Jan 28, 2012 11:00
music,
business,
tomwatson,
search,
uk,
google,
gamesworkshop,
web,
funny,
mental_health,
blindness,
twitter,
sight,
houseoflords,
money,
poverty,
books,
batman,
spotify,
politics,
copyright,
3dprinting,
democracy,
links,
welfare
Leave a comment
Comments 18
I've been getting increasingly fucked off by Google 'autocorrecting' searches and showing you results for what they *think* you meant to search for rather than what you actually searched for. It's bad enough when they say "Showing you results for X, did you mean Y?" so you have an extra link to click to get to the right results. But yesterday, I was trying to remember which TV show had a joke about someone who thought "poloponies" was a word, because they'd misread "polo ponies". So I Googled it. And got results for "polo ponies". With nothing to click on to say "Oi! Google! NO! I typed it as one sodding word because I wanted to search for it as one sodding word, you useless c- [NO CARRIER]
Reply
However, 99% of the time I get corrected it's because I've spelled something wrong, or Google has spotted a synonym that's what I want.
So if I search for "GAE Java OpenID" then the top hits all have "Google App Engine" in them, rather than "GAE" which is what I actually wanted.
Reply
Reply
What kinds of punctuation are you using?
Reply
Reply
The games industry shifted massively when computers became powerful and affordable enough to run games of comparable quality, and there was a huge contraction in the miniatures end of it. GW survived because of their concentration on quality of manufacture, emphasis on community, and their pricing high enough to keep generating revenue... I too grumbled about their prices until I realised that everyone pricing less than them was up against bankruptcy every quarter.
GW's always faced piracy, though they've won out because it's hard to duplicate their models well in any kind of volume. If fabs do become routine, though, then I think GW's sunk unless it transforms completely.
-- Steve misses working in the miniatures industry, but doesn't miss the late (or short) paycheques.
Reply
I do agree with getting rid of some - if not all - hereditary peers, but rather a lot of the Life Peers are there specifically because they have vast amounts of real world experience that Commons politico's don't. In areas such as science and engineering.
having those people in place who don't have to worry about getting re-elected is in many ways a good thing.
Reply
In your opinion, possibly. But that's not how they were set up, or how large chunks of them are run at the moment.
And I don't want them re-elected. I want 20 year terms, with no possibility of re-election.
Reply
well done, that man.
[I am also very fond of Caroline Lucas]
Reply
Leave a comment