Categories
Technology

Google and Blogger = What?

Combine metablogging and Google and you have a link bomb; such is the case, this weekend, with Google buying Pyra (and Blogger and Blog*Spot).

Putting Blog*Spot on faster, more reliable servers can’t help but be good, and I imagine the Pyra crew is happy about steady paychecks. But darned if I can figure out what Google hopes to get with all of this. Eventually, Google must make some form of profit from this move, or they’ll go out of business. But how?

They’ll obtain Blogger, but Google is more than capable of building a weblogging tool of its own. They are getting the Blogger name, which counts for something, and they’re getting Blog*Spot with a built-in client base. Still, this just means they’re getting pre-existing clients, most of whom aren’t paying a penny. This doesn’t mean they’re getting ‘content’.

First Google buys Deja.com, a source of collected Usenet data. Next, it started Google News, a portal into current news stories. Now it’s purchased a major weblogging tool and host, Blogger, and Blog*Spot. Seems to me that Google is centralizing the data in addition to centralizing the data search; controlling both a source of the data as well as a source of the dissemination of the data. This centralization seems a contradiction to the ‘distributed nature of the online world’ that Dan Gillmor writes about:

More than most Web companies, Google has grasped the distributed nature of the online world, and has seen that the real power of cyberspace is in what we create collectively. We are beginning to see that power brought to bear.

Personally, I’m glad I’m using Movable Type. Now if only I could afford my own server…

Archived with comments at the Wayback Machine

Categories
Technology

How not to create software

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

If you develop open source software, or software that you give to the public out of the kindness of your heart, document it. I know people will say, “But it’s free! How can you add more demands on the caring, giving person who wrote it?”

Easily. Software that requires one to edit C makefiles because this little tweak or that little tweak won’t get picked up by the auto-configuration tools; J2EE applications that require tiny little tweaks in a dozen different text files; software that requires you ‘guess’ exactly what you’re supposed to do on a screen Are Not Helpful.

Undocumented APIs. Errors that provide no messages. No documentation because the developer is too busy building the next version of the software to write a silly thing like documentation. These Are Not Helpful.

I have worked with wonderful commercial and non-commercial, proprietary and open source software in the last several months for Practical RDF. These will all be included in the book, with full attribution for the creators as well as full appreciation for the good work and great software that’s a pleasure to both install and learn to use.

Software that is neither is not included. Simple as that. This evening I reached my Tweak/Fuss/Guess/Muck Overflow Point.

Categories
Technology

How not to create software

If you develop open source software, or software that you give to the public out of the kindness of your heart, document it. I know people will say, “But it’s free! How can you add more demands on the caring, giving person who wrote it?”

Easily. Software that requires one to edit C makefiles because this little tweak or that little tweak won’t get picked up by the auto-configuration tools; J2EE applications that require tiny little tweaks in a dozen different text files; software that requires you ‘guess’ exactly what you’re supposed to do on a screen Are Not Helpful.

Undocumented APIs. Errors that provide no messages. No documentation because the developer is too busy building the next version of the software to write a silly thing like documentation. These Are Not Helpful.

I have worked with wonderful commercial and non-commercial, proprietary and open source software in the last several months for Practical RDF. These will all be included in the book, with full attribution for the creators as well as full appreciation for the good work and great software that’s a pleasure to both install and learn to use.

Software that is neither is not included. Simple as that. This evening I reached my Tweak/Fuss/Guess/Muck Overflow Point.

Archived with comments at Wayback Machine

Categories
Technology

Are the fish spawning?

I had a friend ask me a couple of days ago why it’s taking so long to finish the Practical RDF book. I had to laugh (either that or scream) because to write about something such as Siderean Software’s RDF-based search and navigation product, Seamark, required reading over 100 pages of documentation, not to mention installation of the software and other assorted technical activities just to write — effectively — one section covering this very sophisticated commercial product in Chapter 16. And I’m covering at least five other products in that same chapter.

To write about Inkling/SquishQL in Chapter 11 required that I finally download and install Fink (I’ve been lazy), so that I can easily download and install Readline, so that download and install PostgreSQL, so that I can download and install and try out Inkling/SquishQL on my Mac OS X. And SquishQL isn’t even the primary focus of that chapter.

However, I must focus and get this book finished, if for no other reason than to complete the brainwa…urh, education of Dorothea, who is a reviewer for my book (and an excellent one at that).

Must Stop Weblogging.

However, Jonathon has made this a bit difficult by continuing the discussion about copyright and Creative Commons, because, as he puts it, …I am one of only two people in the whole of Blogaria who accept that writers might wish to exert a degree of control over how their work is used and who also feel no obligation to donate their work to the public domain.

I am the other person Jonathon refers to, but I genuinely do not believe we can be the only two people who want to have some control over how our work is used. We can’t possibly be the only two people who believe this. Can we?

As Jonathon, states, this is a topic worth discussing if for no other reason than to see if there are other fishies swimming against the tide of Creative Commons, Public Domain, and an artist’s rights to their own work as compared to the public’s right to use the work as they will. As he writes:

I believe, and I suspect Burningbird does too, that this is a discussion worth pursuing, not so much because she and I happen to share a contrary view but because the intertwined beliefs “copyright is bad” and “Creative Commons is good” have almost instantaneously become an orthodoxy in Blogaria (to wit, the inclusion of support for Creative Commons licenses in the next version of Movable Type). And orthodoxies are the enemy of free, creative thought.

On this issue, there is an orthodoxy within the weblogging kingdom — a mass movement difficult to swim against; and as my last two posts should demonstrate, I am not one for spawning. There must be more subtle nuances to this issue then the black and white pronouncements of “copyright is evil”, “artists wanting to maintain control of their work are stealing from the public domain”, and “creative control suppresses free speech”.

However, I must get myself back to my work and leave this discussion for Jonathon and others — but I sure would like to hear from those others who believe there is no harm in an artist retaining creative control of their work, and that we can be inspired from artists without deriving from them.

(And as I write this, I can feel the push of the stream against me, and see a million fishy eyes headed directly at me…)

Archived with comments at the Wayback Machine

Categories
Technology Weblogging

Month, day, year, oh my

Another fooflah, this time over archiving.

Dorothea picked on Mark’s archive setup, which is based on archive-month-link. Jonathon responds with a push-back at Dorothea’s weekly archive. He’s joined in his comments by Mark who pushes back with justification for his archive-month-link. Aquarionics bravely joines the discussion, Dorothea retracts.

Could be me misreading everything but it sure looked like good fun was NOT had by all. Good lord, I thought I was the only person who took things too seriously.

Being the pain in the butt, annoyance, and general irritant that I am, I thought I would make things worse. It’s part of my philosophy that if you push things enough, either it blows totally, in which case we’ll at least have an interesting afternoon; or everyone collapses into laughter, poking gentle fun at each other’s font choice.

In line with this, I take a great deal of satisfaction in knowing that everyone would be uncomfortable with my archive setup. I list categories, the last 50 entries, and I provide search. That’s it. No weekly or monthly archives at all. I never really thought anyone used them. From this discussion, though, I think I may be off in my assessment; perhaps people do use archives. Well, this is a lowering thought. All this time I’ve been depriving my readers of my archives.

However, after reading all this, I wasn’t sure how to do archives. No matter what kind of archive I implemented, I would be taking sides, and that kind of ruins some of the fun. But I didn’t want to do all of the archives, as static web page generation is taking far too long now as it is. So I did what any self-respecting blogger would do: I picked door number 3.

Instead of static archive pages, I added a form to my main Archive page just under the categories. A person puts in a specific date (using a specific format), picks if they want the material ordered reverse chronological, and clicks the button. A MySql/PHP page opens that lists all of the content in either chronological (default) or reverse order. They can then click on an item to go the main page to view the trackbacks and comments, or they can just read the material there (though I might change this).

Because I let MT do my line breaks I had to a little tiny munging on the text, but that’s my own fault for not doing my own markup.

If a person screws up the format, they’ll get all of my material dating back to when I did my last port in March of last year (I didn’t move all my old content over). However, I also put a limit of only 300 entries on the page. I might play with this a bit, add a range later, but we’ll see how it goes for now.

Following is the code — change stuff appropriately.

 

$dt = $_POST[‘create_date’];
$reverse = $_POST[‘reverse’];

if ($reverse)
$order = “ORDER BY entry_created_on desc limit 300”;
else
$order = “ORDER BY entry_created_on limit 300”;

$link = mysql_connect(“localhost”, “user”, “password”)
or die(“database errors”);
mysql_select_db (“database”);

$query = “SELECT entry_id, entry_title, entry_text, entry_created_on FROM mt_entry where entry_created_on > ‘” . $dt . “‘ and entry_blog_id = 2 and entry_status = 2 ” . $order;

$result = mysql_query($query) or die(“database errors”);

while ($line = mysql_fetch_array($result, MYSQL_NUM)) {
$input = $line[0];
$input = str_pad($input, 6, “0”, STR_PAD_LEFT);

$text = str_replace(“</blockquote><br />”, “</blockquote>”, str_replace(“<blockquote><br />”, “<blockquote>”,nl2br($line[2])));

printf(“<div class=’titlebox’><span class=’title’>”);

printf(“<a href=’http://weblog.burningbird.net/fires/%s.htm’>%s</a></span></div>”, $input, $line[1]);

printf(“<div class=’blogbody’ style=’font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px’>%s<div class=’posted’><p>Posted on %s</p></div>”,
$text, $line[3]);
printf(“</div>”);
}

/* Free resultset */
mysql_free_result($result);

/* Closing connection */
mysql_close($link);