sam_in_nyc's comments

Why would Google continue to pay them for search referrals?

Brilliant writing. However I can't help but imagine that had he lived a more risky and foolish life he would have come up with a different set of regrets and wishes. Although that could just be me living in "the hypothetical alternative past" and not "the now".

Where can I find a list of these things?

I haven't been keeping up with jQuery for awhile, but I look forward to the updates. Site could be toned down a bit, as I find the horns to be a bit distracting, but other than that, all I really care about are the 14 updates.

I am surprised that so many other people share your sentiment. While I understand everybody loves to be a critic, is it really that bad? To me, the layout of the site was actually somewhat intuitive, and there was only 1 possible place content could be... right in the middle of the page below all the welcoming stuff. It's just like all the other run-of-the-mill blog-like sites... welcoming stuff and main links at the top, content below that, and useless stuff like ads and twitter on the left and/or right.

I was unaware that you could rotate things.

Interesting choice of image. The gears cannot turn.

http://www.freestylemind.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/brai...

Ah, thanks. Any first hand experience using it?

Very cool idea and concept. However, I'm not convinced of the utility of rating a movie compared to it's trailer. If the movie has a shitty trailer, but is actually an OK movie, it will get high ratings. If it has a great trailer, and is a great movie, it will get average ratings. Why should I care about the "quality of trailer" to "quality of movie" ratio? What's the advantage over a rotten tomatoes rating, for example?

What I think stands out the most is the super easy access to the trailers. I would come to your site just to see what movies are coming out and watch the trailers. The other sites that offer trailers, at the moment, are barely worth going to because of how much spam they have everywhere.

As far as my first impression: I was confused at first, until I saw the top tagline. The google text ads at the top were very disorienting. It looks like navigation, and immediately causes me to question the legitimacy of the website. I basically ignored the slideshow thing, I'm not sure why.

Scrolling down I notice names of movies coming out. Ok, and so what? Further down I see ratings. Ok, I get it. I think you should put popular movies with ratings first. (Perhaps take the top 10 grossing movies, and only use those that are at least a week old... odds are everyone has heard of these) Just seeing a movie name with a screenshot was confusing at first.

When I watched a trailer I was pleased at the trailer quality and speed at which it started. Now, where do I vote? I have no idea. I can become a fan or follow you on Twitter, but where the hell do I vote? Do I have to sign up? There's no login anywhere... Eventually, after two or three trailers, I read that text that said I need to login with FB or Twitter to vote. You should make that text stand out, for sure. I just assumed that it was the standard "share on Facebook and Twitter" thing that I see elsewhere.

Finally, were I to commit to your site and actually want to browse around (which I have), I would expect more content and more means to sort it. What are the highest/lowest/most voted movies? That definitely needs to be there.

That's all for now... sorry about the disorganization in my post. Best of luck.

Honestly, what did you expect? The link was called "Traits in PHP." The article described the initial constraint as being "stuck in PHP." This wasn't an article arguing that it's a good idea to do it, but more of an exercise.

So your questions, does PHP really need all the added complexity of this?

That doesn't matter. If you don't need it, don't use it.

Does it really help solve the problem, or did you just add a new maintenance nightmare?

This question is a false dichotomy. First, it wasn't trying to solve any other problem then getting traits to work. So yeah, it solved that problem. Second, new code always adds new maintenance concerns. Whether or not it's a nightmare depends on the quality of code, which seems to be above par in this case.

As Nycto pointed out in this thread, there is a "Traits" patch which seems preferable to this code. It's likely that OP didn't realize it existed and did reinvent the wheel. But still, in terms of an exercise in PHP, I found it quite cool.

How about the Trader Joe's line? For those that don't know, there are two lines (express, non-express) that extend the entire perimeter of the store. I'm not joking, the line goes through aisles and blocks you from getting certain things.

The trick to this is to gather all the items not bordering the line, then get in line and shop while you advance in line.

What got me at first was reading the solution and thinking: "Oh, so they're allowed to label the boxes beforehand? Lame." I assumed by "label" the solutions meant "physically write on the box."

It took awhile to sink in that the prisoners could use their own memory, instead. Randomly line up, and have each prisoner memorize all prisoners' numbers in line. Then, agree on the numbering structure of the boxes in the room (eg: left to right = 0 to 100).

This fails if the warden is allowed to shuffle the boxes before each prisoner selects (not likely). It also fails if the room were rotationally symmetric, and each prisoner was brought in from one of two entrances. This way he would be unable to identify the "left" end of the line of boxes. (Much more likely, were I warden).

It takes no extra effort to enter in the wrong item, so the cost of doing so is about zero.

As far as what satisfaction I gain from it... I suppose I find it to be a sort of rebellious act. Also, I did not get accepted into Carnegie Mellon.

I am always amazed, impressed, and inspired by the care tended to jQuery code. I'm as comfortable using it as I would be if I made the whole thing myself, in the sense that I'm often very paranoid about javascript libraries in particular. jQuery is being developed perfectly -- they care about performance, size, and developer usability.

A million thanks to the jQuery team.

Is this a joke? After reading about how zoom:1 is essentially a miracle, you'd be hesitant to use it because it doesn't pass a very arbitrary and often stupid set of rules?

I'm not meaning to put you down, but I just don't understand this validation craze -- beyond the fact that you can say "it validates, does yours?" It seems as though it is some sort of psychological/sociological game... and I was hoping us developers were beyond that sort of thing.

I would be more impressed if there were a validation that said: "This actually looks like it should in X, Y, and Z browsers."

How do you propose banning it? Somebody will always get the news first... you can't stop them for reacting to it.

Or, is it the frequency that you think should be banned?

>>How important is physical proximity, really?

First off, high frequency traders are making their money off of how quickly they react to the market conditions. The quicker they react, the more money they make. In this sense, if they trade at high enough volume, it's worth paying more for a lower latency. This is, of course, assuming they are good at what they do. If they are bad at what they do, a lower latency wouldn't harm.

Second, they are in a competitive environment. If they want to make money off of obvious arbitrages that their competitors are likely engaged in as well (very likely in the forex market), they need to react first.

I assume that physical proximity reduces latency in ways other than the time it takes for photons to travel through fiber optic cable, for example router hops.

>> On: Trading success based on latency

In Forex (the currency exchange), there are sometimes very obvious arbitrage opportunities. You can take your Dollar, and trade it into Euros. Then, go from Euros to Yen. Then, go from Yen back to Dollar -- and end up with more dollars than you started with! Of course, after a certain amount of money flows through, the market will adjust itself and the arbitrage will vanish.

Being the first to react to this arbitrage allows you to realize and profit from the arbitrage before anybody else does.

While you're definitely correct, you should be aware of a literary device called "hyperbole" :)

Your post is a jumble of invalid ideas that, to me, merely expresses your contempt of modern day Wall St. You're completely entitled to your opinion, but you should be more aware of exactly who it is you are pissed off at. You certainly should not typify anyone on Wall St as "harmful," especially when you do not know exactly what they are doing.

The article does not explain what the high frequency traders, specifically, are doing. But it is by no means necessarily evil. All they are doing is two things: they get their trades into the system quickly, and they get current market conditions quickly.

If there is anything that you should quarrel about, it is that their system is automated. But, still, at the end of the day they're the ones holding the bag. If they blow up, they're going to pay for it.

If they start packaging their complicated and automated trading algorithm as a "bond" and get it AAA rated, and then start selling it to pension funds, then you've got a reason to be pissed.

I think you've pretty much got it right. Once there's a significant amount of "agreement" on what a word says, reCAPTCHA will assume it's correct. My guess is it will keep unknown words in its "unknown" pool until a minimum amount of responses are given, AND the responses are in agreement over a minimum (likely very high) percentage.