Comments on: #006598

#006598

armoured-ant — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:20:40 -0800

Unfortunately, MeFi blue didn't make it on to the Web 2.0 Palette. I never liked MeFi Link Yellow, anyway. via.

By: wabashbdw

wabashbdw — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:32:45 -0800

I'm failing to see the usefulness of this.

By: pmbuko

pmbuko — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:33:19 -0800

They forgot whogiveafuck pink.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:38:10 -0800

someone really needs to learn when to use PNGs. Ugh.

By: prostyle

prostyle — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0800

In order to sell to Yahoo!, Google or even get a mention on TechCrunch, you've got to have a web based app that's the next big thing - add a heavy serving of AJAX, maybe use Ruby on Rails, or one of the squillion new code frameworks that have popped up in recent times, maybe have some form of tagging on the site, improve your usability over and over until even your grandmother can use it, and then... Pick from a chart of colors used by projects whose success you hope to emulate, noting that the defining characteristics of your color choices are sure to be noted and memorized by your grandmother. Because there's probably no other way she'll be able to identify your product or service otherwise. Nope.

By: Mikey-San

Mikey-San — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:51:50 -0800

There's no way this is possibly just a joke and not to be taken literally. Nope.

By: blacklite

blacklite — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:02:47 -0800

They couldn't even spell Technorati right, and, uh, lame.

By: boo_radley

boo_radley — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:14:01 -0800

I'm sure there's really just one color of orange there. And wikipedia isn't really web 2.0.

By: slogger

slogger — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:24:35 -0800

Wow, this is lamer than my retahded MeTa post a few weeks ago. Wait, no it's not.

By: chasing

chasing — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:28:16 -0800

What about Snarky Curmudgeon gray?

By: fenriq

fenriq — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:30:25 -0800

Raise your hand if you're thoroughly sick and tired of all the Web 2.0 crap. Yeah, me too.

By: freudianslipper

freudianslipper — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:51:29 -0800

yeah, i'm waiting till Web 2.0 is out of beta. personally, I can't wait till Web 3.0, I hear the font is so big it kicks you in the face.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:03:16 -0800

"Techorati" gets four? Worth it for "A List Apart Cream" alone.

By: ninjew

ninjew — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:10:49 -0800

Needs more snakes.

By: Ogre Lawless

Ogre Lawless — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:45:00 -0800

What about Snarky Curmudgeon gray? They covered that with "Slashdot Grey". The palette lost me after having two like-named entries right off the bat. Also for mispelling "Technorati" four consecutive times.

By: Ogre Lawless

Ogre Lawless — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:47:38 -0800

Though again, haters will find plenty in the source blog. Featured here: IF Web2.0 applied to cars: 1. They would only be available in Lime Green, Orange, Hot Pink and Deep Blue. All of which also in gradients.
2 Manufacturers would all be named 'Chryslr', 'Mercedoodle', 'Dodg3' or 'Toyo.ta' 3. They wouldn't blow smoke, they'd blow clouds. Next entry: "If Web 2.0 were a phallus, let me describe the ways I would fellatiate it"

By: MiltonRandKalman

MiltonRandKalman — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 13:47:11 -0800

I don't get 'google white', it's just white

By: languagehat

languagehat — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 13:53:28 -0800

I'm already using Web 4.1, suckers.

By: Pryde

Pryde — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 14:16:31 -0800

I hear Web 2008 is going to be spectacular, and I'm fully confident that Microsoft will meet its announced January '09 shipping date.

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 14:54:20 -0800

Ogre Lawless writes "Next entry: 'If Web 2.0 were a phallus, let me describe the ways I would fellatiate it'" Hold on; he's mocking the 2.0 stuff, right? This seems pretty clearly tongue-in-cheek.

By: armoured-ant

armoured-ant — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:06:14 -0800

Wow. A lot of you failed to get the joke.

By: seanyboy

seanyboy — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:27:37 -0800

I'm eagerly waiting for some smartarse to say they got the joke, but they didn't find it funny.

By: cortex

cortex — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:33:12 -0800

I'm already using Web 4.1, suckers. Luser. The clueful all switched over to UndiGra* years ago. *Undirected Graph. It's a joke that you're not smart enough to get. God, I bet you use IE.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:37:26 -0800

I'm sure there's really just one color of orange there. And wikipedia isn't really web 2.0. Wikipedia is normatively web 2.0. That is, web 2.0 was defined as being like a basked of sites like flickr and google's adsense. Wikipedia was included in that basket. I think.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:37:41 -0800

"Wow. A lot of you failed to get the joke." The dog just isn't all that shaggy. Or— "Fuck you, clown." A lot of you failed to provide a funny joke. And then you cried.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:38:41 -0800

2 Manufacturers would all be named 'Chryslr', 'Mercedoodle', 'Dodg3' or 'Toyo.ta' Scion and smart are car 2.0

By: seanyboy

seanyboy — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:56:12 -0800

I'm already using Web 4.1, suckers. You and me both languagehat, You and me both.

By: davejay

davejay — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:25:57 -0800

I'm at work, and the number used in the title of this FPP happens to match a bug report I've got on the backburner. I had a brief moment of disorientation when I saw it posted to the blue. Heh.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 17:24:26 -0800

davejay , now that was funny. ;)

By: null terminated

null terminated — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:25:50 -0800

Apparently I'm the only one who finds this funny. The palette lost me after having two like-named entries right off the bat. Also for mispelling "Technorati" four consecutive times. How would you spell Technorati? I don't get 'google white', it's just white ...

By: squirrel

squirrel — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:31:55 -0800

I remain pre-chortle.

By: George_Spiggott

George_Spiggott — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:59:49 -0800

Hang on, hang on, I've nearly got it. They're.... colors... um... color swatches... am I right so far? Swatches of color used by websites... websites which are... ah... damn. I've lost it. Oh wait, no! Websites that are considered to be prominent examples of Web 2.0! And these color swatches are named for those sites! I think I've almost got the joke. There's just one bit remaining. The part that's a joke. But I'm nearly there, I can almost taste it!

By: squirrel

squirrel — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:10:52 -0800

By: tiamat

tiamat — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 01:37:27 -0800

Self Link. Name on the WHOIS for the poster's web page matches the name on the blog of this 'joke.

By: tiamat

tiamat — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 01:44:51 -0800

Actually, I'm wrong. Sorry about that.

By: jfuller

jfuller — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:41:27 -0800

> And wikipedia isn't really web 2.0. Anything that tricks the users into providing their own content is Web 2.0. Dialup BBS systems were Web 2.0.

By: cortex

cortex — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 06:57:19 -0800

The walls of barroom shitters? Web 2.0.

By: cortex

cortex — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 06:57:42 -0800

Barroom? WTF? Bar.

By: asok

asok — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 07:25:49 -0800

Pitman is here, get me a pint of bitter Need to have a crap? Head for the shitter It makes sense to me.