Scientific American Web Awards 99
ldopa1 writes "Scientific American has just announced their 2nd Annual Web Awards. The article outlines the very best of the best of the web in the following categories: Archaeology & Paleontology, Astronomy & Astrophysics, Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Earth & Environment, Engineering and Technology, Mathematics, Medicine and Physics. Sadly, Slashdot isn't on the list, but some great sites are. It's worth checking out."
Re:Yay (Score:2)
Oh, sorry, I thought you were talking about the Webby's.
Re:Yay (Score:2)
Nevermind squarely in the social sniper-sights (or envy, depending on personality type) of those in less fortunate economies. This isn't flamebait, but its good evidence that humans dont enjoy freeloaders who seek opportunities to avoid exposing themselves to anything other than unmitigated 'winners'.
Who the F*ck is A.L.I.C.E. (Score:1)
http://alicebot.org/
Re:Who the F*ck is A.L.I.C.E. (Score:1)
Re:Who the F*ck is A.L.I.C.E. (Score:1)
A*W*A*R*D (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:A*W*A*R*D (Score:2)
Yes, he does. [sciam.com]
NASA watch is a good one (Score:1)
/. != very best of the web (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean I read
No SETI? (Score:1)
Re:No SETI? (Score:2, Informative)
I understand the basic tenents of SETI and run one, sometimes two, SETI clients myself. Popular interest is notoriously fickle and SETI hasn't delivered any aliens of yet. So, correspondingly, the fickle alien hunters, as well as the general public, have lost interest to some notable degree. SETI does gain the occasional new signup (client-wise), but its peak is done.
In spite of my statements above, I believe that SETI will maintain its position as, at the very least, a quasi-respectable scientic research venture, with many supporters and I support its interests fully.
Re:No SETI? (Score:2)
Uhm (Score:3, Funny)
Why would Slashdot be on the list? Did JonKatz discover a fascinating fossil that put the archeological community on its ears and post his dissertation on it here?
Why would a news site win an award for original content?
(Disclaimer: I haven't read the criteria they use, so maybe Slashdot should be in the list - but I doubt it)
Re:Uhm (Score:1)
Re:Uhm (Score:1)
What I mean is, Slashdot doesn't post original content (often), only links to existing content.
Unless we have a fascinating ScienceTroll I haven't noticed...
Re:Uhm (Score:1)
Currently I'm in hibernation, but after that I'll get back to you as soon as possible.
Thank you for your interest, and goodbye.
The Science Troll
Wayback Machine (Score:1, Interesting)
The oldest archived version of
1) Linux 2.1.74 Released
2) Judge Uninstalls IE in 90 seconds
3) The poll: I would see Titanic just to see a Prequel Trailer (Yes/No/What are you talking about?)
Just goes to show how long this Microsoft crap has been going on...
Re:Wayback Machine (Score:2)
Although the Wayback Machine is really neat.
Hey... it is great fun. Here was one from 1998 announcing a new 25G drive which invited speculation on why you'd ever want a drive that big [archive.org]... ;-)
Slashdot hasn't won any awards recently (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot hasn't won any awards recently (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it just means Slashdot hasn't won a web award since April of 2000.
**Shrugs** I don't know why most web awards matter to Marketroids, since all they really are is a method of advertising the websites that give out the awards. Just think of Danielle's Rainbows and Unicorns website--all those awards little Danielle collected, all pointed back to the other Unicorns and Rainbows websites that gave them to her. It's about as meaningful as a banner exchange.
The Webbies are a special case--people actually vote for this stuff, therefore the number of votes relates pretty closely to the traffic each website receives. And that is what matters, since website traffic == advertising opportunity.
So whether SlashDot wins awards or not doesn't mean that it's the best, or that it's going downhill. It probably just means their advertising rates since April of 2000 have been a bit lower.
On a plane from Kansas City to Chicago: (Score:1, Funny)
why don't big planes have baby planes?" The mother (who couldn't think of an answer) told her son to ask the stewardess.
So the boy asked the stewardess, "If big dogs have baby dogs and big cats have baby cats, why don't big planes have baby planes?" The
stewardess responded, "Did your mother tell you to ask me?" The boy admitted that this was the case. "Well, then, tell your mother that there are no baby planes because Southwest always pulls out on time. Your mother can explain it to you.
A mini directory listing (Score:4, Informative)
Re:A mini directory listing (Score:1)
No awards? (Score:1)
Yeah, I think that "Lone Gunmen are Dead" article kinda did /. in for this year. ;)
You mean... (Score:2)
Ah, a Web Award that actually means something (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Sites can suddenly disappear or (more frequently) slowly slid into inactivity.
2) A number of awards really aren't all that impressive because the award was either given by a friend, or has been handed out so many times (i.e. a "Pick of the Day") that the luster fades about as fast as David Lee Roth's stardom after Van Halen.
I've always liked the idea of an annual web awards, but given the very fluid nature of the web, I wasn't sure if the idea would really work. I suppose that other annual awards are given out for web work, but I think these are the first that aren't based (solely) on design and graphics.
Matt
Re:Ah, a Web Award that actually means something (Score:2)
That's what the Wayback Machine [archive.org] is for.
Re:Ah, a Web Award that actually means something (Score:3, Informative)
For your fun here is slashdot on Nov 11 1998 [archive.org]. More?
CNN on Sept. 11 [archive.org]
Great tool for future historians.
Re:Ah, a Web Award that actually means something (Score:2)
Amazingly, it was just as boring then as it is now.
Although, this page is somewhat interesting for the Dude, Where's My Car-style "Sweet!" we get multiple times from CmdrTaco.
Re:Ah, a Web Award that actually means something (Score:1)
Slashdot not on the list? (Score:5, Funny)
Web.archive.org (Score:2, Insightful)
It is a good site however. My job's very first webpage is on there. Sure freaked out the boss when I showed that to him: "What happened to our website"/"Nothing! it's an archived copy"
CGIproxy site [jmarshall.com]
Pi
Re:Web.archive.org (Score:1)
Re:Web.archive.org (Score:1)
It's the site to DOWNLOAD Cgi-proxy!
Pi
This should remind us... (Score:1)
There has been a respectable amount of research applied to making web search results meet the criteria of the user. The results have been improvement, much to Google's credit, but the product is not yet acceptable. Efforts to create search engines with a special interest focus have been met with mild success and meek acceptance. The correct approach, I think, is that some entity in the position that Google has should provide a method to segregate results, not only based on keywords, but by meaningful content as well. The early rough-and-tumble days of the Weird-Wild-Web brought us search engines that were easily fooled by meta-tags and other keyword embedding methods. The next step is to provide, via AI methods, a search engine that can provide, given well defined search criteria, only the set of results that make the *best fit*.
Musings: Kids/Educational Science Sites (Score:2, Interesting)
I grew up at a great time to be a science nerd, I remember fondly the Time-Life Science Books, newspaper articles and television coverage of the Apollo missions, playing with a chemistry set...
I'm not sure what science kids resources on the net will live up to those standards. A couple that I like are Nine Planets [nineplanets.org] and Science Toys you can make with Your Kids, [scitoys.com] anybody got any others?
computer science winners (Score:1)
Another example of bad html (Score:1)
A third of the page was blank since they
assumed my browser width. Shrink it too much,
and the page gets lost. Then, first
check the physics link (my field):
Physics 2000 wants a plugin (ok this is not
my primary machine, but this is a pain).
Then the string theory site, not too bad but
again inappropriately assumes my geometry.
Jump to chemistry: organo transition? what
happened to spelling. Try the virtual experiment,
galeon enters an infinite loop.
Whatever happened to the idea of the web site
presenting the information and the browser
doing the displaying.
Oh well, I guess this is a loosing battle
Mike
Re:Another example of bad html (Score:1)
<snip>
Oh well, I guess this is a loosing battle
Maybe they loost their dictionary.
Anthropology (Score:1)