I'm not entirely sure, but I think that's what I'm talking about. In Firefox, you can do it by right-clicking on a search field and clicking "add a keyword for this search", right? In Chrome you have to do it a bit more manually by right-clicking in the location bar and clicking "Edit search engines", but it works.
If this ISN'T what you're talking about, then there's something I'm missing on that page you linked.
EDIT: Hmm...I guess you're probably talking about the "m.o" example on that page, huh? It seems that you can do that from the "edit search engines" function too. Not as handy as being able to do it from bookmarks, but it's something.
Yeah, it does. I type "yt" then space and suddenly I'm searching Youtube. It's had that for decades.
Spanner menu --> Options --> Manage (On the default search line.) --> Select engine and click edit.
You also don't have to add searchable sites either. If a site is search compatible, you start typing it's address and the "Press Tab to search." dodah appears.
You people clearly did not read the whole thing. I'm not talking about search engines. I'm talking about bookmarks. I really wish people would learn to actually read ALL the words in things carefully. Half the posts I make on this forum are just repetitions due to people's failure to read.
The feature I want is not with search engines. It is a feature simply of bookmarks.
For example, I can bookmark the forum, then I can change the keyword for the bookmark to be "forum". I can press ctrl+l, then type forum, then press enter, and it will load that bookmark.
Take it a step further. I can get a bookmarklet, which is a bookmark containing only javascript. Good examples are supergenpass or another one I have that lets me add books to Listal while browsing Amazon. Then I can set a keywords such as 'pass' for supergenpass. If I'm on a page, and need to activate supergenpass, I press ctrl+l, then type pass, then press enter, and the supergenpass JavaScript will execute.
Also, you CAN use this feature for the search thing, if you want to. You just put a %s anywhere in the URL. For example, I can do a search of wikipedia by doing wiki <query>. However, you can also put the variable anywhere in the URL. Let's say you use Reddit, I don't, but other people do. All their categories follow the URL pattern of reddit.com/r/category/. Well, just set the bookmark to be reddit.com/r/%s/ then you can have a keyword of reddit and now reddit programming goes to reddit.com/r/programming/. It's not a search, it's just a better bookmark.
You people clearly did not read the whole thing. I'm not talking about search engines. I'm talking about bookmarks. I really wish people would learn to actually read ALL the words in things carefully. Half the posts I make on this forum are just repetitions due to people's failure to read.
As much as I fancy to make a snide remark about this, I'll let it go, since you actually managed to be pretty clear, this time.
I clearly did not express myself properly. I'm not talking about search engines. I'm talking about bookmarks. I really wish I was able to accurately describe what's in my head. Half the posts I make on this forum are just repetitions due to my ineptitude.
I clearly did not express myself properly. I'm not talking about search engines. I'm talking about bookmarks. I really wish I was able to accurately describe what's in my head. Half the posts I make on this forum are just repetitions due to my ineptitude.
FTFY
If only Scott would give up on the irrational and clearly wrong belief that politeness or manners in any context was manipulation and attempted mind control. Oh well.
That is true and he did correct our misunderstandings, but was the uppity tone in which he did so necessary?
While I don't speak up (due to indifference), it is annoying that a good half of the "debate" here boils down to people not actually reading the words other people have written and arguing against strawmen of their own devising. The reading comprehension of a good number of the people here is surprisingly low, either through lack of effort or lack of ability, and it's frustrating. Precise language is ignored, specific and detailed statements are half-read and then poorly responded to. It's as though people just skip a few words here and there, and only skim the posts that come before them.
It's something we discuss regularly offline, but have yet to come up with a solution regarding.
While I don't speak up (due to indifference), it is annoying that a good half of the "debate" here boils down to people not actually reading the words other people have written and arguing against strawmen of their own devising. The reading comprehension of a good number of the people here is surprisingly low, either through lack of effort or lack of ability, and it's frustrating. Precise language is ignored, specific and detailed statements are half-read and then poorly responded to. It's as though people just skip a few words here and there, and only skim the posts that come before them.
It's something we discuss regularly offline, but have yet to come up with a solution regarding.
Precisely.
And when we mean every word, and precise language, we mean exactly that. Every single word is extremely important. You learn from reading the rules to board games that words such as can, may, should, shall, must, never, and always are extremely different and change the entire meaning of a sentence. Yet it seems as if most people look at the subject and predicate of a sentence, then fill in the rest of the blanks on their own.
Yet another reason the book club is important. If you start reading actual books, you will increase your reading skills across the board. If you're an audio book person, maybe your visual reading part of your brain is getting a little lazy?
Have you ever thought of just trying to write more consisely and specifically.
Oh, the problem is that people will skip over clear posts in many cases. They'll assume all sorts of implications not actually written. They'll also often misunderstand a technical term or broadly apply a narrow statement. I am convinced that, in most cases here, it's a failure of the reader and not the writer.
If you know people are likely to mis-interpret or mis-read things if you provide them with a needlessly lengthy description, you should write accordingly. Just the paragraph with the example would have been plenty.
If you know people are likely to mis-interpret or mis-read things if you provide them with a needlessly lengthy description, you should write accordingly. Just the paragraph with the example would have been plenty.
Yes, perhaps. I don't know about anyone else, but the Internets have definitely trained me to always be complete and not leave anything out.
For example, I might say "oh man, did you know about this cool thing? It can do X. That's important because of Z." Then someone will come and say "It can also do Y!" Now, I already knew it did Y. This person is telling me something I already knew. However, because I neglected to mention Y, they assumed I didn't know it. Therefore, I always make sure to not leave out any detail, otherwise it's assumed I didn't know it.
Another thing that happens often when "arguing" on the Internets is you have to make all sorts of exceptions. I'll try to make a particular point, and I know already in advance what the first few sets of rebuttals are going to be. First I will be accused of making a generalization I didn't make, so I'll have to add an extra sentence. The sentence won't strictly be necessary since my first sentence was correct, but I already know that people won't read it carefully. After that I can already see two or three logical fallacies that are going to come down the pipe, so I have to add a sentence to pre-empt each one. I can also foresee if there is going to be a semantic argument or two, so maybe I'll have to pre-empt those as well.
Yes, perhaps. I don't know about anyone else, but the Internets have definitely trained me to always be complete and not leave anything out.
Agreed, I do the same - Let's face it, around here, half the time if you leave something out for brevity, someone fires back that you left something out. If you put it in, the wags chime in with that "Words words words" smiley gif. I know I can't win, so I just go long, and if the lazy ones can't post more than a smiley, well, that's their loss. The people who matter to that discussion are generally the ones who actually read it, or at least perform some reasonable facsimile of reading it.
Also, I know I often can't quite get my train of thought down comprehensibly in a short sentence, so going long, and giving more information for those who ain't just lazy, it will probably help understand what I'm saying.
Scott, as I said the first time, Chrome can do this. If you add it as a search engine to Chrome and use the URL (without the %s or anything), the keyword works just like Firefox. Ctrl+l, type red, hit enter, go to reddit. It may not be ideal, but it's the same functionality.
If you want to help sites out, but you don't want to see ads, you are actually better off running adblock. Here is why.
Most sites actually don't get paid per ad shown. They get paid per ad clicked. If 100 people load the ad, and only one clicks, that's a .01 conversion rate. Now let's say that 50 of those people viewing the ad used adblock. Those people were never going to click on the ad. Now the site has a .02 conversion rate. That's significantly better. A higher conversion rate allows the site to charge the advertisers more money.
Also, let's say the site is being paid per ad shown, not clicked. Well, then viewing the ad helps the a very very small bit. Usually the advertiser pays $X per 1000 views. If you're never going to click the ad, though, you're actually hurting the advertiser in favor of the site that very very tiny amount.
The only way you can really help someone with an ad is by clicking on it. Even then it doesn't help very much. To really help them, you have to not only click on the ad, but sign up for whatever bullshit the ad is selling, for example a Netflix subscription. If you do that, then the site will actually make some significant bank.
If you're not going to sign up for or buy whatever the advertisement is selling, then blocking the ad helps you more than it hurts the guys on the other end of the line.
Have you ever thought of just trying to write more consisely and specifically. Scott's second post was quite an adequate description.
My first post linked to an already adequate description that people felt compelled to reply to without reading in full.
Having not cared about the argument in the slightest, I kinda just breezed over Scott's link, but having seen the fight it kicked off, I went back and read the article. I was half-expecting to see something buried in like the second to last paragraph about what Scott was talking about. It was the entire second paragraph of the article. 10 points for style, minus several thousand for reading, guys.
Anyway, I don't know if it's just my crummy computer (Yay 1.6 gHz Celerons and half-gigs of ram!) or what, but occasionally, Chrome is unbearably slow. It happens just often enough to make me go back to Firefox. The ad blocking was perfect, tho.
I don't run AdBlock, because if a site gets some pittance for running ads, I want to let them have it.
Why not use a blocker that hides the ads from you, but still downloads them? The site gets the same benefit, and you still never see the ads.
I actually don't mind ads as long as they're tasteful and not flashing in my face. Some site actually care about their ads, and these I don't mind seeing. It's the teeth whitening, etc., bullshit I can live without. What you're talking about is a lot more work than what I want, even if it already exists.
Comments
https://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/keywords.html
If this ISN'T what you're talking about, then there's something I'm missing on that page you linked.
EDIT: Hmm...I guess you're probably talking about the "m.o" example on that page, huh? It seems that you can do that from the "edit search engines" function too. Not as handy as being able to do it from bookmarks, but it's something.
Spanner menu --> Options --> Manage (On the default search line.) --> Select engine and click edit.
You also don't have to add searchable sites either. If a site is search compatible, you start typing it's address and the "Press Tab to search." dodah appears.
The feature I want is not with search engines. It is a feature simply of bookmarks.
For example, I can bookmark the forum, then I can change the keyword for the bookmark to be "forum". I can press ctrl+l, then type forum, then press enter, and it will load that bookmark.
Take it a step further. I can get a bookmarklet, which is a bookmark containing only javascript. Good examples are supergenpass or another one I have that lets me add books to Listal while browsing Amazon. Then I can set a keywords such as 'pass' for supergenpass. If I'm on a page, and need to activate supergenpass, I press ctrl+l, then type pass, then press enter, and the supergenpass JavaScript will execute.
Also, you CAN use this feature for the search thing, if you want to. You just put a %s anywhere in the URL. For example, I can do a search of wikipedia by doing wiki <query>. However, you can also put the variable anywhere in the URL. Let's say you use Reddit, I don't, but other people do. All their categories follow the URL pattern of reddit.com/r/category/. Well, just set the bookmark to be reddit.com/r/%s/ then you can have a keyword of reddit and now reddit programming goes to reddit.com/r/programming/. It's not a search, it's just a better bookmark.
It's something we discuss regularly offline, but have yet to come up with a solution regarding.
And when we mean every word, and precise language, we mean exactly that. Every single word is extremely important. You learn from reading the rules to board games that words such as can, may, should, shall, must, never, and always are extremely different and change the entire meaning of a sentence. Yet it seems as if most people look at the subject and predicate of a sentence, then fill in the rest of the blanks on their own.
Yet another reason the book club is important. If you start reading actual books, you will increase your reading skills across the board. If you're an audio book person, maybe your visual reading part of your brain is getting a little lazy?
For example, I might say "oh man, did you know about this cool thing? It can do X. That's important because of Z." Then someone will come and say "It can also do Y!" Now, I already knew it did Y. This person is telling me something I already knew. However, because I neglected to mention Y, they assumed I didn't know it. Therefore, I always make sure to not leave out any detail, otherwise it's assumed I didn't know it.
Another thing that happens often when "arguing" on the Internets is you have to make all sorts of exceptions. I'll try to make a particular point, and I know already in advance what the first few sets of rebuttals are going to be. First I will be accused of making a generalization I didn't make, so I'll have to add an extra sentence. The sentence won't strictly be necessary since my first sentence was correct, but I already know that people won't read it carefully. After that I can already see two or three logical fallacies that are going to come down the pipe, so I have to add a sentence to pre-empt each one. I can also foresee if there is going to be a semantic argument or two, so maybe I'll have to pre-empt those as well.
Also, I know I often can't quite get my train of thought down comprehensibly in a short sentence, so going long, and giving more information for those who ain't just lazy, it will probably help understand what I'm saying.
Edit: No idea if SuperGenPass will work though.
However, I liberally use Firefox's Block Images From This Server, and I absolutely cannot live without it. (FlashBlock is also a given.)
Anyone know if Chrome has an extension for Block Images yet? A cursory search didn't turn anything up.
Most sites actually don't get paid per ad shown. They get paid per ad clicked. If 100 people load the ad, and only one clicks, that's a .01 conversion rate. Now let's say that 50 of those people viewing the ad used adblock. Those people were never going to click on the ad. Now the site has a .02 conversion rate. That's significantly better. A higher conversion rate allows the site to charge the advertisers more money.
Also, let's say the site is being paid per ad shown, not clicked. Well, then viewing the ad helps the a very very small bit. Usually the advertiser pays $X per 1000 views. If you're never going to click the ad, though, you're actually hurting the advertiser in favor of the site that very very tiny amount.
The only way you can really help someone with an ad is by clicking on it. Even then it doesn't help very much. To really help them, you have to not only click on the ad, but sign up for whatever bullshit the ad is selling, for example a Netflix subscription. If you do that, then the site will actually make some significant bank.
If you're not going to sign up for or buy whatever the advertisement is selling, then blocking the ad helps you more than it hurts the guys on the other end of the line.
Anyway, I don't know if it's just my crummy computer (Yay 1.6 gHz Celerons and half-gigs of ram!) or what, but occasionally, Chrome is unbearably slow. It happens just often enough to make me go back to Firefox. The ad blocking was perfect, tho.