What if we could redefine the words we know? One step towards this is through The Big Word Project.
The Big Word Project was set up by Lee Munroe and Paddy Donnelly two masters students studying Multidisciplinary Design at the University of Ulster in Belfast. Since February 2008 they have sold thousands of words which can be used to represent any website at a cost of $1 a letter, slowly redefining the dictionary, one word at a time.
I recently asked Lee a few questions about the project:
What was your inspiration for the project?
Mass collaboration. We thought if we can get thousands of people to just
contribute $1 to a project, then that’s $1,000s to us and next to nothing to
them. This then led to us thinking of selling the words of the dictionary.
How many words have been sold...
… it bloody-well is! This post was very nearly “Things that piss me off 5: Internet Explorer” (that one may yet come) but I thought a more descriptive title would help more people struggling with the same problem to find it.
Anyway: background. I am writing a new feature for a Content Management System to allow users to upload files. With a simple bit of javascript I added a “+” button to allow them to add new rows to the form, allowing them to upload multiple files. It looks a bit like this:
Screenshot of Upload Images feature
Anyway, it would obviously be nice to allow the user to remove a row if they’ve added one or two too many. The obvious solution seems to be to add a “-” button beside each. Easy, right?
Unfortunately Internet...
I need a quick bitch.
I love PHP. It’s everywhere. All my sites are written in it. My CMS is written in it. My blog engines, Wordpress and b2evolution, are written in it. It’s free. It runs on any platform. Hosts all support it. With PHP 5 they’ve even done a lot of work on PHP4’s main downfall - lack of OOP support.
One thing really pisses me off though - it’s totally inconsistent. Consider these two functions:
strstr — Find first occurrence of a string
in_array — Checks if a value exists in an array
Take a close look. See the signatures?
string strstr ( string $haystack , mixed $needle [, bool $before_needle ] )
bool in_array ( mixed $needle , array $haystack [, bool $strict ] )
In in_array the first parameter is what you’re looking...
The BBC in Londonderrystrokederrycityorjustfoyle have launched two new websites for people in the west of Northern Ireland, or indeed anyone in general who likes to keep abreast of events there.
The first is a new news homepage dedicated to the news in the west of Northern Ireland. The other is for BBC Radio Foyle which has a nice new design following in the new style BBC homepage.
Oddly the BBC’s ‘west’ seems seems to include the north coast towns of Coleraine and even Ballycastle. Although in all fairness, both are west of......
O hai!
I hart lolcatz.
I hart lolcatz so much dat wun dai I thoughted “I can has lolcatz wen I makes teh pooter turn on?” So I maded a Vista gadjit an now I has new lolcatz every dai.
If u hart lolcatz liek mee an wants lolcatz in ur pooter makin u laff, downlodes mah gadjit. I has tested it 4 liek rly long time. It rly works, srsly. An evry1 needses moar lolcatz.
Kthxbai.
* If you think that was hard to read, you should see the lolcat......
I recently encountered a problem with Microsoft’s ACT (part of Visual Studio 2003) when testing a web service by emulating a browser-based client. For posterity’s sake, here’s an overview of the problem and, more importantly, the solution.
Background
Using Application Center Test (ACT) to help automate performance testing designed to compare the performance of a web service running on ASP .NET 1.1 with ASP .NET 2.0.
Problem
Originally .NET 2.0 seemed to be performing many times better than .NET 1.1, but it was soon discovered that when running .NET 2.0, ATC was receiving a lot of 302 errors on 2.0 which it wasn’t on 1.0. On further investigation the Web Service wasn’t actually making all the correct database calls and on installing HTTP Monitor, it became apparent...