I'm starting to miss Ken Wesson.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Gary Trakhman <gary.trakh...@gmail.com>wrote: > I've volunteered on the pycon AV team, in 2009, it's 1000x more work than > what you described further up in the thread, a minimum wage worker holding > something steady. It requires a lot of coordination, and I think the cost > to the conference would be much higher than InfoQ as well. > > On Monday, March 25, 2013 1:05:51 PM UTC-4, Cedric Greevey wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Michael Klishin >> <michael....@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> 2013/3/25 Cedric Greevey <cgre...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> Don't forget that Youtube has MILLIONS of visitors per month. >>>> >>>> Imagine the impact if the videos were available when demand for them >>>> was actually at its peak, rather than after half the people that had been >>>> interested have forgotten all about them. >>>> >>> >>> I challenge you to put together a technical videos channel that has >>> millions of visitors per month. >>> >> >> Another minute, another straw man. My point is that the needed video >> hosting capability already exists (and even has monetize options). Of >> *course* it will be expensive to go the "reinvent all needed wheels" route. >> >> I don't get it. The thread got complaints that the videos were being >> produced slowly and inefficiently, yet as soon as someone actually >> suggested ways to potentially make the process faster and more efficient, >> practically *everyone* leapt to the defense of those same slow and >> inefficient methods that they'd previously complained about. I guess >> abstract kvetching is okay, but concrete suggestions are frightening >> because they might *actually lead to change* or something. Although that >> still doesn't explain why someone then had the gall to criticize *me* for >> not making concrete and constructive suggestions, when that's exactly what >> I *did* do after *other people* had merely complained without making any >> suggestions. >> >> Of course, I don't really *need* to argue anymore, because someone else >> helpfully pointed out that an existing conference already does a better >> job: pycon. That completely disproves the entire class of arguments along >> the lines of "making *conference proceedings* videos is somehow some sort >> of a special case and it HAS to be slow and expensive!", of which we've >> seen several, sadly including some *after* pycon was first mentioned. >> >> -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
