The article is fairly bland, and the writer manages to weave in a subtle diatribe against atheism, but the Standard certainly deserves a tightness nod for the coverage. (And Civilization definitely deserves a bonus nod for attracting the fandom of the Fresh Prince.)
2) Has anyone else noticed that you can double-click words in the NYT and get a pop-up definition? Friggin' tight!
3) King County--which encompasses my brother's city of Seattle--just changed its official logo from one representing a slave-holding vice president to one of MLK.
I know he preached nonviolence and all, but I would not want to cross that bad mofo. (Anybody else see the resemblance?)
Posts
3 comments:
I have to dissent from your view of the NY Times feature. I like to read text on my computer by clicking and dragging my mouse over it, and every time I attempt to do so, the Times' pop up gets in the way. Very frustrating. I wish they could make this feature optional, or allow you to disable it.
The way I justify Civ to myself: At least I'm not wasting zee Germans in Call of Duty. I mean, it's intellectual right?
I really gotta tighten up...
I just discovered that NYTimes "feature" myself by accident a few weeks ago. I'm not sure how I missed it all these years. Weird thing is I click-and-drag over text all the time, either to copy/paste or save my place. That is, I never noticed a pop-up until this recent instance of double-clicking. Though I will say I think I do recall pop-ups starting to materialize in the past, but I am so incensed at the thought of ads, that I've gotten lightening fast with the CMD-W -- I never realized those were dictionary entries.
But I agree with Jordan: NYTimes should give you the option to disable the look-up. It should be like those stupid links where, if you hover over them, they show a mini image of the linked page. While infuriating (and a resources-suck), at least Snap gives you the option to disable the plugin.
Post a Comment