<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for tom</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/e4f7cd8905e896b04425b1d08411e9fb/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:09:51 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Dare left something out (and it's important) (Scripting News)</title><link>http://scripting.disqus.com/dare_left_something_out_and_its_important_scripting_news/#comment-1606772</link><description>Not really: XML-RPC does not take advantage of HTTP, especially not of the stateless caching feature of GET, not of the Safe feature of GET, not of the idempotence of PUT, etc. Frankly, I don't miss PUT &amp; DELETE, but only using POST but not GET for safe operation is the thing, which keeps me away from XML-RPC.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:27:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I need a server strategy (Scripting News)</title><link>http://scripting.disqus.com/i_need_a_server_strategy_scripting_news/#comment-3058308</link><description>Wasn't there an effort to port Frontier to Unix-based systems?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:46:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Full text in RSS? (Scripting News)</title><link>http://scripting.disqus.com/full_text_in_rss_scripting_news/#comment-3304052</link><description>Atom has a summary and an content element, giving you choice. The RSS community tried to do something similar with summary in description and the full text in content:encoded.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 19:25:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Iran situation highlights strengths, weaknesses of Twitter</title><link>http://inquisitr.disqus.com/iran_situation_highlights_strengths_weaknesses_of_twitter/#comment-11519060</link><description>Yes but some longtime accounts have a reputation for reliability. You have to know who you're reading, and judge, over time. New accounts may or may not be reliable.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:49:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Private: X-Ray Vision Camera Lens Doesn&amp;#8217;t Require You To Collect Bazooka Joe Wrappers</title><link>http://ohgizmo.disqus.com/private_x_ray_vision_camera_lens_doesn8217t_require_you_to_collect_bazooka_joe_wrappers/#comment-4020196</link><description>Oh, please. $199?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.instructables.com/id/A-better-diy-infrared-filter---Take-stunning-digit/" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.instructables.com/id/A-better-diy-in...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.maxmax.com/aXNiteFilters.htm" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.maxmax.com/aXNiteFilters.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And aren't you too old to believe advertising claims?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:56:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dumbest Man Alive?</title><link>http://notesfromoffcenter.disqus.com/dumbest_man_alive/#comment-1539901</link><description>Well, their first names are a bit similar!  What marvellous grounds for a reasoned debate.    This guy is the worst kind of idiot - one who can't do research or think for himself.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:23:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: New Rail Car Runs on Air-Electric Perpetual Drive</title><link>http://modernmechanix.disqus.com/new_rail_car_runs_on_air_electric_perpetual_drive/#comment-3753308</link><description>Oscar - do you really think that a scientist, seeing the possibility of making such a machine, would say `I can't build it, I must maintain the way the world is viewed and suppress this invention'.  No, he or she would be happily collecting a Nobel prize.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is not to mention the enthusiastic amateur.  You seem to know a lot about modern technology, perhaps you could enlighten us.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:29:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: x planes</title><link>http://xplanes.disqus.com/x_planes_262/#comment-12737240</link><description>It looks suspiciously like it's sitting on the ground, and the camera has been rotated during a slow shutter speed shot to give the impression of speed.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The lighting seems too clear, it looks like it's above a surface, the other streaks of light make little sense, and the undercarriage seems to be visible!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:09:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 2007/07/07/what-should-technorati-do/</title><link>http://mashable.disqus.com/thread_3205/#comment-5965561</link><description>Did my comment yesterday not go through?&lt;br&gt;In short, have a look at Technorati's numbers on Alexa, Quantcast, and Compete, and if you have access to Hitwise and other commercial metrics companies, have a look at that, too.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think all Technorati's numbers are up, so why would they need to change???</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2007 09:39:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Meanwhile In Japan</title><link>http://retardedsnotebook.disqus.com/meanwhile_in_japan/#comment-7517914</link><description>Think of it as population control!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 02:29:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The anti-RSS hype</title><link>http://scobleizer.disqus.com/the_anti_rss_hype/#comment-9625520</link><description>Well, normal people don't read 743 web sites. They usually read 2 or 3 daily and for that purpose RSS is an overkill. At least that's what they say on Slashdot.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tom</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:48:54 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>