But will I remember it tomorrow?
January 13, 2007 4:48 PM   Subscribe

 
Fun blog. The guy digs up good photos, too.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:51 PM on January 13, 2007


Oh, and goodnews, just noticed your post title. You can click on [add to favorites], conveniently located just above!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:54 PM on January 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


I just spent way too much time on that page... some interesting stuff. Thanks! :)
posted by miss lynnster at 5:09 PM on January 13, 2007


Me too. And there's so much of it!
posted by SmileyChewtrain at 5:15 PM on January 13, 2007


This is a Cliff-Claven-wanna-be's dream come true. I think I'll be looking through this site for the next hour or so.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 5:18 PM on January 13, 2007


I knew all that stuff...
posted by HuronBob at 5:25 PM on January 13, 2007


Pity they don't cite their references.
posted by strawberryviagra at 5:37 PM on January 13, 2007


great site
posted by Mick at 5:40 PM on January 13, 2007


goodnews: No, no, you did it wrong! You were supposed to add your post to the favorites, not my comment! Silly!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:46 PM on January 13, 2007


Sorry, just have to add: "mehyousay" is a great tag.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:47 PM on January 13, 2007


my brain loves what you posted. two thumbs way the fuck up!
posted by nola at 5:55 PM on January 13, 2007


The "What Would Happen if You Shot a Gun in Space" post is a verbatim copy of Q&A's posted elsewhere...
posted by unmake at 6:15 PM on January 13, 2007


Without citing sources this blog isn't much better than those stupid "weird facts" lists all over the internet. I mean, I'll still spend hours reading it, I'll just take everything with a grain of salt.
posted by bob sarabia at 6:19 PM on January 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


..as is this post - is this just a blog of 'Ask Yahoo' posts?
posted by unmake at 6:19 PM on January 13, 2007


Hmm. Good spot, unmake.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 6:20 PM on January 13, 2007


Similar to some other pages, yes -- but presented in a very readable "user friendly" layout. Style points.
posted by davidmsc at 7:09 PM on January 13, 2007


Seeing the unexpected good response here, it occurred to me he might like to join, if only for AskMe. He swiftly replied, and asked me to post his comments here. So, from the site's author, via email:



I would like to join, but having to pay for it ... i am not too sure.

I just read the thread, and people are not very pleased with the fact that some articles are from ask.yahoo.com or wikipedia.

The purpose of this blog was to list some stuff i genuinely did not know yesterday ..... not to re-invent anything (i mean the fact i did not know them did not mean they did not exists...)

On the start page there is a disclaimer on the right hand side (in the link section) where i say the following:


Some of the Article are sourced and copyrighted @ Wikipedia
Some of the Article are sourced & Copyrighted @ ask.yahoo



That is why comments like do not really please me: Without citing sources this blog isn't much better than those stupid "weird facts" lists all over the internet. I mean, I'll still spend hours reading it, I'll just take everything with a grain of salt. ....

Hope you can post my comment on my behalf...

Many Thx


PS: I'll make sure i'll post my sources more clearly in the future.

posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:14 PM on January 13, 2007 [2 favorites]


i was wondering why the style continued to change after each post
posted by tsarfan at 7:15 PM on January 13, 2007


very cool--thanks!
posted by amberglow at 7:19 PM on January 13, 2007


Oh and flapjax at midnite, I'm not going to favourite my own post, silly! :)

Also, I try to make a habit of staying the hell out of the thread for an hour or so after posting - it helps me cope with my thread moderation tendencies. :) Hence the late reply.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 7:26 PM on January 13, 2007


Ah, an inquiry that warms the hearts of gun-toting physicists. The peacenik response might be...nothing. A gun cartridge holds the bullet or metal tip and the gunpowder (yup, they still use that stuff). The latter requires a spark, a nifty chemical reaction that involves oxygen, which tends to be sorely lacking in space.

Uh... how does a spark need oxygen?
posted by delmoi at 7:47 PM on January 13, 2007


Wow. google a phrase from any of the posts. Almost every one is plagiarized, with no attribution. The "How does the human brain measure up to a computer?" post is not plagiarized from either yahoo or wikipedia.

In some cases, you'll need to click "The only question that doesn't turn up" on Google if you search for a multi-word quotation.

This is seriously fucking weak.
posted by delmoi at 7:55 PM on January 13, 2007


I also like the paypal button that cap'n' cut'n'paste puts after every post.
posted by delmoi at 7:56 PM on January 13, 2007


Ah, the fabled delmoi triad. (I keed, I keed! :))

Seriously, I did not realize that the author pulls a lot of his material from external sources. Now we know this, what exactly is wrong with that? If you feel he should cite his sources, I will gladly concede that point. In defence of the author, maybe it is an aggregator of useful Wikipedia and Ask Yahoo tidbits. Is there anything wrong with that? Would there be if he labelled it as such?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:01 PM on January 13, 2007


Uh... how does a spark need oxygen?

A spark is a generic term for any of several examples of a relatively small amount of stored energy being released suddenly and more or less completely in the form of heat and light. An electric spark doesn't require oxygen, but any spark produced by rapid combustion, such as the spark produced by a primer, or striking a flint with steel, does.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:06 PM on January 13, 2007


Seriously, I did not realize that the author pulls a lot of his material from external sources. Now we know this, what exactly is wrong with that?

What's wrong with plagiarism? Are you serious? Not "properly" citing sources? Why not go ask Blair Hornstine how that excuse worked out for her.

A source is something you quote, or something you get information from. What this guy is doing is taking other people's work, and passing it off as his own. If he got caught doing this on a collage paper, he'd fail the class or be expelled.

So the question is: does plagiarism matter in a non-academic setting? Ben Domenech might have a thing or two to say about that.

Okay, what about a non-academic, non-journalistic setting, such as a blog? Well obviously people can do whatever they want. I find it sleazy as fuck.
posted by delmoi at 8:10 PM on January 13, 2007


This seemed like recycled Straight Dope to me. The straight copy and paste without attribution comes as no shock.
posted by maxwelton at 8:19 PM on January 13, 2007


I see your point, delmoi. I'm not trying to be a plagiarism apologist, I'm just interested in the thin line between aggregation and plagiarism in a blog setting. I say this site walks this line: because it doesn't cites its sources (bar the copyright disclaimers quoted above), but also because it nowhere - that I can tell - claims the author came up with all this stuff himself.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 8:23 PM on January 13, 2007


I also like the paypal button that cap'n' cut'n'paste puts after every post.

Strangely, cutting and pasting the term "cap'n cut'n'paste" in quotation marks into Google yields no hits...
posted by Tube at 8:28 PM on January 13, 2007


Yea, now i can make my own soap. No, really, i want to. Thanks!
posted by gorgor_balabala at 8:33 PM on January 13, 2007


Heh, and this guy had a problem with my comment. Delmoi ftw.
posted by bob sarabia at 8:39 PM on January 13, 2007


Even without the stealing of content, I thought the site looked sleazy as fuck, too many ads, too much begging for money.
posted by empath at 8:42 PM on January 13, 2007 [1 favorite]


I'm not going to favourite my own post, silly!

But favoriting your own post is what all the truly fearless among us do!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 11:05 PM on January 13, 2007


It's like the random button on Wikipedia only with ad fodder.
posted by Holy foxy moxie batman! at 11:44 PM on January 13, 2007


gorgor_balabal - even with the "extremely dangerous ingredient that should be handled with the utmost care"?
posted by paduasoy at 2:41 AM on January 14, 2007


+a, sorry gorgor.
posted by paduasoy at 2:42 AM on January 14, 2007


I don't know, I like it anyway. He says some content is from Wikipedia and some is from Yahoo. He could just link to Wikipedia I suppose, but stuff there can change.

I think all he has to do is make sure to attribute and he's okay. It is very interesting all the same.
posted by JHarris at 8:29 AM on January 14, 2007


delmoi writes "What this guy is doing is taking other people's work, and passing it off as his own."

Except that actually he isn't. As quoted above:

goodnewsfortheinsane writes "On the start page there is a disclaimer on the right hand side (in the link section) where i say the following:

"
"Some of the Article are sourced and copyrighted @ Wikipedia
"Some of the Article are sourced & Copyrighted @ ask.yahoo
"

posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 9:51 AM on January 14, 2007


Ah, an inquiry that warms the hearts of gun-toting physicists. The peacenik response might be...nothing. A gun cartridge holds the bullet or metal tip and the gunpowder (yup, they still use that stuff). The latter requires a spark, a nifty chemical reaction that involves oxygen, which tends to be sorely lacking in space. However, forward-thinking manufacturers have packed an oxidizer within the bullet casing. Whether that's sufficient for an explosive launch is up for much debate.

Copied from somewhere else perhaps, and not showing a full understanding. Gunpowder (including modern smokeless powder) does not require any additional oxygen to burn.

Regardless, this is a fun site.
posted by caddis at 9:57 AM on January 14, 2007


Gunpowder does not require oxygen to burn, but it does require a flame or spark to ignite... which requires oxygen.
posted by tehloki at 11:16 AM on January 14, 2007


Bullet primers also do not need any additional oxygen to burn. The bullets will fire nicely in space. Will they ever stop?
posted by caddis at 1:18 PM on January 14, 2007


Will they ever stop?

Okay. You just turned an astrophysics thought experiment into a Zen koan.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 1:41 PM on January 14, 2007


I say this site walks this line: because it doesn't cites its sources (bar the copyright disclaimers quoted above), but also because it nowhere - that I can tell - claims the author came up with all this stuff himself.

I think it's generally assumed that a blog post is original if it's not in a block quote or quotation mark, just as a newspaper article is assumed to be written by the byline baring some sort of quotation indication.

Except that actually he isn't. As quoted above:

Okay, so he's only passing it off as his work unless you happen to read every word of the sidebar. Also not all of the stuff is ripped from those sites.

The bullets will fire nicely in space. Will they ever stop?

depends on what direction you fire it in, and from where.
posted by delmoi at 4:05 PM on January 14, 2007


Your bullet, carelessly fired from the space station during a drunken New Year celebration, years later hits and kills an astronaut on a spacewalk in orbit around Mars. You bastard!
posted by caddis at 6:15 PM on January 14, 2007


Another update from Chris via email:

Thx for posting my comment. Very much appreciated.
I took some of the advice on board, and will now quote my sources post by post.

I also removed the paypal link ..

If you could post this that would be great.

posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 6:34 AM on January 15, 2007


« Older Pathetic little fat man, noones bloody laughing   |   Hey Google... should I continue living? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments