Comments for LZZR

Comment on Closing searchportal.information.com Subject by T

Fri, 02 May 2008 21:48:17 +0000

searchportal.information.com (and sptc.information.com)is a typo-squatting, ad serving crap outfit.

I have found that several sites (domains) are OWNED by them. All of these sites list the name of the site and under that the phrase, “What you need, when you need it” with a box shaped logo. A large number of sites that are mistyped are owned by them and perhaps people are looking for sites whose registrations expired and an outsider (searchportal.information.com) purchased the domain. See the previously mentioned handcockandmoore.com, or millanco.com, or nhlshop.ca, dineychannel.com (note the missing “s”).

Comment on Pownce Invite - Microblog SEO cheatsheet, tips and tricks by stronghold crusader

stronghold crusader — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:12:22 +0000

Very useful information I see there are realy good tips. I am going to use some of them

Comment on Toilet Digital ID causes Internet Controversy by cohnsey

cohnsey — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 05:40:58 +0000

LZZR-

Nice article but the length of it was waaaayyy too long. Man be like Nick Hexum and use some brevity, bro.

Comment on Those who cannot remember Web 1.0 are condemned to repeat it by LZZR » Internet States of Presence

LZZR » Internet States of Presence — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:40:24 +0000

[…] States of Presence So picking up from where we left off in the post on the Internet History let us summarise in condensed form what we may take from there and use in our further […]

Comment on Closing searchportal.information.com Subject by William

William — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 02:44:18 +0000

So what do I do if this is happening on my phone? I’m getting redirected to searchportal.information.com whenever I try and go to teh Baltimore Sun’s mobile website. What do I do on a Windows Mobile 6 phone for DNS poisoning?

Comment on About SEDD by Karen

Karen — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:57:04 +0000

Yes, Click fraud can be done by any cite owners’ competitors. We must be careful. Thanks for sharing this.
Keep posting. Thanks.

Comment on Do we see the road ahead? by LZZR » Online Communities - Notes on Terminology

LZZR » Online Communities - Notes on Terminology — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 13:06:11 +0000

[…] 23.12.2007 When I was in the middle of writing my next post I realised that I desperately need another term to describe adequately my new idea. Once again, I […]

Comment on Those who cannot remember Web 1.0 are condemned to repeat it by LZZR

LZZR — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 14:51:21 +0000

I gather you define the subject relative to Ego - hence Actor rather than User whilst I'm trying to look at the subject-system relationships, so User is a necessary and sufficient term to describe this. on the subject of WWW as a whole I beg to differ - at least in its Web 1.0 version it is primarily an enormous collection of structured and sometimes cross-referenced narratives and only now through Web 1.5 phase it gradually transforms to a state in which conversational context is going to become predominant. Are you sure that performance is what defines the content rather than the subject in our case?

Comment on Those who cannot remember Web 1.0 are condemned to repeat it by zeroinfluencer

zeroinfluencer — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:54:38 +0000

You’re welcome.

Just to chip in the notion of role again; the ‘user’ is within a morphology of contexts within web2.0ness - the ever moving flow of data will change the affordances of the users actions; this is something new compared to the clunky portal publishing model of web1.0.

The WWW as a whole is neither narrative, though it persists as an archive within Google/Internet archive, nor a platform - which is about conversation. The form is akin to ‘real time stories’ which does lend itself to standup comedy instead of classical acting; regardless the (shifting) contexts enables the user to perform, within the confines of language (the basis to code).

But I’m interested in reading your forthcoming posts, and I will get around to the identity post at some point, work is dominating most of the hours at present.

Comment on Those who cannot remember Web 1.0 are condemned to repeat it by LZZR

LZZR — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:20:21 +0000

Thanks David!
On two bits I was able to grasp:
1) HTML/HTTP compound is as antuquated as 286 processor thing that are happening right now on the Web had outgrown it long time ago and eventually this compound will be replaced by a much more workable combination (more on this in one of my next posts).
2) With User I’ll stick to my guns. I considered using the term Actor but finally rejected it for two reasons: if it is about “acting” as in “take action” than it is too vague and does not describe the specific role user has within a system but if it’s “acting” as in “stage acting” it brings a bunch of misleading connotations hinting that our user “performs” whilst online and I am not sure that it is so as it is perfectly possible to keep consistent self without the kind of detachment that is always present between an actor and a charachter he or she plays.
As for the rest, game theory is not really my cup of tea but I would still argue that the WWW is primarily textual activity only complimented by things like video and audio content and this is what makes what it is. Besides I don’t see language as being a constraint for creativity, but rather as one of its tools.
Once again, thanks for your feedback and please, find some time to produce a piece on identity/self/representation etc. There is much to discuss there!