I think 3-5 seconds for everything is a bit much.

However, I see where you're coming from. In the time frame that you mention I too have noticed a drastic slow down. I would imagine it to be a combination of:

A) The increasing amount of users online. This taxes EVERYTHING from the local regional carriers to the main network backbones to the server hardware to the already sketchy DNS system.

B) Websites not seeing the need to scale as a priority over adding new features. Websites that grow very quickly seem to sometimes follow this trend.

I agree with eusman about the "skip" verbage.

I know this is a large change to the site but my opinion nonetheless -> I think a battle type system such as www.puppywar.com would be more successful.

First it's statistically more accurate. I also think people find the comparing of photos to be more fun/addictive.

I agree with you that a battle system could be more addictive. I'm just not sure how that would work with something like movies or artists, where the user already has an opinion on the two options, which might not be that comparable (eg a comedy vs. a drama). For puppies, kittens, or people, it's always possible to make up an opinion on the spot.

Very good article indeed. I loved the style of writing and the content was great.

"But then remember there are four things that the prepared ice-climber brings to the base of any climb: training, tools, fitness, and partner(s)"

So true. I might have to check out that book.

Hahahaha, that was hilarious! Thanks for posting that! :)

I especially like the part at the end -> "...or if you are taking MAOI inhibitors as this could increase your risk of clot or stroke."

The sad thing is there are coders who either code this way now or will take this seriously, haha.

I think Wiki's were a great concept - a SIMPLE way to share information in a logical manner.

In my opinion these companies are bloating the idea and pushing the limits of what a wiki should be.

Your thoughts?

The challenge with the original wiki implementations using "wiki markup" are that it was hard to get non-engineering members of a team to use them (or at least contribute). WYSIWYG editing in the browser window changes this for the better.

The second key defect early wikis shared was a lack of contention management. When you are working against a deadline you need a contention management (e.g. file locking) scheme so that "he who saves last saves best" is avoided. I have seen this cause much unhappiness for projects when a wiki is used that allows "forks" in the history with two or three people editing the same base version with different results.

MySpace is obviously trying to learn from Facebook's success and incorporate a prominent feature of Facebook.

Unfortunately for MySpace, developers and the population in general are boarding the Facebook train and leaving MySpace back at the station.

MySpace is starting to remind me of the times when Friendster was technically sub par to its peers. All ugly/distasteful design considerations aside (seeing as how that has actually proven successful for MySpace) it is in fact technically inferior to its competitors.

Moreover, adding new features like OpenSocial without fixing its current fallacies could be detrimental.

I too am curious why this was posted being that it's 4 years old.

"The Most Dangerous Geek in the World" ?!?! Where did they get that from? Free spirited? Sure. But how is he dangerous in the slightest?

While I admire his free spirited nature I don't admire his hypocracy. If AOL was that much of an idea crusher/non-innovator why didn't he leave and launch his ideas? Instead he chooses a manner that is disrespectful and possibly illegal.

I couldn't disagree more.

He worked for a company that was / is clearly floundering. He told them clearly that they needed to change things. And they ignored him. They labelled him a troublemaker.

He tried to help the company, and they declined that help. He tried to push the company, and they ignored that as well. The way I see it, this is the demise of AOL in a nutshell.

4 years old or not, this is a good story.