to providing better content to my readers that hopefully isn't just more link sharing. So for that, I thank you but I also encourage you to spend more time trying to speak to your kuro5hin readers productively and respectfully rather than aimlessly ranting.

--------------------------

Memory says, "I did that." Pride replies, "I could not have done that." Eventually, memory yields.
--Friedrich Nietzsche

Satire or Stupidity? You Decide! (2.25 / 8) (#350)
by SQL Error on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 11:08:10 AM EST

The theory that this piece is actually satire is supported by the fact that Kuro5hin is itself a blog, but undermined by the attack on Movable Type's inefficiency, which while overblown is actually supported by the facts. James A C Joyce - lunatic or satirical genius? Tonight on K5!

Or possibly both? (2.25 / 4) (#352)
by James A C Joyce on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 01:48:52 PM EST

It's very hard to explain why you're mad, even when you're not mad.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Darn Those False Dichotomies! (none / 2) (#369)
by SQL Error on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 09:05:11 PM EST

Yes, I'm always pointing out to people that they have made a mistake in treating something as an either/or situation, and now I fall into the same trap! Ladies and gentlemen, K5 proudly presents James A C Joyce, lunatic satirical genius!

[ Parent ]
Or just an anonymous idiot? ;-) (2.25 / 3) (#358)
by Greeblie on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 04:16:18 PM EST


--

TV is a vast and empty wasteland, not unlike New Jersey...
[ Parent ]

kuro5hin is not a blog (1.83 / 6) (#366)
by Estanislao Martínez on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 07:24:09 PM EST

It is a community-based story discussion site, which happens to have a popular diary feature. Blogs don't have anything like story voting, and their "diaries" support a small number of users determined by the blog admin, not open admission.

--em
[ Parent ]

So voting makes it not a blog? (none / 0) (#421)
by trejkaz on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 07:56:50 PM EST

Weblog sites usually have a feature where you can post to a community. The only difference here seems to be that you can vote which ones appear to the public. If LiveJournal added this simple feature would it cease to become a weblog site? I guess so.

[ Parent ]
I may be a pretentious twat (1.75 / 12) (#353)
by adamrice on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 01:54:04 PM EST

But you sir are practically a plagiarist.

I didn't even discover that item until 3 days... (2.40 / 5) (#356)
by James A C Joyce on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 02:40:38 PM EST

...after I submitted this story.

Thank you for playing.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Informative link, +1! (none / 0) (#391)
by Baldrson Neutralizer on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 06:40:44 PM EST



Modern life, in EVERY ASPECT, is a cult of mediocrity.-trhurler
[ Parent ]
why blogs don't have to die (2.50 / 14) (#354)
by cobra libre on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 01:55:48 PM EST

"Pretentious twats"

I just want to point out that the pensive photo is of Dr. Jacques Distler, a physics professor at the University of Texas at Austin.

Irritating jargon

Sure, I agree. All kinds of cultural phenomena introduce irritating new jargon, of course, and in just about every case I've cared to follow, the new jargon grated on everybody's ears until it became too commonplace to be remarkable.

MT's poor design

I agree that MT's design results in heavy server load when posting comments and trackbacks, or conducting searches. It suffers from the same limitations of most CGI-based applications. The advantage is that more people can use MT, because some hosts don't provide PHP, mod_perl, or the like. Also note that most page hits to a blog are read-only, so in practice this is rarely a big deal. (Except when a site is crapflooded, of course.)

Trackbacks

It's unfortunate that empty Trackback pages pollute Google results. I feel the same way about bogus music lyrics sites that pollute search results for music, and I feel the same way about shopping sites that pollute search results for computer hardware and other commercial products.

It's likely that the designers of Movable Type chose to present Trackbacks in a separate page because, ironically, they didn't want Trackback pings to cause processor-intensive page rebuilds. It is, however, easy to inline Trackback results with the weblog entry page, as I and many other MT users have done. This means that my blog doesn't link to any content-free Trackback pages, and all Trackback results appear in context. Note that Six Apart (the makers of Movable Type) have done the same with their Typepad hosted blogging service.

Blogging in general, bloggers are pretentious, etc.

I, too, am annoyed by the seeming homogeneity of bloggers' interests. I am also annoyed when all my friends in the physical world want to talk about is football/basketball/baseball, or the new reality show, or Bush's latest misstep, or Janet Jackson's boobs, or any other topic du jour. If I've heard something several times, I want to hear something new. But as many others have pointed out, none of the dullness/pretentiousness/homogeneity that one finds in weblogs is unique to weblogs.

I quite sincerely appreciate the fact that what makes weblogs valuable is that they provide anybody with a computer an accessible forum for written self-expression. The only precursor I can think for this is the zine explosion of the 1980s. I'm appalled by anybody who doesn't see this as inherently good -- the barriers to any sort of publishing are otherwise prohibitively high. Some people, it turns out, don't have anything interesting to say, and that's unfortunate. Some people just want to talk to their friends and not to the public, and that's fine. Some people, though, have something valuable to share (whether it be humor or wit or thoughtfulness or knowledge or beauty) and they can say it well, and that's wonderful.

Crapflooding, etc.

Most bloggers are individuals who don't have the technical resources to deal with a DoS attack. Crapflooding is a bullying tactic, and I simply don't understand people who derive pleasure from bullying others. We all know that this is neither constructive nor helpful nor mature. Please find some other outlet for your frustration. The parent article is a good example of a potentially constructive outlet -- just look at all the replies.



Try again (2.40 / 15) (#357)
by ChefQuix on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 03:17:23 PM EST

You are all pretentious twats

Who's more pretentious, the blogger or the blog reader who condemns them? Why this big snit? How have other people's satisfaction in blogging made yours miserable enough to write such a heated rant?

You make up irritating jargon for the sake of it

New paradigms of social complexity require new terms to describe them. Sure 'blog' and 'blogosphere' sound pretty kludgy but they describe the system accurately and are pretty much in the standard lexicon now. Why fight against entrenched memes? Why is your sense of written esthetics more important than having a useful word to describe a new method of expression?

All of your blogs talk about the same crap

This is a wonderful new medium filled with many different perceptions of the world, each one unique and individual as much as you accuse them of groupthink. Just because the intent may be the same that doesn't mean the message is. If you view blogs as a social tool as well as a source of new creativity than you can see that it is a powerful device for connecting people with other people. If you see that as the primary goal of blogging than no matter what the 'groupthink' characteristics of the whole may be, the individual connections are what are important. Plus, there are still original and creative ideas being discussed. You just have to have the tenacity to sort through all the information pollution, and that says more about you as a websurfer than it does about the derth of blogs out there.

Movable Type's bad design makes it easier to DoS you

All this does is force MT to change the way they designed their program, to upgrade it and make it more resistant to DoS attacks. If they fail then that opens up a doorway for another company to design a cleaner program with a handy converter to step in.

You are fucking stupid

Well said. You have truely proven your wit, intelligence and charm in one sweeping sentance. Not only is this entire piece dedicated to an attack on one particular blog (electricvenom.com) but you continually use ad hominem attacks to reinforce your points. Surely one so graced with the powers of debate as yourself know that this tact is pretty much absolutely useless except as a smoke screen against a weak and utterly useless point. Congratulations, you're as bad as those bloggers you claim to despise.

Your blog is fucking up Google

Only in the interim. Blogging will eventually make google better - why would they have bought blogger if they didn't think having a dynamic responsive social network would assist their search engine in some form? Blogging is forcing google to adapt and ultimately that adaptation will be a Good Thing for all of us.

So basically what we have here is one blog reader who was having a bad day, got fed up with some of MT's features, found an empty link on google and then proceeded to explode in the blogosphere. As has been said below, you're no different than the rest of us, just another voice in a sea of voices. Why is it that those who shout the loudest are often the only ones who are heard by the many? Ah well, such is life.


Polluting the Internet since 2003...
perceptionalism.com
room-temperature IQs - harsh, man, harsh. (nt) (1.50 / 8) (#360)
by ksandstr on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 04:23:43 PM EST



Fahrenheit or Centigrade? <nt> (none / 1) (#368)
by prolixity on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 08:05:18 PM EST


Bah!
[ Parent ]
Mine's in Kelvin (nt) (none / 0) (#384)
by randyk on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 02:42:57 AM EST



[ Parent ]
How the fuck did this shit make it past voting? (2.00 / 12) (#361)
by Nigga on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 05:07:34 PM EST

Is this what happens when decisions are left to the democracy of the common man? When mobs rule and the rational knowledgable few's voice is left to diminish in the wake of the vocal but senseless masses? Fuck this, i'm going to /..

--------
The fuck happened to Nigga?

Time for a serious refutation (1.42 / 19) (#362)
by theboz on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 05:38:54 PM EST

In the past, blogging was an interesting pastime. Now, with the advent of the ridiculously popular weblog package Movable Type, the Web is in risk of drowning under a tidal wave of morons who throttle search engines with writing that has no purpose and such PageRank-destroying features as "TrackBack".

Perhaps, perhaps not.

You are all pretentious twats Every last one of you. You're all latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASPs who offer absolutely no new insights on anything whatsoever apart from maybe one specialist field if we're lucky. Most of you think that you're writing original content and that you're making a contribution by licensing your spewings under Creative Commons "Some Rights Reserved" licences, just because it's the hip thing to do. You think you know all there is to say about blogging because you understand the concept of HTML and CSS, but the horrible truth is that 40% of you are all using the same shitty default layout. Then you take pictures of yourselves looking pensive or making vague allusions to mythology.

Interesting observation, but I'm not so sure of that.

You make up irritating jargon for the sake of it The word 'weblog' is acceptable. 'Blog' is just about tolerable. The following are simply galling: Blogosphere Travelblog Blogroll Moblog Blogstream The puns just make them worse.

That's what you think.

Movable Type is badly designed Movable Type is written by web designers, not programmers. It looks good, but unfortunately falls apart under the slightest touch. There are scripts out there which can automatically hammer your blog into tiny, tiny bits by someone with a room-temperature IQ and just a few keystrokes of effort.

Well what are YOU going to do about this problem?

Movable Type's bad design makes it easier to DoS you Every time you post a new item or someone posts a new comment, Movable Type spawns a little instance of perl. It then zips through and builds a new static page from the dynamic data since it's now changed. This process consumes your server's processor power. Movable Type's search feature in particular seems to be a processor hog for some reason. In addition to this, most of you have email notification on new comments turned on. If (when) someone crapfloods you or decides to flood you with searches, you might be lucky enough to get 100, 300 or maybe even 10,000 emails in your inbox. If you're not so lucky, the server which runs your blog will crash and/or your hosting company will go apeshit. In this case, the load average of the hosting server reached 200. Two hundred. This was caused by a mere 350 searches per day over a two day period. No comment.

Again, what are you going to do about this problem?

You are fucking stupid The idiocy of Movable Type bloggers is most evident when they become emotional about a topic. When this occurs, they tend to make all kinds of massive, grating rhetorical faux pas such as false analogies. For instance, one fatuous journaller made the following claim after being crapflooded and having lots of search requests made on her blog: Even the most asinine of hackers would not be in the least bit surprised to find themselves pressed with charges were they to enter a cement-and-mortar library and begin wantonly destroying books, ripping out their pages, defacing their covers, rendering them unusable by anyone else. Yet that is precisely what they are doing when they attack weblogs and sites containing original, creative content. Congratulations, you dumb bint. You've just equated the useless babblings of millions of ostentatious retards around the world to a valuable free source of information available to all. Crapflooding is nothing like ripping up most of the books in a library. It's more likely scribbling on several thousands of pieces of paper and then stuffing them all into the "Comments and Suggestions" box hung up on the wall. This will hardly interfere at all with the experience of other library (blog) users. So shut the fuck up before you make a fool of yourself again by making nonsensical comparisons.

Why would you say something like this? Does it make you feel better?

You are all sheep Whenever you discuss a subject about which you all fake your knowledge, such as "metablogging", the lot of you tend to throw out random and completely false opinions and then temperately argue each other down to a single, unified viewpoint. Which is completely wrong.

Just because you think so doesn't mean that you are right.

Your blog is fucking up Google This is what makes your blogs worse than useless. Previously, they were merely bundles of listless rambling scattered around the Web. Now their effects are positively toxic, choking search engines as they grow continuously and invasively. If you try to search Google on any kind of nonmainstream topic which has been discussed amongst yourselves, it's entirely possible that all of the top search results are from a few well-connected bloggers who have blabbed about a subject and then been TrackBacked over and over again by hundreds of other people. TrackBack and "other related blog entries" are hypertextual viruses for fucking up Google, I swear. PageRank was not designed for this sort of linking where each in a series of a thousand pages links to all of the other 999 pages.

As I have stated before, what do you intend to do about this? Anything?

In conclusion Move your shit over to LiveJournal. At least then we can pretend that it doesn't exist and you can stop pretending that your shit doesn't stink.

I hardly think that is a solution to anything.

Stuff.

Sorry (2.40 / 5) (#364)
by ChefQuix on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 06:17:37 PM EST

Is this some subtle k5-centric way of refuting assertations? Because it's pretty much just a waste of bandwidth.... Normally I'm not very critical but I saw the long post and settled in for a good read when all I found was italicized reposting with inane questions as rebuttals. Sorry dude, not good enough. ;)


Polluting the Internet since 2003...
perceptionalism.com
[ Parent ]
Look at the topic (none / 2) (#379)
by theboz on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 02:27:28 PM EST

Is this some subtle k5-centric way of refuting assertations? Because it's pretty much just a waste of bandwidth.... Normally I'm not very critical but I saw the long post and settled in for a good read when all I found was italicized reposting with inane questions as rebuttals. Sorry dude, not good enough. ;)

Your first sentence may have merit, but you have to look at the whole article too.

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

Hmmm (none / 0) (#385)
by ChefQuix on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 05:34:09 AM EST

The topic of your reply or the topic of the article? If this some K5 experiment? What are you guys up to?


Polluting the Internet since 2003...
perceptionalism.com
[ Parent ]
You are right in some ways (none / 0) (#408)
by theboz on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 12:07:19 PM EST

The topic of your reply or the topic of the article? If this some K5 experiment? What are you guys up to?

I was referring to the topic of the original. What guys are you referring to? I am just me.

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

smells like AI (none / 0) (#412)
by koolaidman on Tue Feb 10, 2004 at 09:13:30 AM EST

for some reason theboz's replies and comments are very reminiscent of the replies one would get from one of the AI chatbots which are becoming common on the web - in fact that would be a pretty interesting project - paste people's comments to a chatbot and post the replies.


-----------
OH YEAH!
[ Parent ]
That's not it. (none / 0) (#414)
by theboz on Tue Feb 10, 2004 at 01:26:16 PM EST

for some reason theboz's replies and comments are very reminiscent of the replies one would get from one of the AI chatbots which are becoming common on the web - in fact that would be a pretty interesting project - paste people's comments to a chatbot and post the replies.

Perhaps the AI that you have used is based off of me.

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

ha (none / 0) (#419)
by cobra libre on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 12:06:50 PM EST

Okay, I take back what I said earlier. That's pretty funny.

[ Parent ]
excuse me (2.37 / 8) (#365)
by Estanislao Martínez on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 07:21:09 PM EST

Where is the refutation? All I see are a bunch of snide one-liners.

--em
[ Parent ]

Well (1.71 / 7) (#374)
by theboz on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 09:41:35 AM EST

Where is the refutation? All I see are a bunch of snide one-liners. --em

You are entitled to your own opinion, whatever that may be.

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

his opinion is apparent (none / 2) (#375)
by cobra libre on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 10:20:34 AM EST

You are entitled to your own opinion, whatever that may be.

It's pretty clear that his opinion is that you didn't actually refute the main post. All you did was quote the text at length and pepper it with content-free one-liners such as "what are you going to do about it?" or "that's what you think." You failed utterly to present an argument or make a point.



[ Parent ]
I disagree (1.57 / 7) (#378)
by theboz on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 02:25:35 PM EST

It's pretty clear that his opinion is that you didn't actually refute the main post. All you did was quote the text at length and pepper it with content-free one-liners such as "what are you going to do about it?" or "that's what you think." You failed utterly to present an argument or make a point.

I don't think that I failed at all.

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

what the hell! (none / 0) (#386)
by geozop on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 06:20:06 AM EST

Man! There's no way you can be serious! Your responses barely even seem designed for what you are responding! How can you possibly not even understand what these people are telling you about your comments? You're being damn ridiculous! Just what are you doing? There's no way anyone would ever get anything out of what you're saying!

my handwriting is bad
[ Parent ]
Smell the irony. (none / 1) (#388)
by grendelkhan on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 01:07:27 PM EST

Dude, he's doing exactly what you're claiming he is---responding to arguments of varying cogency with the same snide one-liners he used in the original reply.

--grendelkhan
-- Laws do not persuade just because they threaten --Seneca
[ Parent ]

Incorrect (none / 2) (#410)
by theboz on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 12:11:41 PM EST

Dude, he's doing exactly what you're claiming he is---responding to arguments of varying cogency with the same snide one-liners he used in the original reply.

The previous comments are different than the newer ones, right?

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

Some may yet understand (none / 2) (#409)
by theboz on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 12:08:50 PM EST

Man! There's no way you can be serious! Your responses barely even seem designed for what you are responding! How can you possibly not even understand what these people are telling you about your comments? You're being damn ridiculous! Just what are you doing? There's no way anyone would ever get anything out of what you're saying!

I understand what I am being told, but can the same be said for the ones that are critical of my posts?

Stuff.
[ Parent ]

I think that this is very appropriate to this. (2.00 / 12) (#367)
by James A C Joyce on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 07:31:45 PM EST

Stole it from someone's journal; I feel that this really has me down to a T.

The Very Model of a K5 personality

I am the very model of a K5 personality.
I intersperse obscenity with tedious banality.
Usernames I have plenty of, both genuine and ghosted too,
On all the countless stories that my drivel is crapflooded to.
Your bandwidth I will fritter with my whining and my snivelling,
And you're the one who pays the bill, downloading all my drivelling.
My enemies are numerous, and no-one would be blaming you
For cracking my head open after I've been rudely flaming you.

I hate to lose an argument (by now I should be used to it).
I wouldn't know a valid point if I was introduced to it.
My learning is extensive but consists of mindless trivia,
Designed to fan my ego, which is larger than Bolivia.
The comments that I vomit forth, disguised as jest and drollery,
Are really just an exercise in unremitting trollery.
I say I'm frank and forthright, but that's merely lies and vanity,
The gibberings of one who's at the limits of his sanity.

If only I could get a life, as many people tell me to;
If only Mom could find a circus freak-show she could sell me to;
If I go off to Zanzibar to paint the local scenery;
If I lose all my fingers in a mishap with machinery;
If I survive to twenty, which is somewhat problematical;
If what I post was more mature, or slightly more grammatical;
If I could learn to spell a bit, and maybe even punctuate;
Would I still be the loathsome and objectionable punk you hate?

But while I have this tiresome urge to prance around and show my face,
It simply isn't safe for normal people here in cyberspace.
To stick me in Old Sparky and turn on the electricity
Would be a fitting punishment for my egocentricity.
I always have the last word; so, with uttermost finality,
That's all from me, the model of a K5 personality.

I bought this account on eBay

Why your Movable Type blog must die (1.50 / 8) (#370)
by Philip NT Roth on Thu Feb 05, 2004 at 10:16:10 PM EST

"PUNCH LINE So [said the doctor]. Now vee may perhaps to begin. Yes?"

Great publicity stunt (1.40 / 10) (#371)
by dgci on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 02:12:09 AM EST

It would appear from the Blogdex rankings that kuro5hin has pulled a very effective Janet Jackson-esque publicity stunt with this "rant". What's wrong, Mr. Joyce, blogs stealing from your readership?

What readership? (2.25 / 4) (#372)
by James A C Joyce on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 07:54:59 AM EST

As I posted on your MT blog, that would be a great assertion to make and all, if not for the fact that this is the first thing I've ever had posted on K5.

I bought this account on eBay
[ Parent ]

Blogs are evil (1.50 / 4) (#377)
by guet on Fri Feb 06, 2004 at 01:20:23 PM EST

Loved the title, shame about the rest of your rant, though it has a certain flowing charm; bit like Hemmingway down the pub. Not the most graceful flamebait I've ever seen, but then who needs graceful. Your response in your diary was a bit contradictory though - most of this rant is about blogs, not MT blogs...

Do you read The Register by any chance?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/30403.html

Andy is that you? (yes I'm kidding).

[ Parent ]

YHBT. YHL. HAND. (2.33 / 15) (#389)
by James A C Joyce on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 05:07:37 PM EST

Hark, the herald angels sing
Mr Joyce trolled Kuro5hin!

Take that, you wanking little bloggers. I've been linked to from around 700 blogs at best estimate, and now my "immature" and "facile" views are on your blog networks, on your computer and in your living room.

You have been pwnt.

I bought this account on eBay

Rule number one (none / 1) (#392)
by coryking on Sat Feb 07, 2004 at 08:51:15 PM EST

Never admit to trolling. Jezz... you should have let this go for a few more days. Stuff like this takes time to propagate.

[ Parent ]
Trolled (2.33 / 3) (#397)
by ChefQuix on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 06:34:42 AM EST

So your whole existence is defined by other people acknowledging your intelectual property? The future of the blogosphere lies here, before our very eyes! A publicity whore with nothing better to do than push the right buttons to get noticed. Your parents must be proud.


Polluting the Internet since 2003...
perceptionalism.com
[ Parent ]
Bor-ring (none / 0) (#434)
by royal on Tue Mar 23, 2004 at 07:08:13 PM EST

<homer simpson>Bor-ring!</homer>

Hmm... nice generalisation.

What about Blogger which is so easy to setup, that any one without a clue can easily set up a weblog?

What about those who use MT because they like the functionality or the ease of use.

Don't tar people because they use a tool. Tar them for their crap content - and that is what all publishing tools are 'guilty' of.

[ Parent ]

blah, blah, blah...! (1.33 / 15) (#399)
by rogun on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 01:20:40 PM EST

What's the purpose of your article? Have we not heard enough criticism from blog haters yet? You may have some good points, but you might try conveying your message in a more respectful manner, without calling people stupid, sheep, etc. While some weblog authors may be WASPs, surbabanites, etc, I hardly agree this is the norm. Regardless, don't these people count also? I don't blog, however, I do enjoy reading them. MoveableType may be ruining search engines, but I'd prefer to see more weblogs returned in my results. Unlike you, my search results return bookoos of corporate and reseller sites, of which I'm rarely seeking. The information I am seeking is often found on weblogs or maybe a link is provided get to it. Of course it is up to me to decide if I deem a weblog reliable and truthful, but such is the way of the web in general. In fact, anyone willing to blindly accept what they read from any source is naive, thus what's so different about a weblog? I remember when Usenet was important and weblogs seem like the logical extension to me. Surfing the web these days means going from one corporate site to another, listening to whatever propaganda they wish to push upon you. I miss the intimacy of web past, when intelligent conversation flourished, corporate websites were rare, and advertisements were almost non-existant. To some extent, weblogs are able to fill that void for me, even if I might find some of them annoying, simple-minded, dishonest, inaccurate, and not on par with my taste. Weblogs remind me of the web of yesteryear, when the web provided some contrast with other information mediums, because of the presence of individual viewpoints and the absence of institutional motives. I enjoy reading views from ordinary people, rather than viewing polls telling me how they feel or having corporate America so kindly lend it's opinion. Many authors of weblogs are experts in their fields or disciplines, who's voice might never be heard, if not for the simplicity of weblogs. If all weblogs were as idiotic as you imply, then I wouldn't like them either, but my guess is that you only find worthiness in mass-produced items, that have been approved for the general public, by the Government, corporate America, or some other large institution. Perhaps you should try looking outside the box for a change?

hmmm. (1.83 / 6) (#400)
by PrincessChan on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 04:21:25 PM EST

Wow the funny thing is that I found the link to your retardedly long rant through someone's weblog.

Amen. (2.16 / 6) (#402)
by lux55 on Sun Feb 08, 2004 at 08:43:01 PM EST

While you could have toned the "you're all idiots!"  comments down a bit, to seem a little less troll-like, you're still smack-on.  Blogging is utterly useless.

Fortunately, bloggers tend to talk about such a narrow range of topics, and to have such a singular view on anything they do talk about, that this won't  affect any content of real value on the Internet...
--

Sitellite CMS - Evolve your business.
http://www.sitellite.org/

--

I disagree (3.00 / 4) (#403)
by ChefQuix on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 03:03:47 AM EST

Once again, another person who believes that the endless drone of instapundit and boingboing wannabees are the vast majority of bloggers out there. Every single blogger has their own voice and unique style; finding those bloggers that you respond to is your goal as a surfer. The value comes in finding peers to discuss ideas with. What you're basically saying is that the personal opinions, the unique perceptions that have humanized the internet is of no value? I can't help but disagree.


Polluting the Internet since 2003...
perceptionalism.com
[ Parent ]
you're wrong (none / 0) (#404)
by muyuubyou on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 04:07:57 AM EST

Visit any of those massive blog listings and pick 10 random ones. Face it - most of them suck.

Their existence, in general, is based on an excessive need for attention. Why does anyone want to broadcast (s)he's personal stuff? Personal opinions don't need personal sites. Make copies of your stuff.

I leave blogs from experts and specialists out of the "blogosphere", but not even all of them.

[ Parent ]

Why? (none / 0) (#406)
by rogun on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 06:15:11 AM EST

Why would you leave blogs from "experts and specialists out of the 'blogosphere'?" Does this mean it's only a blog if you dislike it? If you deem the author an expert then it's not a blog? I only reply to this message because I sense you're not alone. I don't see how the aptitude of the author determines the authenticity of a blog. This concerns me for I'm afraid all the negativity against useless blogs might also effect those you don't consider a blog simply because the author is an expert. There are plenty of blogs which I deem useless, but I don't mind putting up with them for the good ones. Besides, if it's useless, I simply don't read it. Simple, eh?

[ Parent ]
simple indeed (none / 1) (#407)
by muyuubyou on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 06:55:51 AM EST

I find 99% of them stupid and obnoxious and therefore I don't read them.

I don't include them in the 'blogosphere' because in general they don't use "trollback" so they're not really interconnected with the 'blogosphere'. They're usually "boring" for the casual blogger and that saves them from their influence.

Blogging is not a religion. Don't preach it. If you use some "weblog" software, please do it properly and don't contribute to the demise of the 'blogosphere'. Pass on "trollback" and don't rehash the same shit everybody else is rehashing. Create your content - then maybe the de-facto definition of "blogging" could change into something not negative.

[ Parent ]

Original Content (none / 0) (#413)
by ChefQuix on Tue Feb 10, 2004 at 12:52:10 PM EST

But what defines original content? Isn't every bit of personal writing a form of original content? How can you define something as original or not? Does it go beyond the words written?


Polluting the Internet since 2003...
perceptionalism.com
[ Parent ]
original content (none / 0) (#416)
by muyuubyou on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 04:31:11 AM EST

Discard anything based upon links and including +50% of the information in references and comments about them.

When the information you link to is more important that what you wrote, that's a rehash. That includes superbowl reviews and comments about Janet Jackson boob. Far too many people talk about the same shit. Pointless.

[ Parent ]

The reason (none / 0) (#424)
by rogun on Thu Feb 12, 2004 at 04:59:43 AM EST

so many topics are rehashed is because they're popular topics. I like browsing blogs to see what topics people are interested in discussing and find they're often topics ignored by the media. These topics are often discussed because the authors belive they are important, even if you or I would disagree. People love to rehash topics and like you it annoys me, but if it's not rehashed in blogs then it's rehashed somewhere else. Like you, I find most blogs uninsteresting, but some are great! I don't blog myself because I don't have anything new to add. But, I fear the possibility of blogs becoming increasingly difficult to find, if search engines ever decide that only large commercial sites (aka big money) were the only sites deserving of high page ranks.When that day comes to pass, the internet will have taken one more step closer to having nothing more to offer than other information mediums.

[ Parent ]
You're adding unnecessary paranoia (none / 0) (#425)
by muyuubyou on Thu Feb 12, 2004 at 05:37:04 AM EST

Like you, I find most blogs uninsteresting, but some are great! I don't blog myself because I don't have anything new to add. But, I fear the possibility of blogs becoming increasingly difficult to find, if search engines ever decide that only large commercial sites (aka big money) were the only sites deserving of high page ranks.When that day comes to pass, the internet will have taken one more step closer to having nothing more to offer than other information mediums.

No one said "only large commercial sites" but just "not trollbacking-enabled blogs." Those get undeservedly high. You can set up a simple website and write something interesting enough to get linked manually (the way it's supposed to be done) in a lot of websites, and thus get deservedly high in pageRank.

[ Parent ]

hmm.. i'm ok.. you're not ok. (1.50 / 6) (#405)
by piper on Mon Feb 09, 2004 at 05:24:38 AM EST

MovableType is definitely polluting the web. But here, i feel that google should be the one to modify it's PageRank system... As someone pointed out, a BLOG tab would be nice for everyone... and maybe you can set the -noblog option a default.. i'm sure google would come with something better.

Maybe (none / 0) (#420)
by trejkaz on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 07:42:15 PM EST

It would be nicer if there were some standard way to indicate "this bit of the page is the content." Then Google could behave, and pay attention only to the "body" of the document. My weblog happens to have <div class="content"> for anything which is sensible to be indexed or interpreted as being a relevant link, but every other weblog probably does it differently.

Anything which is in any sort of sidebar or portlet probably shouldn't be indexed or even parsed by Google at all. Do the metadata, then the content, then get the fuck off the page.

Although, it seems like it might be relatively easy for Google to hack out the Trackback results. Easier, that is, than designing a new ranking system which works better.



[ Parent ]
read -Knoblog<N/T> (none / 0) (#439)
by tonyenkiducx on Thu Sep 09, 2004 at 06:03:23 AM EST



Tony.
I see a planet where love is foremost, where war is none existant. A planet of peace, and a planet of understanding. I see a planet called
[ Parent ]
wow (2.33 / 3) (#415)
by tunesmith on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 03:30:05 AM EST

kuro5hin.org has really gone downhill since everyone started blogging instead.
Yes, I have a blog.
Creepy... (2.30 / 13) (#417)
by Qbertino on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 07:08:17 AM EST

I just was over at /. and was once more like lately kinda fed up with the arrogance that comes across over there. And then coming over here I bump into this right away. The utter arrogance of people considering themselves above others, be it by ranting in this manner or by thinking their exeedingly witty by hiding their satire behind heavy insults (I can't tell here, and frankly I don't give a shit either which way this article is meant) just plain creeps me out and makes me physically sick. That this arrogant crap makes it to the front page of k5 encourages me to do one thing: make a crap-free blog. Ironic isn't it? Honestly, compared to all seemingly pointless stuff that's blogged (note: rant about this word) out there is not half the waste of spiritual space than your rant.
BTW: I'd rather have Google wasted by tons of personal blogs from real people than by link farms that actually really have nothing to say but have the one and only purpose of distracting google. You better watch out what you rant about before you out yourself as a n00b of near equal rank as some occasional MT blogger.
--
Commentators, please go easy on my spelling and grammar, I don't live in an english speaking country.

hmm (2.66 / 3) (#418)
by muyuubyou on Wed Feb 11, 2004 at 09:00:33 AM EST

Your points are valid. The insulting style is "fashionable" by internet standards... not that I like it but it's something you have to keep in mind. You don't have to take it that seriously.

OTOH, google is already killing link farms. Their filtering mechanism has improved a lot lately. That point you made is already outdated. You can't do the same thing to blogs... because blog trollbacks are not really auto-generated and are, thus, "morally" valid. I hope they change their mind at some point, though. It's already out of hand.

[ Parent ]

Nice Blog (2.25 / 4) (#426)
by PseudoFiction on Thu Feb 12, 2004 at 06:21:47 AM EST

Seems to know alot about people and I don't just mean as a bigot. I feel like my soul was exposed. I thought it was just about the words and links. I now know that my style (usually the default) is so very important of a choice. And to have read so many blogs to come to such an enlightened conclusion. I have to stop developing. Imagine what harm I could have done. Thank You Mr. Joyce ;-)
HEY! What are all you aliens doing on my planet?
Insight with a hint of annoyance (3.00 / 3) (#427)
by belrik on Thu Feb 19, 2004 at 05:52:06 AM EST

Impressive rant but littered with valid points. Its true that there are far too many people sitting there with their heads up their arse writing cod-philosophy just because they've seen a film they think was enlightening (or a film reviewer said was enlightening) now they've had a epiphany and they have to drivel on about the marvelous knowledge they've gleaned. Writing diaries is ok, I can see that this allows people to reconsider their thoughts and realise where they are now by seeing how they have developed. But spewing pretentious crap all over the internet is not even close to this. No, you cannot be a micro celebrity. You're just a widely known idiot and this does not amount to the same thing. I wish people would refine what they write before they submit it as some sort of life's work, a testament that while they're not stupid enough to sit all evening watching TV they haven't moved too far in the direction of intellectual development either.

Perhaps if these people actually read some good literature instead of the literary spewings of their peers people would be able to better themselves in this manner. As it is this seems to routinely take the form of two conflicting circle f**ks where each side slaps each other on the back in an attempt to win an argument on some asinine topic where no real evidence or logical path is taken.

Please please if you're going to disseminate you're views on the internet do it in a fashion where you contribute, not merely paraphrase. And a comment like this does come dangerously close to hypocrisy, I am aware of that.

If you have a pet subject that does not involve a pile of pop-culture references and faux-mystic philosophy its great to hear about it. But if your life consists of nothing more than soaps and your "big meaningful, life changing movies" have all been made in the last 18 months then congratulations you have the attention span of a gnat and are probably a shallow idiotic twat. And I don't care about what you may have thought you've done, you need to broaden your horizons. Take a break from the web and read a couple of the books that all these big blockbusters have been ripping off perhaps. Anything to fire up the grey cells and get your attention span above the 30 second mark.

Not that anyone will take me sincerely cos I'm delibrately writing in an abrasive style but a simple fact is that people are more likely to read something that ellicits an emotional response than a clearly laid out discussion. Why do you think a bunch of dull bloggers get such a high readership?

As for search engines I'm sorry but that's a bad argument. Google are providing a service to search the web, not impose a structure on it. It was unstructured 5 years ago and its never going to get tidier. In fact I hope it doesn't because such a structure would automatically remove much of the web's more esoteric (and strangely often most useful and interesting) content. Hypertext linking in this fashion is something that those writing spiders need to cope with and account for. Claiming that bloggers have fouled up Google is an admittance of bad programming on Google's behalf.

I'm done now, if you've read me then thankyou. Keep smiling, keep living.

[ Parent ]

I'm just lacking one aspect. (2.50 / 4) (#428)
by tickerhacker on Thu Feb 19, 2004 at 01:28:34 PM EST

"Wow! That is me!" I thought: A latte-sipping, iMac-using, suburban-living tertiary-industry-working WASP. and ain't life great! Only thing is, I don't have so little to do that I can find the time to write on one of these new-fangled "web log" thingummies... So it looks like I ought to be downloading the most popular program and getting started. Oh look! There's even a link to Movable Type provided! Thanks, I can be a geek too!

Google & Blogs (2.83 / 6) (#430)
by mrrabbit on Sun Feb 29, 2004 at 06:01:34 AM EST

all of the top search results are from a few well-connected bloggers have you not learned to use Google yet? negative keywords...advanced searching...Google isn't broken...its you thats broken.

Blog Slog (2.25 / 4) (#432)
by zx4u on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 02:01:31 AM EST

I agree with you that people who have a lot of time to waste are ruining google and stuff. Most of the blogs are the same and most of the people are cribbing about something or the other. However, people feel great after they post something on their blogs and they feel as if they have used their "right of expression" to the fullest. They don't realize that they are wasting their time and inadvertently causing a malfunction on the world greatest search engine. However, we need to be tolerant to these people and let them have their contentment of posting and hope that their posting will actually make a difference. The kind of profanity used on your K5 post is unwarranted.

Attention new readers. (1.00 / 8) (#433)
by James A C Joyce on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:21:27 PM EST

Keep up to date with the latest version of this rant!

I bought this account on eBay

Good, but not too good (2.50 / 2) (#436)
by Fatal Error on Sun Apr 18, 2004 at 12:51:54 PM EST

I agree with most of your views on weblogging, but not all. Yes it's true that MT is badly designed and has a disgustingly huge monopoly over weblog tools, and they're fucking up Google, but much of your article is bashing MT rather than actual weblogs. And, it seems also that you just have a grudge against all weblogs for whatever reason other than the obvious. In short, good points but not all weblogs suck horribly and not all of them are café latte drinking middle class cubicle workers. There is good shit out there, you've just been looking at the bad side of it, which may be a majority, but certainly doesn't represent the whole.

GNAA (1.12 / 8) (#437)
by Green Cup on Tue Jun 15, 2004 at 10:50:53 PM EST

http://www.gnaa.us
http://gnaa-us-paris-hilton.com/

Why emulate the vitriolic bile you complain about? (none / 1) (#441)
by FreeSpeeches on Thu Jan 06, 2005 at 02:51:56 AM EST

I like you name and your insights; but tone it down a bit you oxymoronic masculinic bint.
Eric Botticelli http://freespeeches.net
hmmm..... (none / 0) (#442)
by MindTrigger on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 08:53:04 PM EST

This post was my very first experience on this website. lol. I've been in IT for like 12 years and never spent any time here. Not sure what happened there... On Topic: The only point I agree with from the original rant is the part about the complete lack of originality in blogs. When I say that, I only mean the blogs out there that actually have a topic. Politics, open source, or whatever else. I rarely take the time to even look for blogs as an information source. The blogs I do enjoy at times are the personal ones where people are BEING INDIVIDUALS. I have no problem with this at all. I find some people fascinating, and I like that everyone has a place to be themselves. I too was sucked into the idea that I may have something important to say about the world, and people may want to listen. I started a little blog and posted my rants. However, I now see the true value in having a blog for myself is so that I can communicate with friends and family. I don't really give a flying shit if the general populace of the earth lands on my site, but I do want to keep my friends up to date with who I am as a person and where my thoughts are. These are the people who DO care what I have to say, so fuck the rest of you... kindly of course. Google will face larger challenges in the future than the blog flood. Before they worry about filtering out useless blog content they should focus on the sites out there that hijack searches with false results in order to draw traffic. That's been going on for years now. I get more of those lately than blog crap. The original post was entertaining, although a little over the top. I guess the author thought he was important enough that people actually cared . This reminds me. How are the countless message boards online any better than all the blogs?
"Pardon me ladies. Enjoying that are you my darling? A bit cold and pointless isn't it my lovely. What's happened to yours my little sister?" - Alex
i like here (none / 0) (#443)
by keleyu on Mon Mar 21, 2005 at 02:41:47 AM EST

lyrics lyrics

Why your Movable Type blog must die | 438 comments (397 topical, 41 editorial, 10 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!