<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Metaspective</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/Metaspective/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/Metaspective/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2016 07:04:33 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: When Test Automation Fails and exploratory Testing rocks | No Automated Testing</title><link>http://www.seleniumtests.com/2016/10/when-test-automation-fails-and.html#comment-2942718449</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No server-side authorization check? Ouch! Time for a security audit?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Lapierre</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2016 07:04:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Catching java script errors with WebDriver | No Automated Testing</title><link>http://www.seleniumtests.com/2016/07/catching-java-script-error-with.html#comment-2792011218</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for that, it worked for me too.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately it still doesn't work when attempting to log errors in my full framework on my single-page app. A simple WebDriver.get() works, but errors raised under different circumstances still don't.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The test framework uses the PageObject model but I'd expect that wouldn't be a problem, nor should using the Actions class; the same WebDriver is used in both cases.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I need to mock up a simpler version of my environment to see what's going wrong...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Lapierre</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2016 16:09:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Catching java script errors with WebDriver | No Automated Testing</title><link>http://www.seleniumtests.com/2016/07/catching-java-script-error-with.html#comment-2791052661</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I've been trying to get this to work on Chrome remotely. It seems that the remote web driver doesn't support the logging capability in Chrome, at least not when enabled in this way. Have you tried it with the remote web driver?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Lapierre</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2016 06:34:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Repetition of The Blogosphere</title><link>http://shegeeks.net/the-repetition-of-the-blogosphere/#comment-1106760</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ahh the love/hate relationship we all have with social interaction. And speaking of relationships, the pattern here is very similar to the pattern that friendships often follow; we meet a new person who is exciting and new (let's call this person Twitter). Twitter is a wonderful motivating force in our social life at the start. She gets us retelling all our old stories again, but that's ok because she's interested in them, and her stories add something new to our old ones. And since she's so great we *must* introduce her to all our friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Time passes, the relationship evolves, the honeymoon period ends, and we realise the friendship has changed substantially. Perhaps we don't find Twitter so interesting any more and our friendship fades and passes. Or perhaps we settle into a comfortable style of rapport which doesn't need very much interaction at all. Or perhaps, just maybe the honeymoon doesn't end and the intensity of our initial connection grows into one of those wonderful, life-long partnerships.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's also a possible comparison with one's relationship with anything which becomes popular, whether it be music, TV shows, books, fashion, ideologies, etc. Popularity decreases the signal-to-noise ratio, so keeping track of the true signal requires more and more effort, or more and more tolerance of the ubiquitous noise.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;So what do you do when anything you enjoy starts to lose its appeal?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sounds like allowing this one to settle into a less frequent but more meaningful style of interaction is a good option for you at this point in time, while you also go find some new friends :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Lapierre</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:37:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Looking for a relationship?  Telling Facebook may hurt your chances</title><link>http://www.andydesoto.com/psychology/looking-for-a-relationship-telling-facebook-may-hurt-your-chances/#comment-812368</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hey, I just noticed your studies are the same as mine! Well, except for the time scale, maybe. I have a Bachelor of Computer Science degree (as of 7 years ago) and I'm currently halfway through a Graduate Diploma in Psychology. Consider your RSS feed subscribed to.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's good to hear others have given that issue due consideration, and not unexpected. I was just a little disappointed that such an obvious thing wasn't mentioned in this study. Maybe I'm just sensitive after the lack of decent training we've been getting in class about how to write a top-notch paper.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'll add Finkel and Eastwick's paper to my pile. Social and Personality Psychology next semester so it might come in handy.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Lapierre</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 01:35:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Looking for a relationship?  Telling Facebook may hurt your chances</title><link>http://www.andydesoto.com/psychology/looking-for-a-relationship-telling-facebook-may-hurt-your-chances/#comment-805017</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hey Andy, I stumbled across this post via &lt;a href="http://researchblogging.org" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="researchblogging.org"&gt;researchblogging.org&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You know, intuitively this makes sense and regardless of my criticisms I agree, but still, the critical part of me has to ask if these results really do generalise beyond the speed-dating-type scenario? I think that's not a conclusion we can make because the study doesn't provide evidence that people form impressions of others in a speed-dating situation in the same way they do in other dating situations, let alone online.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Further, the study controlled for physical attractiveness but it doesn't mention personality attributes beyond the tendency for generalised romantic desire. So it's possible that some other personality attribute was responsible for the results and generalised romantic desire happened to correlate (though if that's the case it would probably just mean that that other personality attribute mediated the generalised romantic desire).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, it could be that another personality attribute was much more important than the perceived generalised romantic desire. If that is the case maybe such a desire isn't a problem, it could just be a small part of something much greater.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And that matches my personal experience. I don't hide my pickiness (my Facebook status has never said "Looking for a relationship"), and I have had strong chemistry with some, yet I'm not exactly fending off the girls. ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Lapierre</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 02:36:04 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>