Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Rob Hyndman
Is this you? Claim Profile »
6 months ago
in Ignore the Web? Good luck with that on Mathew's comments
You may be overstating what he proves. He had to go to what seems like the smallest, most local paper in NJ to find someone who can ignore the web - for now.
I'm not sure what that proves, if it proves anything at all.
I'm not sure what that proves, if it proves anything at all.
1 reply
mathewi
Yes, I was trying to give his argument as much benefit of the doubt as possible. I don't think it proves much of anything, actually. In any case, it's like finding a couple of teenagers making money washing cars in their neighbourhood and proposing that as a business model for the auto industry.
1 year ago
in Fred Wilson Dot VC on A VC
For me it was Dire Straits - we used to say, "When I doubt, play Dire." Maybe you had to be there, but it worked.
1 reply
1 year ago
in Change #025. If your FlickrFan stopped updating on Codecasting
My installation doesn't seem to be updating properly. When I click that link the version # that appears is 37. I downloaded and installed the photoFan.root file you describe in an earlier post, and that updates it to v 42 just fine. But now there's an OPML error message that reads "Can't find a sub-table named "callbacks", and when I click the Prefs link on the home page I get a 500 Server error that says the same thing.
1 reply
dave
Rob, that's easy to fix --
1. Bring the OPML app to the front.
2. Choose Update opml.root from the File menu.
3. Click on OK.
The server error you're getting should go away.
Sorry for this problem, it was programmer error that caused it.
1. Bring the OPML app to the front.
2. Choose Update opml.root from the File menu.
3. Click on OK.
The server error you're getting should go away.
Sorry for this problem, it was programmer error that caused it.
1 year ago
in Is Joost headed for the deadpool? on Mathew's comments
I think there's a pretty short hop from this issue to Joe Duck's post about video's main problem being that it's **boring**.
http://joeduck.com/2008/01/18/the-video-revolut...
http://joeduck.com/2008/01/18/the-video-revolut...
1 reply
mathewi
Yeah, I think Joe hit on something there. I often feel the same. Maybe if
Joost did a better job of pointing you towards the good stuff, but I didn't
find it was very good at that at all.
Joost did a better job of pointing you towards the good stuff, but I didn't
find it was very good at that at all.
1 year ago
in News flash: I agree with Seth Finkelstein on Mathew's comments
The difference is that ABC or CBS is the content provider. Rogers isn't. It's the network provider. ABC and NBC do that because it's how they deliver you their content - it's essentially self-advertising. But this is fundamentally different from the network provider inserting itself into the content. The neutrality issue is that the network must be content neutral. This isn't.
This example is factually innocuous and there is a global opt-out, so it's easy to not get too fussed on the facts. But Rogers and other ISPs are progressively testing the outrage boundaries to see what they can get away with. Sooner or later, the principle will really matter, both as principle, and on the facts.
This example is factually innocuous and there is a global opt-out, so it's easy to not get too fussed on the facts. But Rogers and other ISPs are progressively testing the outrage boundaries to see what they can get away with. Sooner or later, the principle will really matter, both as principle, and on the facts.
1 reply
mathewi
Fair enough, Rob -- and when that happens, I'll be gathering in the
town square with a pitchfork and a torch just like everyone else. But
for now, I don't see what the big deal is -- the network provider is
sending a message to me about something important to do with my
account, in a way they know I will see. It doesn't change or replace
or modify the content in any important way.
town square with a pitchfork and a torch just like everyone else. But
for now, I don't see what the big deal is -- the network provider is
sending a message to me about something important to do with my
account, in a way they know I will see. It doesn't change or replace
or modify the content in any important way.
1 year ago
in News flash: I agree with Seth Finkelstein on Mathew's comments
I don't really agree with you on this one. I don't think the issue is how innocuous the message is in this case, I think the issue is whether the carrier should have any right to intervene in the content. I don't want Bell inserting messages into my phone conversations, or my cable provider inserting its own content when I'm watching PBS, either. I want the pipe to be a pipe.
1 reply
mathewi
Fair enough -- and maybe the content of the message is irrelevant.
But to me, it's no different than the National Post covering half the
front page of my newspaper with a sticky note or house ad of some kind
to remind me of something, or the TV network I'm watching delaying the
program for a second or two in order to show me a programming notice.
I'm not really troubled by it. It's no worse than a pop-up or
interstitial ad, and everyone is pretty used to those.
But to me, it's no different than the National Post covering half the
front page of my newspaper with a sticky note or house ad of some kind
to remind me of something, or the TV network I'm watching delaying the
program for a second or two in order to show me a programming notice.
I'm not really troubled by it. It's no worse than a pop-up or
interstitial ad, and everyone is pretty used to those.
