Nels Wadycki » Social web

Best Yet: Twitter Movie Trailer

Nels — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 14:13:24 +0000

This one not only has its own song, but the best parody of the magnitude quote with “140 words per post?” “140 characters.”

(Brought to me to you by TechCrunch, of course)

Other Stuff Like This

YouTube Movie Trailer

Nels — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 21:32:06 +0000

Awesome.

Thanks TechCrunch

Other Stuff Like This

Web Apps = Automatic Upgrades

Nels — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:00:02 +0000

While it wasn’t one of the major factors I talked about in my previous post, the following is a quick and easy example of another reason that webapps kick ass: No Upgrade Cycle

Google launched Buzz 2 days ago, and already their making changes based on user feedback. But the best part is not that they’re making changes and responding so quickly, rather it’s that the update gets automatically pushed to everyone. No download. No install. Just, roll out, and boom, it’s there.

Other Stuff Like This

Blogging is Easy

Nels — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:30:28 +0000

From a (sort of) recent Facebook status update:

While I agree for the most part with the “Tumblr > Twitter” sentiment, well, that’s kind of obvious. Twitter is definitely good for some things (mostly sharing short fleeting thoughts, but also sometimes for sharing links, and conversing with people who use Twitter as their main form of communication). I did not see “being a blog” in that list, though. And as Commenter #1 points out, you can view Twitter updates on your Tumblr dashboard while posting slightly longer commentaries on Tumblr. Of course, Commenter #1 also makes the fatal mistake of saying that he (or she) wishes they knew HTML.

I’m fairly certain that with a little practice, just about anyone could use a WordPress.com blog without knowing any HTML.

I think what’s really going on here is: People have gotten used to posting status updates and they’re cool with that, but what happens when they want to post something a little bit longer and ~~actually well thought out~~ more introspective? They secretly want to write a blog post, but are convinced that a) they need to know HTML, b) that no one will read it, c) they’ll have to keep doing it (or look like a failure), and d) it’s hard (for many reasons that probably just depend on who you’re talking to at the time).

Tumblr is building it’s popularity off of these popular misconceptions, and, well, good for them, I guess. I just wish that instead of throwing out Tumblr as the next step up from Tweeting, we could enlighten people as to how easy blogging really is.

For example (again, not to disparage what Tumblr is doing – just as a comparison): One can post text, quotes, links, and embed video in WordPress as easily as in Tumblr (plus you have Categories in addition to Tags). Posting a photo or audio file is more complicated, I can admit that, because WordPress’ media uploader requires some a little trial and error to figure out (even in its current super-simple form). That said, it’s still pretty easy, and when you want to post multiple pictures, it’s significantly easier. You can select them all from a single dialog, and then insert them individually (and select from multiple size options), or just make a gallery. Like I said, it’s not bash-your-head-in easy, but it’s got value-added at a pretty high ROI. So, the only thing that Tumblr can do much more easily than a WordPress blog is post a chat transcript. I don’t follow all that many people’s tumblr blogs, but I’ve never seen any of my friends post a chat transcript.

So, d) it’s not that hard, a) you don’t need to know HTML.

b) No one will read it?

You can have a Top 100 blog on Technorati just by picking a URL and posting photos that correspond in a somewhat ironic manner (or not at all) to that URL.

Finally… c) you’ll have to keep doing it. This is the One True Thing.

That said, you have to keep posting to your Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, Anything Else or it will wither and attract tumbleweeds just like a regular old (brand new, awesome) blog.

And of course, this is also the rub. If you want people to read your blog, you have to post stuff. You have to post stuff even when it’s just your parents and the person you live with reading it. Even if your parents and the person you live with aren’t actually reading it. If you want people to look at and comment on your Tumblog or Twitter or Facebook or Anything Else, you have to put something there for them to comment on. I’ve already shown that using Tumblr doesn’t make it any easier to post content (although, it can provide the illusion that it does). But it doesn’t make you more creative or funny or insightful or emotional or powerful. That would be akin to saying “Oh, now that I can get the newspaper on my computer, I’ll actually read it.” Just because you can read it more easily on you computer without getting your fingers all dirty with ink doesn’t mean that you actually will.

Finally, if you use Tumblr, I’m pretty sure you don’t get analytics. While this is another somewhat in depth tool, you know you like checking how many people have visited your blog, and with Google Analytics it’s easy to see what people are searching for to get to your blog. I mean, how much more awesome is it when you can not just post something about vajazzling, but then also see that someone got to your post about vajazzling by looking for “how to vajazzle at home with swarovski”? Boom. Blogging FTW.

Other Stuff Like This

Aardvark on the iPhone – Mobile Answers

Nels — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:26:44 +0000

The need to call my brother-in-law when I was out and needed access to a computer ended when I got my iPhone, but now Aardvark has taken that sort of help and said “Hey, you can ask hundreds of people’s brothers-in-law at the same time!”

I’ve been a fan of Aardvark for some time now, so of course I downloaded the app right away. It’s great that the iPhone has Push Notifications now because otherwise the app would be fairly useless, but as it is, it works pretty much as well as the IM interface that I normally use.

Other Stuff Like This

Songs In Code

Nels — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 19:03:56 +0000

Only the obvious ones have been submitted to the SongsInCodeDB.

worldAsWeKnowIt.end(); self.feel = “fine”;

Wish skeelo = new Wish[]; skeelo[0] = “taller”; skeelo[1] = “baller”; skeelo[2] = “girl who looked good”;

if (ready) { hereICome = true; } else { hereICome = true; } you.hide = false;

if ( !woman ) { cry = false; }

temperature = temperature + 100; clothes.off();

Guitar g = new Guitar(); g.color = “#CCCCCC”; if ( picasso.know() ) { buy(g); g.play(); }

if ( romeo.makelove(juliet) ) { juliet.cry(); }

public boolean bringDown(landslide) { if ( reflection.see() ) { landslide–; bringDown(landslide); } }

Problem[] jz = new Problem[99]; for (int p=0; p

dc = chillin; pg = chillin; if (this.name == wale) { kill(it); }

if ( me.hasWorld() ) { empire.build(); }

Other Stuff Like This

Life Is Beautiful

Nels — Tue, 26 May 2009 19:14:23 +0000

(Sometimes coming up with a post title is the hardest part)

Lifestream Blog has an article on a new – ahem – lifestreaming application called Amplifeeder. I’d prefer just Amplifeed without the last syllable, but who am I to nitpick?

Something that is not a nitpick, though, is that Amplifeeder (basically a good-looking, self-hosted lifestreamm app) it requires Microsoft technology. For someone who runs his blogs on a cheap-as-heck LAMP shared server, that’s very disappointing. Amplifeeder is Open Source though, so if I had any free time, and felt like doing even more coding in said free time, I’d take a stab at porting it to PHP. But I don’t really have that kind of free time, and when I do have that kind of free time, I like doing stuff that is more outside of the scope of the job that I spend 8-10 hours a day doing. Like, y’know, studying Java for Certification, or holding my own Browser Battle Royale, or watching Dollhouse, which – like Terminator – started to get ever-so-slightly better at the end of the first season (hopefully the second season will be as good as that of Terminator).

Other Stuff Like This

Gmail’s Magic Inbox

Nels — Thu, 21 May 2009 13:54:34 +0000

Google Operating System has found some Gmail code that indicates the coming of a social inbox!

So, not only will we have one inbox for Everything, but it’ll be organized by importance (or at least how important Google thinks things are).

Other Stuff Like This

Does FriendFeed Know Kim Kardashian? (Not In The Biblical Sense)

Nels — Fri, 08 May 2009 17:22:46 +0000

Here’s Kim Kardashian’s alleged FriendFeed page. It would be easy enough for a simple name squatter to do something like that, especially since FriendFeed allows you to import not just a Twitter feed, but Twitter followers without a password.

I’m leaning towards about 75% that it’s not really her. I’d give her about a 25% chance that her crew is smart enough to realize how popular the Ashton/CNN and Oprah things were with Twitter, and they did this to get the jump on the Next Big Thing.

The other 75% I’d split pretty evenly between a) Squatter and b) Friendfeed. That’s right, I’m giving equal odds to the idea that FriendFeed did this themselves to try to attract some additional publicity to their service. And as I mentioned, with their setup, it wouldn’t be too hard to just pretend you had no idea. I mean, I could go to the nearest public library and in 5 minutes, have a completely anonymous Oprah FriendFeed that looks just like the Kim Kardashian one except probably with more followers (or “subscribers”). They probably figured that doing someone as high profile as Oprah or Ashton would have made it obvious what they were doing. But Kardashian is a pretty good mark: her reputation is a little questionable (furthering the speculation that it might actually be her), and she has a lot of crazy people who are obsessed with her (furthering the squatting idea).

Plus, by choosing Kardashian, you get not only someone whose Google Trends indicate she’s actually competitive with Oprah terms of search, but you also get bloggers like me (and TechCrunch) posting pictures of her, which is probably what most people are searching for when they look for her anyway, which will attract attention from people outside of the technocrats.

Finally, let me add the possibility that FriendFeed contacted celebrities to import their Twitter accounts to FF for a little bit of spending money or Cristal. I’m sure they know that links are the currency of the internet and nothing brings links like geeks and hot (or at least supposedly hot) women.

And so as not to disappoint the people who are inevitably going to end up here looking for Kardashian booty… there’s a couple more pictures are the jump.

Copycheating Myself

So, is it Opposite Day at Google?

Nels — Tue, 05 May 2009 02:57:24 +0000

From the Official Google Reader blog, a post about sharing with friends and making new friends. Now, I don’t have a lot of “Google Reader Friends” and I use my Shared Items to feed into a sidebar widget over here, so maybe I’m just not into the whole “sharing” thing enough, but this part seems really overly complicated to me:

By hovering over the name of an unfamiliar commenter you can see their profile picture and the links they’ve added to their Google Profile. Furthermore, you can click the “Start sharing” link to start sharing your shared items with that person!

This is a great way to add new people to your friends list. When that person next logs in, they’ll see an option to view your shared items as well as the option to start sharing with you. If they reciprocate, you’ll have a new friend in your Reader.

I mean, I guess they’re erring on the side of privacy but really, is a thing called Shared Items supposed to be all that private? It seems to me that it would make a lot more sense to do the Twitter-style follow for this one, and send The Sharer an email when The Follower starts viewing their shared items. Then The Sharer can reciprocate if they want by following The Follower, and if they don’t want to follow The Follower back, they don’t have to do anything (as opposed to having to make a decision in Google’s model). Yes, this means that The Sharer has to be willing to share their items publicly to start with, but that seems to have worked out pretty well for Twitter. And I’d argue that sharing and commenting on items via Google Reader is orders of magnitude less personal than the kind of things people put on Twitter. All this “privacy” thing means is that Google has to add this kind of disclaimer to make sure people can understand how it is going to work:

Note: You can stop sharing your items with someone at any time by visiting the Sharing settings link in your left sidebar. Also, if someone chooses to share with you, your shared items are not visible to that person unless you consent. Finally, the “start sharing” link in profile cards will also only appear to those users sharing with friends, and not those sharing only with chat buddies.

It just seems like a real backwards way of doing it.

Other Stuff Like This

Post To And Read Your TO READ List From Anywhere With Email