Well, it seems I've more to say though I wouldn't want to test your
patience . If folks have NO idea what they want, then Meno's Paradox
would apply. People tend to have a descriptive ability, or a gut feeling
at the least. "It kinda needs to be a camera that like hovers to longer
observation times can be maintained" enter the quadcopter.
So I thought to addd the third possibility, which is partial descriptive
knowledge, communal connectivity, expert availability/receptivity, and
descriptive inquiry.
Best,
Robert
On 12/08/2015 04:20 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
I would need to disagree with you as inquiry is possible by
description, rather than by name, through conversation with those who
don't have to inquire, due to their knowledge [see Meno's Paradox...].
So, a third possibility exists through communal association. Do you
know Kevin Bacon? ;-)
I've used that language!
On 12/08/2015 04:02 PM, EuanM wrote:
The philosophical issue behind the disutility of project names like
these is "Meno's Paradox"
On 8 December 2015 at 21:01, EuanM <euan...@gmail.com> wrote:
"I wish people would choose descriptive names for their projects" -
Todd
I agree.
I went looking for the current state of dbxtalk recently. It seemed
to ba apackage designed for my needs - to X[-over] from a DB to
[small]talk.
I went there and the the page started talking about "Glorp" and
"Garage". Neither are mnemonic or meaningful
These projects are just the tip of the iceberg.
Pharo project names have publisher-only project names. The project
name equivalent of write-only computer languages, like Brain-F**k.
On 7 December 2015 at 17:52, Todd Blanchard <tblanch...@mac.com> wrote:
Sigh.
I wish people would choose descriptive names for their projects. I
went looking on Smalltalkhub for some capability and what I found
are thousands of packages with names that mean nothing and no
description entered either. If you want to make sure nobody ever
uses your code you've just taken a giant step in the right
direction. But if you hope to make something lots of people
benefit from - nobody is going to look for "mushroom" when they
want crypto capabilities.
Sorry, this has been really bugging me lately. We, as a community,
do a lousy job of making our code easy to find.
-Todd Blanchard
On Dec 7, 2015, at 07:38, Ben Coman <b...@openinworld.com> wrote:
I like it, but it seems you missed my point :)
mushroom --> 117,000,000 is two orders of magnitude more hidden.
Anyway, maybe I overplay its significance.
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com> wrote:
I renamed the project to Mushroom and I also dumped the encoding
work to
focus on shutdown, optimization and serialization. Here's the wiki:
https://github.com/SqueakCryptographySquad/Mushroom/wiki
thanks,Robert
On 12/06/2015 01:42 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/05/2015 09:24 PM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now I think you are right on with your observation.
Additionally, the
number
of dialects could increase further with Fuel serialization,
just port
SecureSession and bits.
Alright, I came up with a name and it may border on the
egregious ...
presenting ...
"Maelstrom"
Great sounding name. However some general advice for the
community,
since I see a lot of great sounding project names drowned out
in the
noise of our web-search-centric universe. A litmus test for
project
naming is using google search to find which return low search
results.
Today, its more important to be unique than any other
attribute of a
name. So in general, *dictionary* english words are not the
best.
One technique is to intentionally mispell the word you like.
Here are
some comparative examples (note, the surrounding quotes are
required
to avoid google trying to be helpful and correct the spelling)...
"maelstrom" --> 7,480,000
"maelstroom" --> 6,200
"maelstrum" --> 2,280
"maelstruum" --> 7
Lots of interesting other techniques can be found by searching
on:
techniques to generate brand names or domain names.
cheers -ben
I would be happy to change the names to something more unique,
though it
may
take a few. Are you suggesting "maelstruum"?
cheers,
Robert
*Suggesting* yes, but the choice is yours ;) You need to own it.
I think maelstruum is certainly memorable with the double "u", but
maybe jarring next the the "m". I'm inclined to maelstroom,
since I
associate it with "zoom". I wouldn't necessarily go for the
absolute
lowest results. I have an entirely unsubstantiated belief that
anything less than 10,000 gives a reasonable chance to compete
once a
user's browsing history is taken into account. Finally you need to
check existing results don't return something abhorrent (I
didn't do
this).
I'd encourage to play around testing on google search. Its
quick and
easy to generate and test alternatives. I've added a few more
below.
"maelstra" --> 3,560
"maelstram" --> 504
"maelstrim" --> 1200
"maelstroon" --> 58
"maelstroomi" --> 4
btw, I wouldn't swap the order of the "ae" since that would be
susceptible to real typing errors.
cheers -ben
