Disqus - Latest Comments for dancameron

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:31:38 -0000

They like the taste of throw-up in their mouths too.

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:27:38 -0000

My example was a bit extreme. How about Utley's error? That was a routine play, and caused a run. Although, I do see how we expect KJ to routinely hit location.

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:22:08 -0000

Oh, I agree, losing Game 2 cost them big. I just don't see it being an issue of one pitch. Since we can all agree that Utley made a bigger mistake in that game (or DR giving the Astros free outs with him in the box).

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:17:32 -0000

Agreed, Darvish didn't look good; although most of those hits were not grooved down the middle either, so they guessed right on (meh) located pitches.

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:13:37 -0000

Haha, Texas vs. Cali

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:13:07 -0000

The logic of one moment cost the Championship, not the logic of moments. A result of seven game series can't be put on one pitch, that's silly to me.

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:10:23 -0000

That said, I'm really interested in Darvish tipping his pitches and only an AL team in the playoffs "figured" it out. #conspiracy

Re: The swing that changed the World Series, Dodgers’ season

dancameron — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:09:36 -0000

If Puig would have caught that ball in the inning before (it had a reasonable catch probability) this pitch wouldn't have mattered...see how ridiculous this type of logic is.

Re: Astros @ Dodgers Nov. 1, 2017: World Series Game 7

dancameron — Wed, 01 Nov 2017 18:27:34 -0000

Now that's a bandwagon response.

Re: Astros @ Dodgers Nov. 1, 2017: World Series Game 7

dancameron — Wed, 01 Nov 2017 18:25:58 -0000

Win or lose these bandwagon Dodgers fans watching these 7 games of the World Series will now know how it has felt to be a fan for life. It's been a rollercoaster!

Re: Dodgers gamble on Cody Bellinger is paying off handsomely

dancameron — Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:38:56 -0000

wowza

Re: Dodgers gamble on Cody Bellinger is paying off handsomely

dancameron — Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:17:43 -0000

I'd like to see some stats on his production as a first baseman vs. right field (in the majors obviously). It would seem he's much more productive as a first baseman...that doesn't mean I'd like to see #gonzogonebenched.

Re: 3 Reasons Why You Should Be Using WP_DEBUG_LOG In Your WordPress Development

dancameron — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 20:23:21 -0000

Do. This.

Then open up Console.app, open the debug.log file, and keep the console running to view the logs in realtime. If you're on a linux box you could use the shell command `tail`.

P.S. I have to admit I don't use WP_DEBUG_LOG, instead I open up the php error log in console and make sure PHP is set to report everything (including notices people!).

Re: Promoting, Developing, and Supporting Premium Plugins and Themes – WPCAST012

dancameron — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:19:10 -0000

Thanks for taking my questions!

Some great advice here.

Re: Text Link Ads

dancameron — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:36:40 -0000

Stumbled across this today...4 years later I'm making ~$100 a month still. Only in the last year has it been sub $100.

Re: The Death Star Is a Surprisingly Cost-Effective Weapons System

dancameron — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 13:27:17 -0000

Great article but it's a galaxy far far away so it's not in our future, nor is it our steel. I don't think we have metachlorians on earth either.

Re: beauty sleep

dancameron — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 14:37:57 -0000

Anything but that show.

Re: Holding Sway

dancameron — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:20:10 -0000

I'll leave it at this:

I'm just trying to show you that the examples you use to base your _negative_ opinions on include a lot of assumption and to the point where it becomes circular.

For example, you assumed Apple didn't try to get non-DRM in the iTunes store before Amazon but they did with EMI. Then you mention indie music as a rebut, even though indie labels were able to use DRM free music shortly after EMI had DRM-free tunes. You're biggest point is they could have renegotiated with the labels to get DRM free music long before they actually did; instead of disregarding that *perceived* non-action, since whatever they were doing wasn't public, you're using it as major point of contention.

There's reasons behind each one of your arguments but I don't think you're giving them their due credit. A good example is how you think Jobs' letter was a marketing message to apease it's customers, something completely unfounded because it had never been done before. You're reasoning behind not believing what was said in a long letter about the topic is one response to an interview when he said "It's all about the music..." and later said "we're focused on music" after a question about an iPod that does video: the fact that a video iPod was released a year later doesn't mean they were "hard at work" on it, nor does it hold the same weight as a hundred+ public letter. Yes, the denial of an iPod video is simply good business strategy (not marketing), it's standard not to hype a future unreleased gadget while you have it's predecessor on store shelves. An open letter to the record labels complaining about DRM restrictions may be a business strategy in the long run but Apple looses nothing if they/Jobs' doesn't write a letter. Publics approval? Yeah right, the company that's said to be so idealistic they don't release products the public thinks they want.

Another example of why don't trust that letter is how Apple pushed web apps as the iPhones SDK saying there was no SDK for native apps, only to later release a full SDK for native apps the next year. Again, I don't agree that this has the same weight as the public letter but I'm mentioning it because it's a great example of how the lack of information and the mystery Apple places on themselves creates fuel for negative opinion.

Maybe Apple should be more forthcoming in their intentions but in this case they actually were, they tried to do web apps and were later convinced to do something else[1]. It's not a matter of Apple lying, it's a matter of Apple making the right decision instead of sticking to the wrong one.

Again, if there's no trust in Apple's publicly release intentions or beliefs on a matter (DRM, Flash, etc.) than there's no reason to assume the worst.

[1] Jobs pushed web apps because that's what he believed in, he constantly referenced Google for making web apps, it wasn't until after the launch of the iPhone and a lot of convincing by Schiller that he agreed to release an SDK and the app store was created. This is from his bio, google it.

Re: Holding Sway

dancameron — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 20:38:02 -0000

I updated that last part a little to make it easier to understand.

Also, I forgot to mention that you don't have to agree with what they said publicly but if you're judging their stance on DRM because of what Amazon was able to do early is silly. There's obviously more to it than that, much of which has already been hashed out but I'm curious as to what they are in brief points.

Here are mine:

* Only until recently has DRM been applied to any of their software, items that they solely control the delivery of and would not be tied to any other party's term/contract
** Apple only until Lion had DRM on their OS (when purchased through the App Store, not sure about hard copy purchases)** All of Apple's software doesn't include DRM (unless delivered through the App Store), other than their "Pro" apps like Final Cut, etc..

The whole software DRM is highly debatable because I agree with it for the most part and I'm sure all the developers in the store like it too.

The way they implemented it shows that they continue to care about experience since their DRM isn't heavy handed (single seat restriction) and unless you're trying to steal an app you shouldn't even know it's there.

Re: Holding Sway

dancameron — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:36:59 -0000

Do you not see that you're making assumptions about what you think happened since there's no fact? To disregard their public statements because of some notion that they didn't try hard enough is not "logical". I don't get why you're trying to say your opinion is fact. I'll concede that what you're saying is your opinion but you're speaking as though it's fact, fact derived from not believing publicly released information.

I glossed over the Amazon stuff earlier but I didn't think it was right and based on Wikipedia it isn't.

Job's letter was released in Feb. 2007
The first DRM free songs came out in April of '07 - http://www.apple.com/pr/lib...
Amazon's music store was release in September - http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

So for you to allude that Apple didn't want DRM free music in the store until after Amazon is factually inaccurate.

I remember reading this a long time ago and there's a ton of other articles that knew a lot more about the conditions than the anti-apple sites at the time. http://www.wired.com/entert...

It's simple:

* Record labels wanted DRM and Apple agreed[1]
* Apple created a goliath in the iPod
* Apple didn't want DRM and made it public[2]
* Apple somehow got EMI to agree to non-DRM, probably because of competitive reasons over the other labels
* Amazon brought the labels together to fight iTunes, the competitive advantage given was DRM

Logically you could (I do) determine that the reason Apple was able to bring DRM free music to it's entire library was because of renegotiated terms because Amazon now had a competitive advantage[4].

I think it's careless to think [because Amazon had all the labels a year+ before iTunes Apple didn't want to allow DRM free music] -- especially since they already had months before Amazon and publicly said they didn't want DRM months before that.

[1] - "When Apple approached these companies to license their music to distribute legally over the internet, they were extremely cautious and required Apple to protect their music from being illegally copied," ...
[2] - Jobs' letter
[3] - http://www.wired.com/entert...
[4] I will say that I doubt iTunes would have gone DRM free in Jan. of '09 if it weren't for Amazon.

Re: Green Lantern

dancameron — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:56:34 -0000

Yeah, I posted this review right after the movie. So I'll adjust it but even at 84% it's still not a great review. I also don't like discerning movies that I like or enjoy, that's why I tend to rate them like a school grade where 3.8-5 are movies I liked, 3.5-3.7 is meh and anything lower was bad and there's a lot of room to show how much I didn't like it.

Re: Holding Sway

dancameron — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 13:31:31 -0000

I think it's pretty obvious your opinion about what happened and the facts don't jive, you're assuming a lot -- including that Jobs lied to everyone in his open letter and Apple is dishonest. You're also assuming that when Amazon got their music deals Apple's terms with the labels would change immediately.

Re: Google, Why Don’t You Hang On To That Gmail App For A While? | TechCrunch

dancameron — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:50:08 -0000

Comparing Apple not making Android apps to Google making crappy iOS apps is funny to me, since Apple isn't even trying on other platforms (except iTunes on Windows but that's only so their devices will work) but Google is _trying_.

If they suck at developing iOS apps because of the language it's their own fault, they can hire an outside company that knows the tools or they can hire someone. It's like you're saying the people that build the Android apps are the ones tasked to build iOS apps too, they have to be separate teams, only they don't care to hire good enough people in the iOS department.

Re: Google, Why Don’t You Hang On To That Gmail App For A While? | TechCrunch

dancameron — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 11:59:22 -0000

Absolutely not. There are a ton of Mail apps in the App Store.

It looks like to me that Google's strategy to iOS apps is a webview wrapped in a basic app, all of their apps are like this and it's annoying as hell. I understand that iOS has a ton of APIs for content delivered through a webview (i.e. web apps) but it's still half-assed. They should know better not to deliver a GMail app via a webview because the storage is limited (AFAIK) to MBs and GB; every change to a different tag results in a spinning gif, it's ridiculous.

I don't know if their Android Apps are basic webviews but I doubt it. Maybe you know if they're true native apps using just APIs.

Re: Google Reader Apocalypse / Revolt

dancameron — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:03:32 -0000

After some more thought I'm just going to build out this theme a bit more using post formats, shouldn't be hard since all my current posts have a "format" to them already. I'm just going to wait on figuring out the design, maybe a three column responsive theme that very basic; nothing will happen anytime soon though since I still need to relaunch sproutventure.com with something new too.