SitePoint播客＃81：Doom，Gloom和Rainbow Tweets

Episode 81 of The SitePoint Podcast is now available! This week your hosts are Patrick O’Keefe (@iFroggy), Stephan Segraves (@ssegraves), and Kevin Yank (@sentience).

SitePoint Podcast的第81集现已发布！ 本周的主持人是Patrick O'Keefe( @iFroggy )，Stephan Segraves( @ssegraves )和Kevin Yank( @sentience )。

下载此剧集 (Download this Episode)

You can also download this episode as a standalone MP3 file. Here’s the link:

您也可以将本集下载为独立的MP3文件。 这是链接：

• SitePoint Podcast #81: Doom, Gloom, and Rainbow Tweets (MP3, 54.6MB, 59:39)

  SitePoint Podcast＃81：Doom，Gloom和Rainbow Tweets (MP3，54.6MB，59:39)

剧集摘要 (Episode Summary)

Here are the topics covered in this episode:

以下是本集中介绍的主题：

1. Disaster Stories #1: Prominent Sites Hit By Cross-site Scripting (XSS) Attack
   灾难故事＃1：受到跨站点脚本(XSS)攻击的突出站点
2. Disaster Stories #2: Facebook’s Massive Outage
   灾难故事2：Facebook的大规模停运
3. Disaster Stories #3: Digg Traffic Down 26% In Wake of Redesign/Relaunch
   灾难故事3：重新设计/重新启动后，Digg流量下降了26％
4. Deadpool: Xmarks Bookmark Sync Service Shutting Down
   死侍：Xmarks书签同步服务关闭
5. Deadpool: Microsoft Shutting Live Blogs, Migrating Users to WordPress.com
   死侍：微软关闭实时博客，将用户迁移到WordPress.com
6. The Web Is Gradually Drowning in Redirects
   Web逐渐被重定向淹没

Browse the full list of links referenced in the show at http://delicious.com/sitepointpodcast/81.

浏览http://delicious.com/sitepointpodcast/81中显示的参考链接的完整列表。

主持人聚光灯 (Host Spotlights)

• Patrick: The Lara Jade Coton/TVX Case: The Full Story

  帕特里克： 劳拉·玉·科顿/ TVX案例：完整故事

• Kevin: Introducing “?—”: A Distraction-Free Writing Environment

  凯文： 介绍“？—”：一种无干扰的写作环境

• Stephan: Going Without a Laptop

  斯蒂芬： 不用笔记本电脑

显示成绩单 (Show Transcript)

Kevin: October 1st, 2010. Twitter and Google make rookie mistakes, and the rest of the Web isn’t doing too well either. I’m Kevin Yank and this is the SitePoint Podcast #81: Doom, Gloom, and Rainbow Tweets.

凯文(Kevin)： 2010年10月1日。Twitter和Google犯了菜鸟般的错误，而Web的其余部分也表现不佳。 我是Kevin Yank，这是SitePoint播客＃81：Doom，Gloom和Rainbow Tweets。

And welcome to another episode of the SitePoint Podcast. Just three of us this week, it’s me, Patrick, and Stephan; hi guys.

欢迎收看SitePoint播客的另一集。 本周只有我们三个，分别是我，帕特里克和斯蒂芬。 嗨，大家好。

Patrick: Hello.

帕特里克：你好。

Stephan: Howdy, howdy.

史蒂芬：你好，你好。

Kevin: Brad is at a WordCamp of some description, and it seems like they’re creating a new WordCamp every week and Brad is going to all of them.

凯文：布拉德(Brad)处于一个描述性的WordCamp中，似乎他们每个星期都在创建一个新的WordCamp，而布拉德(Brad)将去所有这些人。

Stephan: That sounds about accurate.

史蒂芬：听起来很准确。

Kevin: And, I don’t know, if I were Brad I think this is the week I’d want off because the news is not good. I collected stories for the show this week and, boy, there’s a lot of bad news going around. Is it just me, do I follow the wrong feeds or was there no good news on the Web this week?

凯文：而且，我不知道，如果我是布拉德，我想这是我要放假的一周，因为新闻不好。 我收集了本周演出的故事，男孩，周围有很多坏消息。 是我本人，还是我遵循错误的提要，还是本周网上没有好消息？

We’ve got disaster stories; we’ve got a couple more big names for the deadpool, and a little theorizing that the Web is going to implode on itself because of redirects.

我们有灾难的故事； 我们为死池有了两个更大的名字，还有一些理论认为网络将由于重定向而自我崩溃。

Patrick: If it bleeds it leads.

帕特里克：如果流血，它会导致。

Kevin: Yeah, let’s just dive right in here, disaster story number one: the Twitter hack. I finally got the new Twitter and you did too, right, Stephan?

凯文：是的，让我们就深入探讨灾难故事第一：Twitter黑客。 我终于有了新的Twitter，您也做到了，对，斯蒂芬？

Stephan: Yeah, I’ve had it for a week now, yeah.

斯蒂芬：是的，我已经有一个星期了。

Patrick: I don’t have it.

帕特里克：我没有。

Kevin: Yeah, so you can just be quiet, Patrick (laughter).

凯文：是的，所以你可以保持安静，帕特里克(笑声)。

Patrick: Talk amongst yourselves.

帕特里克：彼此交谈。

Kevin: But you liked the old one, right?

凯文：但是你喜欢旧的，对吗？

Patrick: Sure, yeah, and TweetDeck.

帕特里克：是的，是的，还有TweetDeck。

Kevin: You’re happy with it.

凯文：你对此感到满意。

Patrick: I am.

帕特里克：我是。

Kevin: That’s why they haven’t given you the new one. What do you think Stephan?

凯文：这就是为什么他们没有给你新的。 您如何看待斯蒂芬？

Stephan: You know, it’s alright. I mean I’m not easily impressed I guess, so, the endless scroll is nice, everything else is kind of eh, you know, I actually like the old design too, it was functional to me; this almost seems like there’s too much going on in the page.

史蒂芬：你知道，没关系。 我的意思是，我想我不会轻易被打动，因此，无休止的滚动效果很好，其他所有内容也都不错，您知道，我实际上也喜欢旧的设计，对我来说很实用。 页面上似乎发生了太多事情。

Kevin: It is definitely more of an app than a page you’re looking at now. It’s very reminiscent of the iPad app for Twitter.

凯文：绝对比您现在正在浏览的页面更多的是一个应用程序。 这非常让人联想到Twitter的iPad应用程序。

Stephan: Yeah, and I’m sure that’s why they did this I mean to kind of make everything gel together.

斯蒂芬：是的，我敢肯定，这就是他们这样做的原因，我的意思是使所有东西都凝聚在一起。

Kevin: The biggest consistent complaint I’ve seen is while it is an excellent application it is not a beginner friendly experience. The one thing Twitter had going for it is it was not intimidating for a beginner, I guess.

凯文：我所看到的最大的一贯抱怨是，尽管它是一个出色的应用程序，但它并不是初学者的友好体验。 我想Twitter要做的一件事是，它对初学者来说并不吓人。

Stephan: Yeah, you could jump in to the original Twitter and just go and know what you’re doing, and this one’s a little more I’d say it’s intimidating a bit. When you pull it up it’s kind of like there’s just a lot to look at, and if you don’t know what you’re doing I could see it being a little overwhelming, yeah.

斯蒂芬：是的，您可以跳到原始的Twitter上，然后去了解您在做什么，这还有些吓人。 当您将其拔起时，似乎有很多需要看的东西，如果您不知道自己在做什么，我会发现它有点压倒性的，是的。

Patrick: Still, a beginner won’t see that, though, a beginner will see their registration, their un-logged in sort of page, and they put it in the right light to make it friendly I would say.

帕特里克(Patrick)：不过，初学者不会看到，但是，初学者会看到他们的注册，未登录的页面，并且将其放在正确的位置以使其友好。

Kevin: There’s some really nice polish that’s not obvious at first, like when you click a tweet with a link in it or with anything in it, it opens the slide panel to the side to give you like related information or the YouTube video or the Flickr photo set or whatever it may be, and once you do that if you move your mouse over that panel and then scroll up and down with your scroll wheel you’ll notice really nice details like it will scroll the panel first, but when it gets to the bottom of the panel then the rest of the page starts scrolling. And that is not something that would be coming easily or automatically from the browser, that is some really clever JavaScript going on there I’d say, impressive stuff. I know I was reading on Twitter, strangely enough, just yesterday a developer that used to work here at SitePoint was trawling through the JavaScript code that powers this thing and found some hidden features including a mute feature, so although it is not in the user interface yet anywhere it does look like Twitter is planning to provide a ‘mute this user temporarily’ sort of feature, and all the code to make it work is in there; he was able to put a Greasemonkey script together that actually triggered that feature, and he was surprised to find it worked, it’s functional.

凯文(Kevin)：刚开始时有些不太好的修饰，例如，当您单击带有链接或其中任何内容的推文时，它会打开侧面的滑动面板，为您提供相关信息或YouTube视频或Flickr照片集或其他类似照片集，一旦执行此操作，如果将鼠标移到该面板上，然后使用滚轮上下滚动，您会注意到非常好的细节，例如它将首先滚动面板，但是当它滚动时到达面板底部，然后页面其余部分开始滚动。 那不是从浏览器中轻松或自动获得的东西，我会说那是一些非常聪明JavaScript，令人印象深刻的东西。 我知道我在Twitter上阅读的内容很奇怪，就在昨天，一个曾经在SitePoint工作的开发人员正在浏览支持该功能JavaScript代码，并发现了一些隐藏的功能，包括静音功能，因此尽管它不在用户中界面，但它确实看起来像Twitter计划在任何地方提供“暂时静音此用户”功能，并且使它工作的所有代码都在其中； 他能够将一个Greasemonkey脚本放在一起，而该脚本实际上触发了该功能，但他惊讶地发现该功能有效，并且功能正常。

Patrick: It seems like the overall message of the new Twitter is keeping people on Twitter and competing I guess with the apps in some way because it just seems like they’re turning the website into an app itself, like you said, and also like you said YouTube video is embedded, Flickr photos are shown, it’s just keeping people on Twitter longer.

帕特里克(Patrick)：新Twitter的总体信息似乎是在吸引人们关注Twitter，并以某种方式与应用进行竞争，因为就像您所说的那样，似乎他们正在将网站转变为应用本身您说YouTube视频是嵌入式的，显示了Flickr的照片，这只是使人们在Twitter上停留的时间更长。

Stephan: You know one interesting thing is people’s backgrounds like for their profiles, so if you click on a user it brings up their — when you click on more tweets from this user, their backgrounds now are more hidden so I know a lot of people put up their contact information and stuff as their background so it would scroll on the old Twitter so people had to go in and change that, and I’ve seen a few tweets about that frustrates people because they have to redo their thing and I’m kind of like big deal, you know.

斯蒂芬：您知道一个有趣的事情是人们的背景，例如他们的个人资料，因此，如果您单击某个用户，则会显示其背景信息–当您单击该用户的更多推文时，他们的背景现在更加隐蔽，所以我认识很多人将他们的联系信息和内容作为背景，以便在旧的Twitter上滚动显示，这样人们就不得不改变它，而我看到的一些推文使人们感到沮丧，因为他们必须重做他们的事情，而我我知道这很重要。

Kevin: That’s what I was saying two weeks ago, yeah, they basically stomped it, and yeah, definitely SitePoint is affected by that; we had some text in our background that is now not exactly visible.

凯文：这就是我两周前所说的，是的，他们基本上是踩了它，是的，肯定是SitePoint受此影响。 我们的背景中有一些文字现在不完全可见。

Stephan: It’s interesting. I mean it’s alright; I guess I’ll just have to get used to it more.

斯蒂芬：这很有趣。 我的意思是没事； 我想我只需要习惯一些就可以了。

Patrick: So is the new Twitter, since you both have it, is it more customizable personalization-wise as far as your brand, changing the colors and putting your own sort of feel on it; is it more of that or is it less?

帕特里克(Patrick)：新的Twitter也是如此，因为你们俩都拥有，因此就您的品牌而言，它是更具可定制性的个性化设置吗？它可以改变颜色并赋予您自己的感觉。 是更多还是更少？

Kevin: I would say it’s the same. You have a little less space to play with because the interface stretches out to fill more of the browser when that space is available, so you probably have a little less real estate, but as far as making it feel like your thing I think you’re still basically limited to choose your background. Was there anything else?

凯文：我会说相同。 您可以使用的空间要少一些，因为当该空间可用时，界面会扩展以填充更多的浏览器，因此您的房地产可能要少一些，但是就我所想而言，基本上仍然仅限于选择您的背景。 还有其他吗？

Patrick: Avatar background and colors?

帕特里克：头像的背景和颜色？

Kevin: I think colors are gone, to be honest.

凯文：老实说，我认为色彩已经消失了。

Patrick: Can’t change colors anymore? Interesting.

帕特里克：不能再改变颜色了吗？ 有趣。

Kevin: I don’t think so. I don’t think so. Yeah, just the white and semitransparent white, and if you change your background image to something that has a rich color that color will bleed through the semitransparent portions of the interface, but other than that, yeah, you don’t have a lot of control.

凯文：我不这么认为。 我不这么认为。 是的，只有白色和半透明的白色，如果您将背景图像更改为色彩丰富的东西，该颜色会通过界面的半透明部分渗出，但是除此之外，您没有太多控制。

Stephan: You can change the background color, the text color, the links color, the sidebar color and the sidebar border color.

史蒂芬(Stephan)：您可以更改背景颜色，文本颜色，链接颜色，侧边栏颜色和侧边栏边框颜色。

Kevin: Oh, good, I stand corrected then.

凯文：哦，好，那我可以纠正。

Patrick: I’m surprised they didn’t just adopt Facebook’s color scheme.

帕特里克(Patrick)：我很惊讶他们不仅仅采用Facebook的配色方案。

Kevin: Hmm, yeah, exactly; they should have a theme for that. I don’t know; have you tested those features? Because I think it’s the same settings page they used to have, I’m not sure how many of those features they actually apply to the new design.

凯文：嗯，是的。 他们应该为此主题。 我不知道; 您测试过这些功能了吗？ 因为我认为这是他们过去使用的相同设置页面，所以我不确定它们实际上将哪些功能应用于新设计。

Stephan: I’ll switch one real quick while we’re on the show, ooh, live (laughs).

史蒂芬：我们在节目中快点切换一下，哦，现场直播(笑)。

Patrick: Let me try to login to another Twitter account and see if I have access over there (laughs).

帕特里克：让我尝试登录另一个Twitter帐户，看看我是否可以在那里访问(笑)。

Kevin: Meanwhile this was my — praising the new design was my attempt to add some lightness to what is really a negative story because in amidst all of this attention to detail on the new design Twitter missed, and I guess technically continued to miss, a very simple cross-site scripting vulnerability that according to this story also affected the old design as well, so it was a longstanding bug; they didn’t pick it up when they released the new one, but I suppose the blame is on whoever missed it in the first place. But the bug was essentially that you could trick Twitter into publishing arbitrary JavaScript code when displaying a tweet, and initially that vulnerability was used to do things automatically when the user hovered their mouse over a link in a tweet on the Twitter web interface. The story here from The Guardian’s Technology Blog that kind of breaks down what they’ve been able to discover of who found out about it from whom and what experiments were done along the way suggests the original proof of concept was someone who made the tweets on the page turn rainbow color when you moused over their particular tweet. But it was rapidly co-opted and used to create a self-propagating worm that when you moused over a corrupted tweet in this way it would automatically send a similar tweet on your behalf to all of your followers and very quickly Twitter was being overrun by these vicious, self-propagating tweets; they had to clean all these tweets off Twitter after they fixed the bug. Which was a relatively simple one. As an experienced web developer displaying a URL safely in a link is not the hardest security problem to solve, you just escape it as HTML content, and they were not doing that successfully for some reason.

凯文(Kevin)：同时，这是我的想法–赞美新设计是我尝试为真实的负面故事增光一些，因为在所有对新设计细节的关注中，Twitter一直被错过了，而且我想从技术上讲，它仍然会被错过，根据这个故事，非常简单的跨站点脚本漏洞也影响了旧设计，因此这是一个长期存在的错误； 他们发布新版本时并没有选择，但我想应该归咎于谁首先错过了它。 但是实际上，该错误是您可以在显示推文时诱使Twitter发布任意JavaScript代码，并且最初，当用户将鼠标悬停在Twitter Web界面上的推文中的链接上时，该漏洞用于自动执行操作。 《 卫报》技术博客中的故事分解了他们能够发现谁从谁那里发现了东西，以及沿途进行了哪些实验，这表明概念的原始证明是有人在上面发推文将鼠标悬停在特定推特上时，页面变为彩虹色。 但是它很快就被选中并用于创建自传播蠕虫，当您以这种方式将鼠标悬停在损坏的推文上时，它将自动代表您向所有关注者发送一条类似的推文，很快，Twitter被淹没了。这些恶毒的，自我宣传的推文； 他们修复了该错误后，不得不从Twitter清除所有这些推文。 这是一个相对简单的。 作为经验丰富的Web开发人员，在链接中安全显示URL并不是最难解决的安全问题，您只是将其作为HTML内容转义，并且由于某种原因，他们没有成功地做到这一点。

Patrick: And I’ll say that this actually happened to me, guilty. I had one of the things. Mine was a vulgar message that was displayed, I can’t repeat it, but it was quickly deleted.

帕特里克：我会说这确实发生在我身上，有罪。 我有一件事情。 我的消息很粗俗，我无法重复，但很快就被删除了。

Kevin: By your or by Twitter?

凯文：是你还是推特？

Patrick: It wasn’t a link, it wasn’t something else, it was I interacted with a message on Twitter with a link, or with I forget exactly what happened, and then it automatically posted a vulgar message to my stream, and I saw it right away and deleted it but, yeah, it happened to me. And the thing is on some level there is some hilarity to this particular vulgar message getting re-tweeted around there for some people, because not like a spam link or it doesn’t take you to pornography or some sort of scam, it was just something vulgar that was suddenly appearing in different streams that people wouldn’t otherwise use those words.

帕特里克(Patrick)：这不是链接，不是别的东西，它是我在Twitter上通过链接与某条消息进行交互，或者我忘记了发生了什么，然后自动在我的信息流中发布了一条庸俗的消息，我立即看到它并删除了它，但是，是的，它发生在我身上。 而且，从某种程度上讲，这种特殊的庸俗信息在某些地方被转发到某些人那里有些欢喜，因为它不像垃圾邮件链接，或者不带您进入色情或某种骗局，这仅仅是低俗的东西突然出现在不同的流中，否则人们将不会使用这些词。

Kevin: According to The Guardian story, the first appearance of an exploit using this hack, the rainbow thing, was traced back to August 14th, so it’s been around for nearly two months, but it all kind of hit the fan on one particular evening when I guess these vulgar tweets started making the rounds was that moment where people started using these in a slightly malicious way and then within a few hours the people at Twitter HQ woke up, noticed the issue and addressed it. But, yeah, the vulnerability was being used for innocent purposes for something like six weeks until it was noticed.

凯文：根据《卫报》的故事，利用这种黑客手段进行的一次漏洞利用(彩虹之类的东西)的首次出现可追溯到8月14日，因此已经存在了将近两个月，但在某个特定的晚上都受到了粉丝的欢迎。当我猜想这些低俗的推文开始绕行的那一刻，人们开始以一种略带恶意的方式使用这些推文，然后在几个小时内，Twitter总部的人们就醒了，注意到并解决了这个问题。 但是，是的，直到被发现之前，该漏洞已被用于无害目的长达六周之久。

And Twitter isn’t the only site that’s been hit by a cross-site scripting attack, the other one is owned by none other than Google; Orkut, which is Google’s answer to Facebook, successful in some parts of the world, not the ones that your hosts today tend to live in, but yeah, Orchid was similarly brought to its knees in a security sense by a cross-site scripting attack. XSS attack essentially means that your site fails to properly make safe a piece of user submitted content that it then displays to other users, and as a result a malicious user can inject some bad mojo into your site just by submitting that as part of a piece of submitted content. It was a problem in forum software for a long time, but any decent piece of forum software these days needs to at a very minimum protect you, offer very strong protection against cross-site scripting. This is the first problem you learn how to avoid when you go to security school, quote/unquote, as a web developer, and yet in a space of a couple of weeks two major sites from two major players on the Web caught out by it, is it a coincidence or are we forgetting the basics here?

Twitter并不是遭受跨站点脚本攻击的唯一站点，另一个站点由Google拥有。 Orkut的，这是谷歌的答案，Facebook的成功在世界的一些地方，而不是那些你今天的主人大多生活在，但没错，兰花也同样一蹶不振由一个跨站点脚本攻击的安全感。 XSS攻击本质上意味着您的站点无法正确保护一部分用户提交的内容，然后将其显示给其他用户，因此，恶意用户仅通过将其作为部分内容提交就可以向您的站点注入一些有害的Mojo。提交的内容。 长期以来，这是论坛软件中的一个问题，但是如今，任何一款不错的论坛软件都需要至少保护您，为跨站点脚本提供非常强大的保护。 这是您要学习的第一个问题，当您以网络开发人员的身份进入安全学校时，如何避免报价/取消报价，而在短短几周的时间内，网络上两个主要参与者的两个主要站点被它吸引住了，这是巧合还是我们忘记了这里的基础知识？

Stephan: It’s poor foresight I think. I think when you look at Google that really surprises me, and Twitter not so much, sure it surprised me a little bit but I’m sure that someone just forgot something. But Google it kind of surprises me just because they’ve been in this game a lot longer than Twitter, and cross-site scripting has been around for a while now. So that one, Orkut, it was a little — it’s a little strange to see them hit by it and a little worrisome; if Google’s not doing it right then I should be really worried about other companies that I’m giving my information, too I would think, right? I mean does it make you worry more Kevin? I mean that’s kind of my question.

史蒂芬：我认为这是可怜的预见。 我认为，当您看到Google时，确实让我感到惊讶，而Twitter并没有那么让我感到惊讶，请确保它使我感到有些惊讶，但是我敢肯定，有人忘了一些东西。 但是Google令我感到惊讶的是，因为他们参与该游戏的时间比Twitter长得多，而且跨站点脚本已经存在了一段时间。 因此，Orkut有点麻烦了-看到他们被它撞到并有些令人担忧，这有点奇怪。 如果Google的做法不正确，那么我应该真的担心其他公司在提供我的信息，我也想，对吗？ 我的意思是，这会让您更担心凯文吗？ 我的意思是我的问题。

Kevin: When these things are discovered they, especially on these major sites, they seem to be discovered and addressed pretty quickly.

凯文：一旦发现这些东西，尤其是在这些主要站点上，它们就会很快被发现并解决。

Patrick: Because people have to brag about it. They have to talk about it; look what I did.

帕特里克：因为人们必须为此吹牛。 他们必须谈论它； 看看我做了什么。

Kevin: Exactly, exactly. If you, I don’t know, the people seem to discover these, what they do is how can I make the biggest splash possible and have something that I can brag about in job interviews for years to come, that seems to be their response, not, ooh, how can I be really subtle about this and make as much money as possible, for example, or steal as many credit card numbers as possible without being detected. That’s the kind of attack that we really need to worry about, and I suppose if it was going on it’s not the kind of thing we would be reading about the next day.

凯文：完全正确。 如果您(我不知道)，人们似乎发现了这些，他们所做的就是我如何才能最大程度地发挥作用，并在今后几年的工作面试中夸耀自己，这似乎是他们的回应，不是，噢，我如何才能真正地做到微妙，例如赚取尽可能多的钱，或者在不被发现的情况下窃取尽可能多的信用卡号。 那是我们真正需要担心的那种攻击，我想如果它正在进行的话，那不是第二天我们要读的那种东西。

Stephan: The Twitter one is what — it’s a little concerning, too, because this guy, apparently one of these, a developer in Japan, the story reads he contacted Twitter about this bug.

史蒂芬(Stephan)： Twitter是个问题–也有点令人担忧，因为这个家伙，显然是其中的一个，是日本的开发人员，这个故事读到他就此bug与Twitter联系了。

Kevin: Yeah, that’s the, ugh, that’s what really angers me.

凯文：是的，那真是让我生气。

Stephan: I mean he pointed something out, he’s obviously a smart guy, and he said, hey, I’m not going to do anything with this, I’m going to tell Twitter about it, and it seems that Twitter just didn’t take what he said to heart. And that’s frustrating to me as a developer, and I’m sure to you, Kevin; if someone contacted you, you would fix the problem, you wouldn’t just sit back and go, oh, it’s not a big deal.

史蒂芬：我的意思是他指出了一点，他显然是个聪明人，他说，嘿，我不会对此做任何事情，我要告诉推特，推特似乎并没有这样做。谨记他所说的话。 作为开发人员，这让我感到沮丧，凯文，我确定。 如果有人与您联系，您将解决问题，您将不会只是坐下来走走，哦，这没什么大不了的。

Kevin: I mean I would be lying if I had said at SitePoint we had never published a piece of code with a security vulnerability in it, of course we have, but we then receive an email from a responsible user and we go, “Oh crap, of crap!”, and it’s fixed in five minutes; that’s our response when we receive an email like that not, oh, yeah, let’s push it down the queue, we might get to it later. Security vulnerabilities go to the top of the list for us, and if it doesn’t at Twitter there’s something really wrong.

凯文：我的意思是，如果我说过在SitePoint上我们从来没有发布过带有安全漏洞的代码，那我肯定是在撒谎，但是我们随后收到了一位负责任用户的电子邮件，然后说：废话，废话！”，并在五分钟内修复； 这是我们在收到不这样的电子邮件时的答复，是的，让我们将其推送到队列中，我们稍后可能会收到它。 安全漏洞对我们来说是最重要的，如果不是Twitter上的安全漏洞，那就真的有问题。

Patrick: Right. I mean you have to understand, of course, they’re dealing with a high volume of mail, but I guess on some level they have to have someone at the forefront who can at least properly sort it and read it and make sure that it gets to the right department because, I don’t know, I haven’t seen their contact form, I’m sure they have a nice set of dropdowns or something that allows you to route it in some way, but it’s so important to have someone reading those emails who can make a quick decision and shoot it to the right person.

帕特里克：对。 我的意思是，您当然必须了解他们正在处理大量邮件，但我想在某种程度上他们必须要有一个最前沿的人，他们至少可以正确地对其进行分类和阅读，并确保其正确性。到达正确的部门是因为，我不知道，我还没有看到他们的联系表，我确定他们有一组不错的下拉菜单，或者可以通过某种方式进行路由的方法，但是对于让某人阅读这些电子邮件，他们可以快速做出决定并将其发送给合适的人。

Kevin: So Twitter, Orkut both had bad days. Another disaster story that was prominent in the past couple of weeks, a little site you might have heard of called Facebook; were you guys affected by the Facebook outage?

凯文：所以Twitter和Orkut都过得不好。 在过去的几周中，另一个灾难故事很突出，您可能听说过一个名为Facebook的小站点。 你们受Facebook中断的影响吗？

Patrick: Insomuch as I visited Facebook because of the people who said it was down and then saw it didn’t work, that’s about how much I was affected.

帕特里克(Patrick)：因为有很多人说Facebook掉下来然后看到它不起作用，所以我访问了Facebook，这就是我受到的影响。

Kevin: Hmm, yeah, I found out about the Facebook outage on Twitter.

凯文：嗯，是的，我在Twitter上发现了Facebook中断的情况。

Stephan: Yeah, I didn’t even notice it.

斯蒂芬：是的，我什至没有注意到。

Kevin: So, we are not Facebook people. I guess there are Facebook addicts out there who were pretty freaked out.

凯文：所以，我们不是Facebook人。 我猜那里有一些Facebook成瘾者，他们都吓坏了。

Facebook, I have to congratulate them, they have posted a detailed technical breakdown of what happened; it’s still in kind of abstract terms, they say a system responsible for detecting and correcting corrupt configuration information … yada, yada. We don’t know what configuration information, we don’t know what that system was, but it was just the right amount of detail that, yes, I understood what happened, I went oh, yeah, that could easily happen to any site of the size and scale and complexity of Facebook. I know we have managed to denial of service ourselves once or twice in SitePoint’s history, and it always seems to happen when you build these systems that are self-monitoring, self-correcting, it saves you a whole lot of work but once every couple of years something you didn’t foresee happens and the system effectively, actively destroys itself. It’s like an autoimmune disorder in your web servers is what happens and that’s what happened here. So, my response to this is, wow, sucked to be them that day, it could happen to the best of us. Unlike a security vulnerability that may have been reported and ignored this is something I can forgive.

Facebook，我要向他们表示祝贺，他们已经发布了发生情况的详细技术明细 ； 他们说，它仍然是一种抽象术语，它负责检测和纠正损坏的配置信息的系统……yada，yada。 我们不知道什么配置信息，我们也不知道那个系统是什么，但是只是了解了适当的细节，是的，我了解发生了什么，我走了，是的，很容易在任何站点上发生Facebook的规模，规模和复杂性。 我知道我们在SitePoint的历史中曾经设法拒绝过一次或两次拒绝服务，而且当您构建这些具有自我监控，自我纠正功能的系统时，这种情况似乎总是会发生，这可以为您节省很多工作，但是每对夫妇多年以来，您没有预料到的事情会发生，并且系统会有效地自我毁灭。 这就像发生在您的Web服务器中的自身免疫性疾病一样，这就是这里发生的事情。 所以，我对此的回应是，哇，那天很高兴成为他们，这对我们最好的人来说可能发生。 与可以报告并忽略的安全漏洞不同，我可以原谅。

Patrick: Yeah. And here’s the thing, right, I think it’s good they came out and talked about it, and that’s always a good move. And I think it’s a good move especially because businesses now depend on Facebook, and people make money from Facebook and it’s their livelihood from their fan pages and things. Three hours? I mean I looked at this and I thought, wow, a whole three hours, no way! But I realized for them it’s a lot money that they lost in three hours; they make a lot of money in three hours, some businesses make a lot of money in three hours, but for the average person I just think, I don’t know, putting such a heavy focus on this, making it such a major news story, as a blog publisher I look at a side effect of that as being, wow, we’re really encouraging what is already an ugly sense of entitlement that many web users already have. Facebook can’t go down for a couple hours? I mean what is their up time, 99.999? I mean this is going to happen, sites go down even for the biggest site, so to me I say no big deal and it’s not even something to forgive.

帕特里克：是的。 就是这样，对，我认为他们出来讨论这个问题很好，而且这始终是一个好举动。 我认为这是个好举动，尤其是因为企业现在依赖于Facebook，人们从Facebook上赚钱，而这是他们通过粉丝专页和事物谋生的。 三个小时？ 我的意思是我看着这个，我想，哇，整整三个小时，没办法！ 但是我为他们意识到，他们在三个小时内损失了很多钱。 他们在三个小时内就赚了很多钱，有些企业在三个小时内就赚了很多钱，但对于普通人，我只是想，我不知道，将重点放在此上，使其成为一个重大新闻故事，作为博客发布者，我看到的是它的副作用，哇，我们真的在鼓励许多网络用户已经拥有的丑陋的权利感。 Facebook不能停几个小时？ 我的意思是，他们的正常运行时间是99.999？ 我的意思是，这将会发生，即使是最大的站点，站点也会崩溃，所以对我来说，没什么大不了的，这甚至都不是可以原谅的事情。

Kevin: So do you mean that Patrick is there no site too big that you can’t forgive a few hours downtime every four years like if Google went down for three hours?

凯文：那么，您是说帕特里克(Patrick)没有太大的站点，您无法容忍每四年停机数小时，就像Google停机了三个小时一样吗？

Patrick: Absolutely I’d forgive. For me there’s nothing to forgive because it’s just a part of life. It’s like if — I don’t even have a euphemism for it, but we all make mistakes and things happen; I didn’t see anybody get hurt here, I didn’t see anybody’s credit card numbers be exposed to the world, so to me it’s just not that big a deal, but I realize in the Facebook world it might be.

帕特里克：我绝对会原谅。 对我来说，没有什么可以原谅的，因为它只是生活的一部分。 就像是，我什至没有委婉说法，但我们都会犯错，事情会发生； 我没有看到有人在这里受伤，也没有看到任何人的信用卡号码暴露在世界各地，所以对我来说这没什么大不了的，但是我知道在Facebook世界中可能是这样。

Kevin: I’m trying to figure out who would be worst impacted by something like this. The companies that like you say rely on the Web to make money and maybe decided to be good web citizens, or for whatever reason decided, you know what we don’t need our own usernames and passwords for user accounts, we’ll just use Facebook Connect, people can login with their Facebook accounts and then they can buy stuff from us, great. For three hours they had no customers.

凯文：我正在尝试找出谁会受到像这样最严重的影响。 像您所说的公司依靠网络来赚钱，并可能决定成为良好的网络公民，或者无论出于何种原因，您都知道我们不需要用户帐户的用户名和密码，我们只会使用Facebook Connect，人们可以使用其Facebook帐户登录，然后可以从我们这里购买商品，太好了。 他们三个小时没有顾客了。

Patrick: Right. And Facebook too.

帕特里克：对。 还有Facebook。

Kevin: Yeah, exactly. Facebook was losing as much money as anyone on this, there was no one more motivated to improve this; if you decided to use Facebook Connect for your ecommerce site’s login system then I would say the amount of time that you saved, the amount of customers that you acquired extra because they didn’t have to go through a sign-up process on your site more than makes up for three hours of downtime, that’s me.

凯文：是的，确实如此。 Facebook在这方面的损失与任何人一样多，没有人再有动力去改善它了。 如果您决定将Facebook Connect用于您的电子商务网站的登录系统，那么我想说您节省了多少时间，您额外获得了多少客户，因为他们不必在您的网站上进行注册流程这就是我，足以弥补三个小时的停机时间。

Maybe there is a business so critical out there that you can’t survive three hours of downtime, but then maybe you shouldn’t be relying on a third-party for your login infrastructure.

也许那里的业务如此重要，以至于您无法在三个小时的停机时间中生存下来，但是也许您不应该依赖第三方来建立登录基础结构。

Stephan: If people get this bent out of shape over Facebook being down I’d hate to see how they’d feel about like a freeway being shut down. It’s just one of those things where I’m kind of like, ah, Facebook’s down, whoopdeedoo, you know. Twitter’s down, ah, whatever. Sometimes that happens to me where Twitter doesn’t work on my phone or something, it’s over capacity, and it’s like whoopdeedoo.

史蒂芬(Stephan)：如果人们因Facebook倒闭而陷入困境，我不愿看到他们对高速公路被关闭的感觉。 这只是我喜欢的事情之一，啊，Facebook倒闭了，哎呀，你知道的。 Twitter崩溃了，啊，随便吧。 有时候在我的Twitter不能在我的手机上工作或发生某些事情时，我会发生这种情况，这是超负荷的，就像whoopdeedoo。

Patrick: If my kidneys went down for three hours then we’d have something, but Facebook or Twitter, I don’t know.

帕特里克：如果我的肾脏掉了三个小时，那我们会有东西，但是Facebook或Twitter，我不知道。

Kevin: (Laughs) is there a vital utility, like if electricity goes down for three hours on a really hot day in summer people start worrying about senior citizens and things like that, I don’t think Facebook is anywhere near that level of vitalness yet, but it’s probably not far away that we will soon come to rely on the Internet, on web access to that level.

凯文：(笑)有至关重要的作用，例如，如果在夏天炎热的一天里停电三小时，人们开始担心老年人之类的事情，我认为Facebook的生命力不会达到这个水平但是，不久之后，我们将很快依赖Internet，达到这一级别的Web访问可能并不遥远。

Stephan: And that’s when Zuckerberg’s won. (Laughter) And we should just move on. No, I mean power, yeah, is important; I went two weeks without power, Kevin, after a hurricane, and it sucked, it really did because it was 100 degrees.

斯蒂芬：那是扎克伯格获胜的时候。 (众笑)我们应该继续前进。 不，我的意思是，力量很重要； 凯文，我在飓风过后两周没电了，它很烂，确实是因为100度。

Patrick: I bet it did.

帕特里克：我敢打赌。

Stephan: But it’s not nearly, you know.

史蒂芬：但这不是几乎，您知道。

Patrick: We can laugh about it now.

帕特里克：我们现在可以笑了。

Stephan: Yeah, we can laugh about it now.

斯蒂芬：是的，我们现在可以笑了。

Kevin: Have we got an update on the Twitter customization, Stephan, what worked?

凯文：我们有关于Twitter定制的更新，斯蒂芬，什么有效？

Stephan: Yeah, the links do work; you can change the colors, so I’m assuming everything else does work.

斯蒂芬：是的，链接起作用了。 您可以更改颜色，所以我假设其他所有功能都可以正常工作。

Kevin: So they haven’t switched too much stuff off, that’s good. Disaster story number three, Digg redesign. This story is if you’re a Digg fan this is probably a bit old news for you, but last month Digg launched/relaunched their big redesign that was turning it from a voted news site dominated by the power users into more of a social network where you follow your friends and then the news that they find important surfaces on your radar. Kind of like if you took Twitter and you removed everything except the URLs that people are sharing in Twitter, that’s what the vision for Digg was, that it was a link sharing, a news sharing social service. And so in the lead-up to this launch I was totally on board, I was like, yeah, that completely addresses the problems that are with that site, I’m really excited about this launch, I’m looking forward to it. Have either of you two guys visited Digg since that relaunch?

凯文：所以他们并没有关闭太多东西，这很好。 灾难故事三，Digg重新设计。 这个故事是，如果您是Digg的粉丝，这可能对您来说是个老新闻，但上个月Digg发起/重新启动了他们的大型重新设计，此设计将其从以超级用户为主的投票新闻网站转变为更多的社交网络您在其中跟随您的朋友，然后有消息说他们在您的雷达上发现了重要的表面。 有点像您使用Twitter并删除了人们在Twitter中共享的URL之外的所有内容，这就是Digg的愿景，即链接共享，新闻共享社交服务。 因此，在此次发布之前，我完全参与其中，是的，这完全解决了该站点存在的问题，我对这次发布感到非常兴奋，我很期待它。 自重新启动以来，你们两个人中有一个去过Digg吗？

Patrick: I have.

帕特里克：我有。

Kevin: Uh-huh, what’s your take on it, Patrick? Better?

凯文：恩，你对此有什么看法，帕特里克？ 更好？

Patrick: My take is I maybe haven’t had enough time on it to have a take, but for me it looks nicer, I mean I’ve obviously heard some of the criticisms over Twitter as probably all of us have so, I don’t know, I was never a heavy, heavy Digg user; I used it for a period regularly but I’ve long stopped that before there was any redesign because I just didn’t get into it. For me it just looks nicer and that’s kind of the superficial thing that I guess a non-active user would say, right, it looks nicer.

帕特里克(Patrick)：我的想法是我可能没有足够的时间来尝试，但对我来说看起来更好，我的意思是我显然已经听到了有关Twitter的一些批评，因为我们所有人都有，我不不知道，我从来不是沉重的Digg用户； 我经常使用它一段时间，但是在没有进行任何重新设计之前，我已将其停止很长时间了，因为我只是没有参与其中。 对我来说，它看起来更好，这是肤浅的事情，我猜一个不活跃的用户会说，对，它看起来更好。

Kevin: As someone who used Digg sort of through my feed reader, I follow like the top stories in the Technology section, for example; Digg has gotten way more noisier, and this was kind of the problem I was hoping it was going to address. It was kind of noisy source for me; I always just skimmed those headlines because one in ten would be of interest. I was hoping this new version would bring a little more filtering to it, but if anything it’s gone way the other way, it’s much noisier. Having watched a couple of interviews with Digg’s head guy, Kevin Rose, I understand that some of their anti-spam, their sort of gaming countermeasure features, were taken out and they’re working hard to put them back in to this new version of the site, but that really does seem to have unleashed or opened the flood gates for the spam to return to Digg because the Technology section of Digg for me is now overrun by people arguing about Digg, and spam, and maybe there’s one or two new stories in there somewhere but it’s not pretty, and things like the Digg homepage are overrun with people arguing about whether the new Digg is good or bad; that’s not what you want on your content site. But most damning, this latest stat that I’m reading on ReadWriteWeb at the moment is the traffic on the site is down 26% since the relaunch a few weeks ago. So besides the fact that the quality is down, traffic is also suffering. Is this all bad news? Is Digg on its way out further, faster?

凯文(Kevin)：作为在我的提要阅读器中使用Digg的人，例如，我像在“技术”部分中的热门文章一样关注。 Digg变得越来越嘈杂，这就是我希望它能够解决的问题。 对我而言，这是一种嘈杂的来源； 我总是只浏览那些标题，因为十分之一十分有趣。 我希望这个新版本能给它带来更多的过滤，但是如果它以相反的方式消失了，那会更加嘈杂。 观看了Digg的负责人Kevin Rose的几次采访后，我了解到他们的一些反垃圾邮件，他们的游戏对策功能已被淘汰，并且他们正在努力将其恢复到新版本的该网站，但实际上确实释放了垃圾邮件或打开了垃圾邮件的闸门，让垃圾邮件返回Digg，因为对我而言，Digg的“技术”部分现在已被人们争辩Digg和垃圾邮件所淹没，也许还有一两个新的那里的故事，但不是很漂亮，像Digg主页之类的东西已经满是人们争论新的Digg是好是坏。 那不是您想要的内容网站。 但最可恶的是， 我目前在ReadWriteWeb上阅读的最新统计数据是，自几周前重新启动以来，该网站的访问量下降了26％。 因此，除了质量下降的事实之外，交通也受到了影响。 这都是坏消息吗？ Digg是否正在进一步更快地发展？

Patrick: I don’t know; I think things like this are always overblown a little too far. Maybe they didn’t consult with users as much as they should have, I don’t know, I’m not a hardcore Digg user, but I look at these charts from the ReadWriteWeb article and I wonder on some level what am I looking at, right, because I mean they have percentages of internet visits, UK Internet visits, okay, I get it, they’ve trended down for two months. To me that’s just not that, I don’t know, traffic, it’s awful to have traffic drop by 26%, don’t get me wrong, but if you look at like I pulled up the websites that trend traffic, or try to: Compete, Alexa, Quantcast, and according to compete their traffic was lower in January, in February, in March then it was in August; it went up and it went down, so different services have different trends, and it’s so debatable how accurate these sites even are. And farther down in the article I think this is kind of exhibited because there’s a claim made about Reddit’s traffic, and then Reddit came back and showed their Google Analytic numbers and the numbers were not off by a ton maybe I guess Hitwise thought they were up 15% when they were really up 24%, so that’s not a huge number, but still, I’d never know how much to really trust these numbers.

帕特里克：我不知道。 我认为这样的事情总是过于夸张。 也许他们没有像应该向用户提供的建议那样多，我不知道，我不是Digg的忠实用户，但是我从ReadWriteWeb文章中查看了这些图表，我在某种程度上想知道我在寻找什么没错，因为我的意思是他们的访问量和英国的访问量所占的百分比都很好，我明白了，他们已经下降了两个月。 对我而言，这并不是我所不知道的，访问量下降了26％真是糟糕透顶，不要误会我的意思，但是如果您看到的是我拉动了那些显示访问量趋势的网站，或者尝试：竞争，Alexa和Quantcast，根据竞争，他们的流量在1月，2月，3月和8月有所减少； 上升和下降，因此不同的服务具有不同的趋势，而且这些站点的准确程度也值得商bat。 在文章的更深处，我认为这是一种展示，因为有人声称Reddit的流量，然后Reddit回来并显示其Google Analytic数字，并且数字并没有减少一吨，也许我猜Hitwise认为它们在上升15％的人实际上增长了24％，所以这并不是一个很大的数字，但是我仍然不知道要真正相信这些数字有多少。

Kevin: My thinking on it is that Digg is really trying to reinvent itself here, and if it has to throw away 25% of its user base on day one of that reinvention that’s not too bad, that means you’ve kept 75% of your previous user base, you’ve migrated them over to what is really an entire new concept. The idea here is I complain about the noisiness of the front page of Digg about the Technology section, but the vision for this new version is that if you are a serious user of Digg you are not following those aggregate feeds, you are rather subscribing to a social network and following your own personalized feed of stories, which, if you choose people whose opinions matter to you, is going to be way less noisy by definition. It seems like Digg had seen the writing on the wall that their previous model of operation, their previous user experience, their whole system of working was not sustainable, and that if they held onto that in five years the site was going to go away anyway. So the choice was let it peter off to nothing over five years, let’s just say for the sake of argument, or make a drastic change, we’re going to shed a quarter of our user base on day one, but the people who do come with us that’s a head start on the new version of our business. It seems to me that this could be cast as a success story if you look at it in that light.

凯文：我的想法是，Digg确实在这里进行自我改造，如果在重新改造的第一天就不得不丢掉25％的用户，这还算不错，那意味着您已经保留了75％的您以前的用户群，已经将他们迁移到了真正的全新概念。 这里的想法是我抱怨Digg的“技术”部分的首页很嘈杂，但是此新版本的愿景是，如果您是Digg的忠实用户，则不会关注这些汇总提要，而是订阅了一个社交网络并遵循您自己的个性化故事提要，如果您选择意见对您重要的人，那么从定义上讲，它会减少噪音。 好像Digg在墙上看到的文字是他们以前的操作模型，以前的用户体验，整个工作系统都是不可持续的，并且如果坚持五年，该站点无论如何都会消失。 。 因此，选择是让它在五年内逐渐消失，我们只是为了争辩而说，或者进行重大更改，我们将在第一天就减少四分之一的用户群，但是这样做的人与我们合作，这是我们新业务的领先版本。 在我看来，如果您以此角度来看，这可以说是成功的故事。

Patrick: Yeah, I think that’s not an unreasonable position to take, and I was kind of thinking along those similar lines myself that change is going to scare some people away, it always does, especially with a site like Digg that had that kind of same layout for a long time. So to me I think if they have some kind of new path, new vision, then they’re going to lose people, but maybe those aren’t the people that they really, I don’t know, vision for the future of the site; maybe those aren’t the people they found would help them make a good sustainable business with growth and continued revenue increasing and all those things that you want with a normal business. So maybe they have a better path and as part of that you have to kind of get rid of the old, and not to say I don’t love users because that kind of sounds nasty (laughs).

帕特里克(Patrick)：是的，我认为这不是一个不合理的立场，而且我本人也按照类似的思路思考，变革会吓跑某些人，而且总是如此，尤其是在Digg这样的网站上长时间相同的布局。 所以对我来说，我认为如果他们拥有某种新的道路，新的视野，那么他们将失去人，但也许这些人不是他们真正(我不知道)对未来的愿景的人。现场; 也许他们不是找到的人会帮助他们通过增长和持续的收入增长以及您希望通过正常业务实现的所有目标来帮助他们实现可持续发展的良好业务。 因此，也许他们有一条更好的道路，并且作为其中一部分，您必须摆脱旧的道路，而并不是说我不爱用户，因为这种声音听起来很讨厌(笑)。

Kevin: Well, I wish them luck. I don’t think it’s over yet. I know if I lived and died by Digg, if I was a power Digg user I would be a lot more emotionally invested in this and would probably feel differently, but as a dispassionate bystander I’m encouraged, I hope the numbers having dropped I hope will now start trending upwards again as they address the problems with the launch and hopefully build a more sustainable service for the future.

凯文：好吧，祝他们好运。 我认为还没有结束。 我知道如果我是Digg的死者或死者，如果我是Digg的超级用户，我会在这方面投入更多的精力，并且可能会有不同的感觉，但是作为一个热情洋溢的旁观者，我受到鼓舞，我希望这个数字有所下降。当他们解决产品发布时遇到的问题并希望为未来提供更可持续的服务时，希望现在将再次开始呈上升趋势。

But there a couple of services that will not be building for the future and this is what brings us to our deadpool. The first one on the list this week is Xmarks. Now if I’ve learned something in the past few podcasts is that if a service, a venerable service, like Xmarks goes down it probably means Patrick used it.

但是有一些服务将无法为将来服务，这就是使我们陷入僵局的原因。 本周名单上的第一个是Xmarks。 现在，如果我在过去的几个播客中了解到一些信息，那就是如果一项服务，一项古老的服务(例如Xmarks)出现故障，则可能意味着Patrick使用了它。

Patrick: That’s an interesting conclusion.

帕特里克：这是一个有趣的结论。

Kevin: It’s a lesson I learned from NetNewswire and others before it. Sorry, not Net Newswire, who were they?

凯文：这是我从NetNewswire和其他人那里学到的教训。 抱歉，不是Net Newswire，他们是谁？

Patrick: Bloglines.

帕特里克： Bloglines。

Kevin: Yeah, Bloglines. So, were you an Xmarks user, Patrick?

凯文：是的，博客专栏。 那么，您是Xmarks用户吗，Patrick？

Patrick: I was not. And I don’t even know if I’ve heard of this service before this, but I might have, but no, no, not me.

帕特里克：我不是。 而且，我什至不知道在此之前是否听说过这项服务，但是我可能有，但没有，不是，不是我。

Kevin: Ohhh! So much for that theory. Stephan?

凯文：哦！ 对于该理论来说是如此。 斯蒂芬？

Stephan: No, never was.

史蒂芬：不，从来没有。

Kevin: Really? Not one of the three of us. Xmarks, as I understand it, well, it was originally called Foxmarks, and it was a high profile bookmark syncing plugin for Firefox, or extension I should say, so you installed Foxmarks on your Firefox and it would sync your bookmarks with any other copies of Firefox that you had around on other computers with Foxmarks installed. I never really used this software but my understanding is that the people who loved it loved it because it just worked, it wasn’t fancy, it didn’t get in your way, it wasn’t screaming look how stylish I am and I’ve just done another redesign with more gradient fills, it was one of those things that just worked and people came to rely on as part of their web experience. And, in fact, according to this story some two million users across five million desktops continue to be active users on the service to this day, and they said they’re on track to add just under 3,000 new accounts per day, so the service was still growing. And yet they are shutting down in 90 days because they cannot figure out how to make any money. They’ve got two million people and every single one of them is costing a little money to keep the servers running. What’s wrong here? Are you necessarily doing something wrong if you’ve built a service that has two million users and you can’t figure out how to make money?

凯文：真的吗？ 我们三个都不是之一。 据我了解，Xmarks最初称为Foxmarks，它是Firefox的高配置书签同步插件，或者我应该说的扩展名，因此您在Firefox上安装了Foxmarks，它将使您的书签与任何其他副本同步在装有Foxmarks的其他计算机上使用的Firefox的数量。 我从未真正使用过该软件，但我的理解是，爱它的人喜欢它，因为它只是起作用，它并不花哨，它不会妨碍您，它并没有尖叫我和我多么时尚。刚刚进行了另一次具有更多渐变填充的重新设计，这是刚刚起作用的事情之一，人们开始依赖它作为Web体验的一部分。 而且，事实上，根据这个故事，迄今为止，在500万台式机中，约有200万用户一直是该服务的活跃用户，他们表示，他们有望每天增加近3,000个新帐户，因此该服务还在增长。 然而，由于无法确定如何赚钱，他们将在90天之内关闭 。 他们有200万人，而且每个人都要花一点钱才能保持服务器运行。 怎么了 如果您构建的服务拥有200万用户，却又不知道该如何赚钱，您是否一定在做错事？

Stephan: If you’re shutting down, obviously.

斯蒂芬：显然，如果您要关机。

Patrick: Reading this message two thoughts came across my mind. First is that it was interesting to look at kind of the work that goes into kind of a startup in general, and finding something and getting something to try to make money that a lot of people enjoy, because there’s a lot of free services out there, there’s a lot of free websites and things that either make no money or make very little money from ads that are struggling with this very same problem, so it was an interesting read. The second part of that is I just thought of it talking with you guys here with all this talk about Twitter is I think I said this before but we don’t want this to happen to Twitter. So, this is kind of the exact thing is people are concerned about how they’ll make money, if they won’t make money, and I don’t like this new method, I don’t like this little ad up here, blah, blah, blah, well they need to make some money, because they need to make something otherwise they will go away. And with these companies like Twitter that were built very strongly on their API and used through other services where you never have to visit twitter.com or pay Twitter any money, there needs to be something, and Xmarks is not the same kind of service but again you have the synchronization, most people don’t visit their website they just run it through their desktop, through their browser; they never give Xmarks a second thought really other than upgrading or downloading. So, to me there’s always a challenge with building that type of service and, like I said, maybe this is a reminder hopefully to some users who like the service that these companies need to make some money.

帕特里克(Patrick)：阅读此消息时，我想到了两个想法。 首先，很有趣的是，一般来看初创公司所从事的工作，并找到一些东西并设法赚钱，这是很多人都喜欢的，因为那里有很多免费服务，有很多免费的网站和东西，它们都在挣扎着解决同样的问题，这些广告要么赚钱，要么赚很少钱，所以这很有趣。 第二部分是我只是想在这里与大家谈论Twitter的所有话题，我想我之前曾说过这一点，但我们不希望Twitter发生这种情况。 So, this is kind of the exact thing is people are concerned about how they'll make money, if they won't make money, and I don't like this new method, I don't like this little ad up here, blah, blah, blah, well they need to make some money, because they need to make something otherwise they will go away. And with these companies like Twitter that were built very strongly on their API and used through other services where you never have to visit twitter.com or pay Twitter any money, there needs to be something, and Xmarks is not the same kind of service but again you have the synchronization, most people don't visit their website they just run it through their desktop, through their browser; they never give Xmarks a second thought really other than upgrading or downloading. So, to me there's always a challenge with building that type of service and, like I said, maybe this is a reminder hopefully to some users who like the service that these companies need to make some money.

Kevin: Hmm, yeah. I’ve read a few dedicated users of Xmarks saying, come on, I would pay for this service, would anyone else? And then a few hours go past and then I see someone else say, yeah, I would pay for this service. It’s probably not enough to pay the bills, let’s be generous and say they could convert 1% of their two million users into paying ten bucks a year, that’s not going to support the costs for that entire user base I don’t think, let alone make a successful business that people are going to want to spend their time and energy continuing to invest in.

凯文：嗯，是的。 I've read a few dedicated users of Xmarks saying, come on, I would pay for this service, would anyone else? And then a few hours go past and then I see someone else say, yeah, I would pay for this service. It's probably not enough to pay the bills, let's be generous and say they could convert 1% of their two million users into paying ten bucks a year, that's not going to support the costs for that entire user base I don't think, let alone make a successful business that people are going to want to spend their time and energy continuing to invest in.

Stephan: Makes me start worrying about delicious.com and sites like that.

Stephan: Makes me start worrying about delicious.com and sites like that.

Kevin: Yeah. I guess the idea is a lot of these — there was a lot of this build any web service you can think of if it gets a critical mass of users, and I think by any argument two million is a critical mass of users, even if you can’t make money from them directly you will be able to leverage the data that you collect from them in some way that you can make money out of them. So, but I guess a large store of anonymous bookmark information just isn’t as valuable as someone might have guessed, which does spell trouble for services like Delicious.

凯文：是的。 I guess the idea is a lot of these — there was a lot of this build any web service you can think of if it gets a critical mass of users, and I think by any argument two million is a critical mass of users, even if you can't make money from them directly you will be able to leverage the data that you collect from them in some way that you can make money out of them. So, but I guess a large store of anonymous bookmark information just isn't as valuable as someone might have guessed, which does spell trouble for services like Delicious.

Patrick: And also another service to think about is like Bit.ly because that’s what a lot of people have said about Bit.ly and about URL shorteners is there’s some value in the data, but more and more people have this data, right, people share links on Facebook who, guess what, Facebook has that data. People share links on Twitter, well, guess what, Twitter has that data. Pretty much all these sites that have links shared with them they all have this bookmarking data that pulls from the social graph and so on and so forth, and how many people are going to be able to sell that data if everyone has it.

Patrick: And also another service to think about is like Bit.ly because that's what a lot of people have said about Bit.ly and about URL shorteners is there's some value in the data, but more and more people have this data, right, people share links on Facebook who, guess what, Facebook has that data. People share links on Twitter, well, guess what, Twitter has that data. Pretty much all these sites that have links shared with them they all have this bookmarking data that pulls from the social graph and so on and so forth, and how many people are going to be able to sell that data if everyone has it.

Kevin: I think the number of free services in a space is also a problem, you know, if all the bookmarking services all at once decided on a price, which would of course be collusion and illegal.

Kevin: I think the number of free services in a space is also a problem, you know, if all the bookmarking services all at once decided on a price, which would of course be collusion and illegal.

Patrick: Not that we’re suggesting that.

Patrick: Not that we're suggesting that.

Kevin: But if they could somehow do that then maybe suddenly all these businesses could become profitable, but if any one of them goes, you know, we can’t pay our bills anymore, we need to start charging you, that’s going to move people to another service. Or if they decide every tenth bookmark you follow we’re going to have to show you an ad before we take you to the site, again, people are going to move off the service. So there’s something about this dynamic on the Web that no service can be completely unique, you can always have a copycat come out and if they all set the expectation that these are free services then no one of them can suddenly monetize in an obvious way.

Kevin: But if they could somehow do that then maybe suddenly all these businesses could become profitable, but if any one of them goes, you know, we can't pay our bills anymore, we need to start charging you, that's going to move people to another service. Or if they decide every tenth bookmark you follow we're going to have to show you an ad before we take you to the site, again, people are going to move off the service. So there's something about this dynamic on the Web that no service can be completely unique, you can always have a copycat come out and if they all set the expectation that these are free services then no one of them can suddenly monetize in an obvious way.

Stephan: Well, remember not too long ago we were talking about Magnolia and how they suffered that major data loss, and then they were taken offline, and now they’ve kind of come back as another social bookmarking site, Gnolia, I think is what it’s called, and it’s kind of just stayed off the radar. So, I mean it’s hard space to get into and it’s a hard space to stay alive in I think.

Stephan: Well, remember not too long ago we were talking about Magnolia and how they suffered that major data loss, and then they were taken offline, and now they've kind of come back as another social bookmarking site, Gnolia , I think is what it's called, and it's kind of just stayed off the radar. So, I mean it's hard space to get into and it's a hard space to stay alive in I think.

So, I mean it makes me worry about services that I use that are free that have no discernable business model whatsoever such as Delicious or Xmarks now, I mean it makes me wonder, like is my data really secure and should I come up with an offline way of holding it.

So, I mean it makes me worry about services that I use that are free that have no discernable business model whatsoever such as Delicious or Xmarks now, I mean it makes me wonder, like is my data really secure and should I come up with an offline way of holding it.

Patrick: An interesting point, I just pulled up Gnolia, gnolia.com, and it is offline and in read-only mode in a week on September 29th, which is the day we’re recording, so that’s gone as well.

Patrick: An interesting point, I just pulled up Gnolia, gnolia.com , and it is offline and in read-only mode in a week on September 29th, which is the day we're recording, so that's gone as well.

Kevin: Gee.

Kevin: Gee.

Stephan: That didn’t last long. Wow. Well, nevermind then.

Stephan: That didn't last long. 哇。 Well, nevermind then.

Kevin: Deadpool number two, and this is a big name, Microsoft is shutting down its Live Blogs platform and moving everyone to, drumroll please, wordpress.com. Brad sent this story in for us to discuss in his absence, and this is huge news for me.

Kevin: Deadpool number two, and this is a big name, Microsoft is shutting down its Live Blogs platform and moving everyone to, drumroll please, wordpress.com. Brad sent this story in for us to discuss in his absence, and this is huge news for me.

Stephan: Yeah, it’s a big deal.

Stephan: Yeah, it's a big deal.

Patrick: When you said “We have another one for the deadpool, Microsoft,” I guarantee you like half of our listeners went oh, man, it’s finally happened, I’ve been calling this forever! (Laughter)

Patrick: When you said “We have another one for the deadpool, Microsoft,” I guarantee you like half of our listeners went oh, man, it's finally happened, I've been calling this forever! (笑声)

Kevin: Oh, man, one thousand hearts stop at once. Yes. Sorry about that for anyone who spilled their coffee, sorry about that.

Kevin: Oh, man, one thousand hearts stop at once. 是。 Sorry about that for anyone who spilled their coffee, sorry about that.

Patrick: But this is big news for WordPres.

Patrick: But this is big news for WordPres.

Kevin: Yeah, so, and they’re not being too — Microsoft is not being too proud about it either, they’re calling it an upgrade for their users as well, “Upgrade your blog to wordpress.com.” Users have six months to migrate off. There’s an automated upgrade process that takes your blog hosted at live.com and moves it over the wordpress.com, and, it’s been a while since I’ve seen Microsoft admit defeat on something like this, at least on the Web. You know Microsoft is well known for abortive phone antics and things like that, but big win for WordPress. Microsoft ate its own dog food on this front as well, all of the Microsoft staff blogs, the IE Blog, all of these things were all hosted on these Live Blogs platform, and they never looked too great I have to say, you definitely knew when you were on a Microsoft hosted blog is my feeling.

Kevin: Yeah, so, and they're not being too — Microsoft is not being too proud about it either, they're calling it an upgrade for their users as well, “Upgrade your blog to wordpress.com.” Users have six months to migrate off. There's an automated upgrade process that takes your blog hosted at live.com and moves it over the wordpress.com, and, it's been a while since I've seen Microsoft admit defeat on something like this, at least on the Web. You know Microsoft is well known for abortive phone antics and things like that, but big win for WordPress. Microsoft ate its own dog food on this front as well, all of the Microsoft staff blogs, the IE Blog, all of these things were all hosted on these Live Blogs platform, and they never looked too great I have to say, you definitely knew when you were on a Microsoft hosted blog is my feeling.

Stephan: And they’ve been around for a long time. Some of those blogs have been around six, seven years now, and I mean I can remember reading them back when I was in high school, that’s almost 10 years ago, wow, that’s scary. And so I mean it’s kind of surprising that they took them off; I guess I never saw any really big feature changes over those 10 years, and so it’s surprising they lasted this long, I guess. But I guess they never had an alternative and I’m happy for WordPress, it’s good for them, I’m glad.

Stephan: And they've been around for a long time. Some of those blogs have been around six, seven years now, and I mean I can remember reading them back when I was in high school, that's almost 10 years ago, wow, that's scary. And so I mean it's kind of surprising that they took them off; I guess I never saw any really big feature changes over those 10 years, and so it's surprising they lasted this long, I guess. But I guess they never had an alternative and I'm happy for WordPress, it's good for them, I'm glad.

Patrick: I’m curious what Microsoft gets out of this because the post at ReadWriteWeb doesn’t really talk much about it, but on the Microsoft Windows Team Blog it talks about how Messenger Connect is one of the three big things where they can connect a wordpress.com blog to Windows Live Messenger, so I wonder if that’s really a big value pull for Microsoft.

Patrick: I'm curious what Microsoft gets out of this because the post at ReadWriteWeb doesn't really talk much about it, but on the Microsoft Windows Team Blog it talks about how Messenger Connect is one of the three big things where they can connect a wordpress.com blog to Windows Live Messenger, so I wonder if that's really a big value pull for Microsoft.

Kevin: Reading the ReadWriteWeb story they say that Microsoft seems to be moving to a strategy of partnerships for live.com, so live.com will become sort of a front-end, an entry point for these partnerships. So that tells me that Microsoft is getting money from WordPress in this deal, that WordPress is getting the users but Microsoft is getting some sort of referral fee so that every time someone goes to live.com and says I want a live.com blog and Microsoft goes here’s your wordpress.com blog, cha-ching for Microsoft; they’ve got a similar partnership with LinkedIn through live.com, the story says, which would explain I guess why they’re pitching this as an upgrade so that as many users as possible can get over there and Microsoft can get as much money out of this deal as they can. Supposedly if you’ve got something against wordpress.com, though, you can also export your data and use it how you see fit on some other blogging platform.

Kevin: Reading the ReadWriteWeb story they say that Microsoft seems to be moving to a strategy of partnerships for live.com, so live.com will become sort of a front-end, an entry point for these partnerships. So that tells me that Microsoft is getting money from WordPress in this deal, that WordPress is getting the users but Microsoft is getting some sort of referral fee so that every time someone goes to live.com and says I want a live.com blog and Microsoft goes here's your wordpress.com blog, cha-ching for Microsoft; they've got a similar partnership with LinkedIn through live.com, the story says, which would explain I guess why they're pitching this as an upgrade so that as many users as possible can get over there and Microsoft can get as much money out of this deal as they can. Supposedly if you've got something against wordpress.com, though, you can also export your data and use it how you see fit on some other blogging platform.

So, the last story I have today, and you can see — you can see the trend, it’s all bad news here. And this is a bit of doom and gloom. Whereas with the Digg story I kind of like to see the ray of light, the bright side, the silver lining; this one I kind of agree with things are getting out of hand. And this is a story from pingdom.com which is the site that you might remember it as the service that Twitter was using for a while to monitor their up time and they publish their live Pingdom stats; they may in fact still do that. But the Pingdom blog is complaining that there are too many redirects on the Web. More and more it seems like you can’t follow a link without being funneled through five or six redirects while each site in that chain grabs its analytics, registers the fact that you clicked on a link, files it away for some stats graph somewhere, maybe even gives someone their affiliate money or whatever it is, and then finally passes you along to the target site. This is slowing down the Web because every hop along that step takes another second while it does an DNS lookup, and your browser goes, uh, how about you, can you tell me what’s supposed to be on this page? Oh, no, you’re going to redirect me somewhere else. Have you guys noticed this?

So, the last story I have today, and you can see — you can see the trend, it's all bad news here. And this is a bit of doom and gloom. Whereas with the Digg story I kind of like to see the ray of light, the bright side, the silver lining; this one I kind of agree with things are getting out of hand. And this is a story from pingdom.com which is the site that you might remember it as the service that Twitter was using for a while to monitor their up time and they publish their live Pingdom stats; they may in fact still do that. But the Pingdom blog is complaining that there are too many redirects on the Web. More and more it seems like you can't follow a link without being funneled through five or six redirects while each site in that chain grabs its analytics, registers the fact that you clicked on a link, files it away for some stats graph somewhere, maybe even gives someone their affiliate money or whatever it is, and then finally passes you along to the target site. This is slowing down the Web because every hop along that step takes another second while it does an DNS lookup, and your browser goes, uh, how about you, can you tell me what's supposed to be on this page? Oh, no, you're going to redirect me somewhere else. Have you guys noticed this?

Stephan: Oh, yeah, yeah. It’s prevalent.

Stephan: Oh, yeah, yeah. It's prevalent.

Patrick: I’ve noticed the use of shortners, but I have to ask you have you actually noticed the Web slowing down. Technically it’s true, right, but in reality have you visited a Bit.ly link or some certain link and said oh, man, I got stuck here at Bit.ly; how often does that happen?

Patrick: I've noticed the use of shortners, but I have to ask you have you actually noticed the Web slowing down. Technically it's true, right, but in reality have you visited a Bit.ly link or some certain link and said oh, man, I got stuck here at Bit.ly; how often does that happen?

Kevin: Well, I don’t get stuck but I definitely notice whereas before I could type a URL or I could click a link and it would take me straight to the page, now I click the link and I see the digital static of my status bar flicking through five or six different URLs as the browser goes you, no, you, no, you, no, oh, here’s the page. I do notice it. I think at the same time browsers are getting faster and computers are getting faster so it may be balancing out, but still. Part of it is the shortners and the stats trackers and things like that, and that kind of makes me upset; it’s enough that when I’m collecting links for this podcast often the link I’ll copy, I’ll paste it into the show notes, and I go, oh, that’s a Bit.ly link, let me follow that. Or the service like Delicious that I use followed the Bit.ly link but it followed it to another intermediate link and I end up getting that. And I can’t even tell which site was the source of the story; I have to open the site in my browser then copy the definitive URL and bring it back, it’s annoying.

Kevin: Well, I don't get stuck but I definitely notice whereas before I could type a URL or I could click a link and it would take me straight to the page, now I click the link and I see the digital static of my status bar flicking through five or six different URLs as the browser goes you, no, you, no, you, no, oh, here's the page. I do notice it. I think at the same time browsers are getting faster and computers are getting faster so it may be balancing out, but still. Part of it is the shortners and the stats trackers and things like that, and that kind of makes me upset; it's enough that when I'm collecting links for this podcast often the link I'll copy, I'll paste it into the show notes, and I go, oh, that's a Bit.ly link, let me follow that. Or the service like Delicious that I use followed the Bit.ly link but it followed it to another intermediate link and I end up getting that. And I can't even tell which site was the source of the story; I have to open the site in my browser then copy the definitive URL and bring it back, it's annoying.

But at the same time there’s other things that are contributing to the number of redirects, and a lot of it has to do with Web’s history. I know at SitePoint we just recently finished the migration of our blogs onto a new server infrastructure, you may have noticed that the URLs have changed from www.sitepoint.com to www.sitepoint.com, and in order to keep all the old URLs and all the old links working we had to put redirects in place, and there were also redirects in place for convenient URLs. So, one URL that we mention every single week here is sitepoint.com/podcast, which if you go to that it redirects you. Initially when we set it up we realized it was redirecting you through four or five hops as it went through the convenience URL to the old blog URL to the new blog URL and then WordPress prettied up the link. So when we noticed that we made sure to go in there and put some shortcuts in so that we could direct you straight to the place if we could to speed things up. But, yeah, just as the Web gets more and more weighted down by its history and it remains important to keep all the links working, more and more I’d be interested in seeing a pie chart of the number of URLs out there that are actually final URLs versus the numbers that will take you to redirects. I wouldn’t be surprised if three quarters of the URLs in circulation are actually redirect URLs.

But at the same time there's other things that are contributing to the number of redirects, and a lot of it has to do with Web's history. I know at SitePoint we just recently finished the migration of our blogs onto a new server infrastructure, you may have noticed that the URLs have changed from www.sitepoint.com to www.sitepoint.com, and in order to keep all the old URLs and all the old links working we had to put redirects in place, and there were also redirects in place for convenient URLs. So, one URL that we mention every single week here is sitepoint.com/podcast, which if you go to that it redirects you. Initially when we set it up we realized it was redirecting you through four or five hops as it went through the convenience URL to the old blog URL to the new blog URL and then WordPress prettied up the link. So when we noticed that we made sure to go in there and put some shortcuts in so that we could direct you straight to the place if we could to speed things up. But, yeah, just as the Web gets more and more weighted down by its history and it remains important to keep all the links working, more and more I'd be interested in seeing a pie chart of the number of URLs out there that are actually final URLs versus the numbers that will take you to redirects. I wouldn't be surprised if three quarters of the URLs in circulation are actually redirect URLs.

Patrick: I guess the question is, what’s circulation? Is it Twitter; is it the Web as a whole? I mean because when I go to blogs, for example, or any publication, generally I don’t see Bit.ly links in use, generally. On Twitter, yes, everywhere you see Bit.ly or t.co or Goog dot … whatever Google’s one is. And that’s where it’s prevalent, not so much in any kind of the public locations we’ve had, not on forums, not on blogs, not on web publications in general, but on these social networking services.

Patrick: I guess the question is, what's circulation? Is it Twitter; is it the Web as a whole? I mean because when I go to blogs, for example, or any publication, generally I don't see Bit.ly links in use, generally. On Twitter, yes, everywhere you see Bit.ly or t.co or Goog dot … whatever Google's one is. And that's where it's prevalent, not so much in any kind of the public locations we've had, not on forums, not on blogs, not on web publications in general, but on these social networking services.

Stephan: Well, I’m starting to see it more on blogs, I’m starting to see it more on forums and stuff where people are using their own URL shortners to redirect some page and they’re tracking their link. So I’m starting to see it more that way, but yeah, you’re right, it’s definitely more in the social scene and I guess McAfee is introducing their own safe URL shortner, it’s kind of like at what point do we just stop having URL shortners and someone just link to the stupid thing, you know. And the DNS thing is interesting, Kevin, that you brought that up because people forget I think over time what DNS stuff they have on their site working, and redirects, 301 redirects, or whatever redirects you’re using I have a bunch that I probably should go in and clean out but I never have, so who knows how many people are actually using those links that I’m redirecting and how they’re being used now and what kind of traffic it’s creating. So, it’s one of those things, it’s kind of like house cleaning, it just needs to happen.

Stephan: Well, I'm starting to see it more on blogs, I'm starting to see it more on forums and stuff where people are using their own URL shortners to redirect some page and they're tracking their link. So I'm starting to see it more that way, but yeah, you're right, it's definitely more in the social scene and I guess McAfee is introducing their own safe URL shortner, it's kind of like at what point do we just stop having URL shortners and someone just link to the stupid thing, you know. And the DNS thing is interesting, Kevin, that you brought that up because people forget I think over time what DNS stuff they have on their site working, and redirects, 301 redirects, or whatever redirects you're using I have a bunch that I probably should go in and clean out but I never have, so who knows how many people are actually using those links that I'm redirecting and how they're being used now and what kind of traffic it's creating. So, it's one of those things, it's kind of like house cleaning, it just needs to happen.

Kevin: Yeah. It’s lucky at the moment that Twitter is kind of the definitive service. If there were two services like Twitter out there, each with their own shortening, this could get really messy because a link that was first shared on Twitter and then shared on the competing service would be shortened by Twitter, re-shortened by the competing service, and then if someone then re-shared that link on Twitter again these services could be shortening and re-shortening each other pretty badly; it could be like an old-style mail loop if we weren’t careful. The story on Pingdom points out that there’s already some redirect overhead that’s kind of invisible, like you mention, Patrick, that a lot of the links that you see out there on the Web do seem to be direct links, but in some cases your browser is lying to you because although the link itself is a direct link there is JavaScript in play that is hijacking your click and directing it through a redirect anyway, and so they’re pointing out that every time you click on a search result in Google or Bing there’s an intermediate step via Google’s servers or Bing’s before you’re redirected to the real target site, even though the links themselves appear to be direct they’re redirecting you through a JavaScript method. Same thing with links in FeedBurner RSS feeds, same thing with outgoing links from Facebook; outgoing links is a big one, because of he architecture of the Web by default you don’t get to know when someone leaves your site, all you see is their last request and when they click a link to another site you don’t see that on your servers. That’s just the way the Web was designed and it’s what made the Web successful initially when bandwidth was at a premium, when browsers couldn’t be all that complex. These days though that’s the kind of stats you really want to know, you want to know where people left your site, you want to know what link they followed to leave your site, and in order to get that information the best way to do it is to make all the outgoing links on your site redirect through your servers to say, bye, leaving now via this link, and Facebook is definitely doing that and a lot of the social networks do.

凯文：是的。 It's lucky at the moment that Twitter is kind of the definitive service. If there were two services like Twitter out there, each with their own shortening, this could get really messy because a link that was first shared on Twitter and then shared on the competing service would be shortened by Twitter, re-shortened by the competing service, and then if someone then re-shared that link on Twitter again these services could be shortening and re-shortening each other pretty badly; it could be like an old-style mail loop if we weren't careful. The story on Pingdom points out that there's already some redirect overhead that's kind of invisible, like you mention, Patrick, that a lot of the links that you see out there on the Web do seem to be direct links, but in some cases your browser is lying to you because although the link itself is a direct link there is JavaScript in play that is hijacking your click and directing it through a redirect anyway, and so they're pointing out that every time you click on a search result in Google or Bing there's an intermediate step via Google's servers or Bing's before you're redirected to the real target site, even though the links themselves appear to be direct they're redirecting you through a JavaScript method. Same thing with links in FeedBurner RSS feeds, same thing with outgoing links from Facebook; outgoing links is a big one, because of he architecture of the Web by default you don't get to know when someone leaves your site, all you see is their last request and when they click a link to another site you don't see that on your servers. That's just the way the Web was designed and it's what made the Web successful initially when bandwidth was at a premium, when browsers couldn't be all that complex. These days though that's the kind of stats you really want to know, you want to know where people left your site, you want to know what link they followed to leave your site, and in order to get that information the best way to do it is to make all the outgoing links on your site redirect through your servers to say, bye, leaving now via this link, and Facebook is definitely doing that and a lot of the social networks do.

Patrick: Yeah, and I think I am concerned about this a little bit on the level of the main point which is that the links don’t die, I go to search for something one day and it’s a Twitter message and then it’s Bit.ly and Bit.ly is dead so now it doesn’t work anymore and that’s the bad thing, but to me it’s a publisher thing really more than anything else; publishers will publish in a manner that makes sense, and if this is a real concern for you well then, you know, publish in your space, your blog, your website that you own, publish full links, don’t use any short links, don’t use your own short links, just offer the straight links that link to everything directly and be a part of the ecosystem that you want to play with. There are good reasons to have redirects for websites for the publishers especially, now is it user friendly, there’s an argument to make but at the end of the day I don’t see people not using a service because it uses a shortener or a link redirect as long as it’s done in kind of a normal, ethical manner, I’m not talking about cookie stuffing or anything crazy, I’m talking about just standard redirection, no frame bar and so on. And I don’t think that’s a service deciding factor, and until it is, and I don’t want it to become one, then I don’t really see a big reason for the average publisher to change.

Patrick: Yeah, and I think I am concerned about this a little bit on the level of the main point which is that the links don't die, I go to search for something one day and it's a Twitter message and then it's Bit.ly and Bit.ly is dead so now it doesn't work anymore and that's the bad thing, but to me it's a publisher thing really more than anything else; publishers will publish in a manner that makes sense, and if this is a real concern for you well then, you know, publish in your space, your blog, your website that you own, publish full links, don't use any short links, don't use your own short links, just offer the straight links that link to everything directly and be a part of the ecosystem that you want to play with. There are good reasons to have redirects for websites for the publishers especially, now is it user friendly, there's an argument to make but at the end of the day I don't see people not using a service because it uses a shortener or a link redirect as long as it's done in kind of a normal, ethical manner, I'm not talking about cookie stuffing or anything crazy, I'm talking about just standard redirection, no frame bar and so on. And I don't think that's a service deciding factor, and until it is, and I don't want it to become one, then I don't really see a big reason for the average publisher to change.

Kevin: I think that puts all our stories behind us and I feel cleansed I have to say, we got it out there, we talked about it, everything that’s wrong with the Web is now out in the open, I can go back to my day, I’m feeling better about things. But before we do let’s go through our host spotlights, let’s take the opportunity to cast a little light on things. Patrick, what have you got?

Kevin: I think that puts all our stories behind us and I feel cleansed I have to say, we got it out there, we talked about it, everything that's wrong with the Web is now out in the open, I can go back to my day, I'm feeling better about things. But before we do let's go through our host spotlights, let's take the opportunity to cast a little light on things. Patrick, what have you got?

Patrick: I have a story from Plagiarism Today, authored by my friend Jonathan Dailey; it’s the Lara J. Cotton/TVX Case, The Full Story. It’s kind of an interesting read and an interesting read for people who post photos online or post content online in general. Basically what happened is in 2007 a photographer noticed or was notified that a photo of her as a teenager was on the cover of a pornographic movie. It had been taken off the Internet and then plastered on this movie, and she’s in the UK, this studio that reproduced this film was in Texas, so obviously you can see how that would add to the legal circumstances of the matter, but through an internet campaign she got in touch with an attorney in Texas and that led to a lawsuit, and she did prevail, and she was awarded about $130,000.00, not that they decided to collect any of that, but she did win and it is hailed as a victory and it’s sort of an interesting read because there’s all the backstory that went on behind the scenes, what the person said to her which was really very rude and disrespectful and in hindsight hilarious, but it’s just a nice detailed read.

Patrick: I have a story from Plagiarism Today, authored by my friend Jonathan Dailey; it's the Lara J. Cotton/TVX Case, The Full Story . It's kind of an interesting read and an interesting read for people who post photos online or post content online in general. Basically what happened is in 2007 a photographer noticed or was notified that a photo of her as a teenager was on the cover of a pornographic movie. It had been taken off the Internet and then plastered on this movie, and she's in the UK, this studio that reproduced this film was in Texas, so obviously you can see how that would add to the legal circumstances of the matter, but through an internet campaign she got in touch with an attorney in Texas and that led to a lawsuit, and she did prevail, and she was awarded about $130,000.00, not that they decided to collect any of that, but she did win and it is hailed as a victory and it's sort of an interesting read because there's all the backstory that went on behind the scenes, what the person said to her which was really very rude and disrespectful and in hindsight hilarious, but it's just a nice detailed read.

Kevin: Let’s see, my spotlight this week is a blog post by Merlin Mann, and in his typical irreverent style he is calling out through parody a trend that he has spotted which is these distraction free text editors. They’re becoming especially popular and prevalent on the iPad at the moment, but even before that there was a trend for them on the Mac. If you’ve heard of software like WriteRoom or things of that nature, I think there’s Zen Text Editor was another one if memory serves, but these are text editors that in theory if you want to get some serious writing done you fire up this software, it clears your screen, your menu bar goes away, your taskbar goes away, your Twitter notifications are hidden behind it, it floats on top of everything and fills your screen from edge to edge, and all you see is the text you’re working on. And WriteRoom I think was the initial one, the definitive one; it made your screen black by default with a really plain font and forced you to focus on the text and nothing but the text. And I think if I’m remembering the name right the Zen one came out just earlier this year and tried to put a little more style into it, so it was still a full screen experience but it would have like sort of a soothing tree in the margin and some music that was sort of faint wind chimes playing, and it was trying to give you a relaxing environment to write in as well. The latest one that I saw was for the iPad as I say and was trying to use some typography tricks and it was citing some famous designers who were saying that really if you want to focus on your writing all you need is to see the last three lines of text that you wrote, and that will prevent you from critiquing your own work above and below what you’re actually writing and succumbing to the distractions of copy and paste and things like that. Well, Merlin Mann had enough when he saw that post and has written a parody called, Introducing “?—” which is the name of his supposed app, it’s a letter U with a bar above it followed by a long M dash. “A distraction free writing environment.” And I’ll just quote, it’s written in the form of a press release and I’ll just quote briefly from it, “Whether you review writing apps, blog about writing apps, or simply author angry forum posts about the limited functionality and lack of distraction free environment-ness plaguing most writing apps, we think any serious writer will benefit from our gorgeous and minimalistic design choices. While some so-called environments that are less free of distraction may display one, three, or even more lines of text all at the same time, we understand that if you could only achieve the theoretical removal of all theoretical distractions you would finally be able to write something. And we want ?— to help you almost do that.” And the screenshots he shows that this particular text editor narrows your focus even further by just showing you the bottom half of whichever letter you typed last. And he goes on and on with many features like choose which species of autumnal tree to display in your distraction free margin, play non-distracting circus music every time you manage to finish a word. Yep. Stay in nonstop touch with distraction free community by showing distraction free realtime Facebook and Twitter updates from your fellow users, and so on. It’s great, hilarious fun. His big point here which he has made before in several essays, and which I completely agree with, is if you need software to force you to focus on the job at hand maybe you aren’t passionate about the job at hand and maybe that’s your problem; maybe you should looking to work at something you actually care about. It’s kind of harsh when you put it that way; I like his funny take on it though. Stephan, what have you got?

Kevin: Let's see, my spotlight this week is a blog post by Merlin Mann , and in his typical irreverent style he is calling out through parody a trend that he has spotted which is these distraction free text editors. They're becoming especially popular and prevalent on the iPad at the moment, but even before that there was a trend for them on the Mac. If you've heard of software like WriteRoom or things of that nature, I think there's Zen Text Editor was another one if memory serves, but these are text editors that in theory if you want to get some serious writing done you fire up this software, it clears your screen, your menu bar goes away, your taskbar goes away, your Twitter notifications are hidden behind it, it floats on top of everything and fills your screen from edge to edge, and all you see is the text you're working on. And WriteRoom I think was the initial one, the definitive one; it made your screen black by default with a really plain font and forced you to focus on the text and nothing but the text. And I think if I'm remembering the name right the Zen one came out just earlier this year and tried to put a little more style into it, so it was still a full screen experience but it would have like sort of a soothing tree in the margin and some music that was sort of faint wind chimes playing, and it was trying to give you a relaxing environment to write in as well. The latest one that I saw was for the iPad as I say and was trying to use some typography tricks and it was citing some famous designers who were saying that really if you want to focus on your writing all you need is to see the last three lines of text that you wrote, and that will prevent you from critiquing your own work above and below what you're actually writing and succumbing to the distractions of copy and paste and things like that. Well, Merlin Mann had enough when he saw that post and has written a parody called, Introducing “?—” which is the name of his supposed app, it's a letter U with a bar above it followed by a long M dash. “A distraction free writing environment.” And I'll just quote, it's written in the form of a press release and I'll just quote briefly from it, “Whether you review writing apps, blog about writing apps, or simply author angry forum posts about the limited functionality and lack of distraction free environment-ness plaguing most writing apps, we think any serious writer will benefit from our gorgeous and minimalistic design choices. While some so-called environments that are less free of distraction may display one, three, or even more lines of text all at the same time, we understand that if you could only achieve the theoretical removal of all theoretical distractions you would finally be able to write something. And we want ?— to help you almost do that.” And the screenshots he shows that this particular text editor narrows your focus even further by just showing you the bottom half of whichever letter you typed last. And he goes on and on with many features like choose which species of autumnal tree to display in your distraction free margin, play non-distracting circus music every time you manage to finish a word. 是的 Stay in nonstop touch with distraction free community by showing distraction free realtime Facebook and Twitter updates from your fellow users, and so on. It's great, hilarious fun. His big point here which he has made before in several essays, and which I completely agree with, is if you need software to force you to focus on the job at hand maybe you aren't passionate about the job at hand and maybe that's your problem; maybe you should looking to work at something you actually care about. It's kind of harsh when you put it that way; I like his funny take on it though. Stephan, what have you got?

Stephan: Well, I have a short blog post by a guy named Andrew Hyde. I met Andrew at BlogWorld last year actually, and he is currently going around the world, he’s starting a trip to go around the world and he’s in the U.S. right now and hopping place to place, and he’s sold almost everything he owns and he’s simply blogging and writing using a iPad and a keyboard, and so this blog post is about how he gets along with just those two things, and it’s pretty interesting how he takes photos and things like that. It’s an interesting read, just some of the frustrations he has such as no multi-tasking and the Bluetooth keyboard gets turned on in his bag and drains the batteries and things like that. It’s good. It’s a good little post for anybody who travels, you know, I travel a decent amount and so it’s interesting to me.

Stephan: Well, I have a short blog post by a guy named Andrew Hyde . I met Andrew at BlogWorld last year actually, and he is currently going around the world, he's starting a trip to go around the world and he's in the US right now and hopping place to place, and he's sold almost everything he owns and he's simply blogging and writing using a iPad and a keyboard, and so this blog post is about how he gets along with just those two things, and it's pretty interesting how he takes photos and things like that. It's an interesting read, just some of the frustrations he has such as no multi-tasking and the Bluetooth keyboard gets turned on in his bag and drains the batteries and things like that. 很好。 It's a good little post for anybody who travels, you know, I travel a decent amount and so it's interesting to me.

Kevin: Yeah, I could totally do that. The no multi-tasking is going to be solved in November when the new OS comes out for it, so tick that off the list. Yeah, I think the Bluetooth keyboard was probably designed, you know, Apple designed it to sit on your desk and be a wireless keyboard for your desktop or your laptop; clearly if they had designed it to be chucked in a bag on a daily basis they probably wouldn’t have made that button so bump-able, so yeah, there’s a design issue or two there to be solved. But, honestly, like I went on a three week trip to Canada earlier this year and I took my iPad and my laptop with me and I only used my laptop to charge my iPad, and to back it up occasionally. But, yeah, seriously, I forgot the separate charger for my iPad so the fastest way to charge my iPad was to plug it in to the high-power USB port on my laptop. And so my laptop just sort of sat there plugged into the wall in the corner of the bedroom and every night when I went to bed I plugged the iPad into it to charge, but yeah, I did everything on the iPad. It is, yeah, I certainly rely on and love my laptop to get real work done or to code or to do lots of stuff at once, but as a casual on the road computer for very specific tasks where you’re doing one thing at a time, yeah, go iPad, and, yeah, I think there’ll be more along that trend.

Kevin: Yeah, I could totally do that. The no multi-tasking is going to be solved in November when the new OS comes out for it, so tick that off the list. Yeah, I think the Bluetooth keyboard was probably designed, you know, Apple designed it to sit on your desk and be a wireless keyboard for your desktop or your laptop; clearly if they had designed it to be chucked in a bag on a daily basis they probably wouldn't have made that button so bump-able, so yeah, there's a design issue or two there to be solved. But, honestly, like I went on a three week trip to Canada earlier this year and I took my iPad and my laptop with me and I only used my laptop to charge my iPad, and to back it up occasionally. But, yeah, seriously, I forgot the separate charger for my iPad so the fastest way to charge my iPad was to plug it in to the high-power USB port on my laptop. And so my laptop just sort of sat there plugged into the wall in the corner of the bedroom and every night when I went to bed I plugged the iPad into it to charge, but yeah, I did everything on the iPad. It is, yeah, I certainly rely on and love my laptop to get real work done or to code or to do lots of stuff at once, but as a casual on the road computer for very specific tasks where you're doing one thing at a time, yeah, go iPad, and, yeah, I think there'll be more along that trend.

Kevin: Alright. Well, so that brings us to the end of an episode, a gloomy one, thank you for bearing with us listeners, I hope we haven’t brought you down too much, but please do chime in in the comment thread, we’d love to hear your thoughts on anything we discussed today. A reminder that BlogWorld Expo is coming up and we’re going to be there. October 14th to 16th is BlogWorld Expo in Las Vegas, Nevada, and I will be there, Patrick will be there, Stephan will be there, and Brad will be there no doubt attending the inaugural Las Vegas WordCamp (laughter). We’ll be podcasting live and recording interviews to be published later on this very feed.

凯文：好吧。 Well, so that brings us to the end of an episode, a gloomy one, thank you for bearing with us listeners, I hope we haven't brought you down too much, but please do chime in in the comment thread, we'd love to hear your thoughts on anything we discussed today. A reminder that BlogWorld Expo is coming up and we're going to be there. October 14th to 16th is BlogWorld Expo in Las Vegas, Nevada, and I will be there, Patrick will be there, Stephan will be there, and Brad will be there no doubt attending the inaugural Las Vegas WordCamp (laughter). We'll be podcasting live and recording interviews to be published later on this very feed.

Next week’s show is kind of a special one, and I want to hear from you, listeners, on what you think we should do with it. Warlier this week in celebration of the launch of SitePoint’s latest book, Host Your Website in the Cloud, written by Amazon’s own Jeff Barr, this is a book that really focuses on Amazon’s Cloud hosting EC2 S3, all those sorts of services, and will take you from the very beginning as a web developer into how to host your website in these environments and the benefits of that and all that sort of stuff. We talked about that for two hours, though, in this live Webinar that we did earlier this week, and in my opinion it’s great stuff, I just sort of sat back and let them go and prodded them with a question every now and then. But I want to know, listeners, is two hours too long for a single episode of this podcast? Because I’m thinking of publishing the audio of that for Podcast #82, so what do you think should we split it apart into two halves or do you just want to get the whole shebang all at once? Let us know.

Next week's show is kind of a special one, and I want to hear from you, listeners, on what you think we should do with it. Warlier this week in celebration of the launch of SitePoint's latest book, Host Your Website in the Cloud , written by Amazon's own Jeff Barr, this is a book that really focuses on Amazon's Cloud hosting EC2 S3, all those sorts of services, and will take you from the very beginning as a web developer into how to host your website in these environments and the benefits of that and all that sort of stuff. We talked about that for two hours, though, in this live Webinar that we did earlier this week, and in my opinion it's great stuff, I just sort of sat back and let them go and prodded them with a question every now and then. But I want to know, listeners, is two hours too long for a single episode of this podcast? Because I'm thinking of publishing the audio of that for Podcast #82, so what do you think should we split it apart into two halves or do you just want to get the whole shebang all at once? 让我们知道

Let’s go around the table, guys, who are our hosts this week?

Let's go around the table, guys, who are our hosts this week?

Patrick: I am Patrick O’Keefe of the iFroggy Network, ifroggy.com, find me on Twitter @ifroggy.

Patrick: I am Patrick O'Keefe of the iFroggy Network, ifroggy.com , find me on Twitter @ifroggy .

Stephan: I’m Stephan Segraves, you can find me at badice.com and my Twitter handle is @ssegraves.

Stephan: I'm Stephan Segraves, you can find me at badice.com and my Twitter handle is @ssegraves .

Kevin: And you can follow me on Twitter @sentience and follow SitePoint @sitepointdotcom. Visit us at sitepoint.com/podcast, just one or two redirects, I promise, to leave comments on this show and to subscribe to receive every show automatically.

Kevin: And you can follow me on Twitter @sentience and follow SitePoint @sitepointdotcom . Visit us at sitepoint.com/podcast , just one or two redirects, I promise, to leave comments on this show and to subscribe to receive every show automatically.

The SitePoint Podcast this week is produced by Carl Longnecker and I’m Kevin Yank. Thanks for listening. Bye, bye.

The SitePoint Podcast this week is produced by Carl Longnecker and I'm Kevin Yank. 谢谢收听。 Bye, bye.

Theme music by Mike Mella.

Theme music by Mike Mella .

Thanks for listening! Feel free to let us know how we’re doing, or to continue the discussion, using the comments field below.

Thanks for listening! Feel free to let us know how we're doing, or to continue the discussion, using the comments field below.

翻译自: https://www.sitepoint.com/podcast-81-doom-gloom-and-rainbow-tweets/