binarybits

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-conf...

Public opinion is rarely coherent or rational. Most voters think Congress spends too much, but if you poll individual big-ticket spending items, almost all of them are popular. Similarly, I imagine many of the specific "security theater" measures wouldn't poll very well, but "more secure airports" is overwhelmingly popular, and that's the level of abstraction at which the TSA's mission is set.

I couldn't disagree more. The majority of my closest friendships and professional opportunities have come from time spent on the Internet. I'm probably an extreme case, but people "on the Internet" are no more real than people you meet face-to-face, and online friendships can and do turn into real-life friendships, and vice versa.

"Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and father of Monetarism, argued that many of the fears of trade deficits are unfair criticisms in an attempt to push macroeconomic policies favorable to exporting industries. He stated that these deficits are not harmful to the country as the currency always comes back to the country of origin in some form or another (country A sells to country B, country B sells to country C who buys from country A, but the trade deficit only includes A and B). In fact, in his view, the "worst case scenario" of the currency never returning to the country of origin was actually the best possible outcome: the country actually purchased its goods by exchanging them for pieces of cheaply-made paper. As Friedman put it, this would be the same result as if the exporting country burned the dollars it earned, never returning it to market circulation."

It's worth keeping in mind that trade is not a race or competition. It doesn't hurt us in any way if Europe accumulates wealth quickly.

I think the idea that trade deficits are bad and trade surpluses are good is largely an artifact of the way we talk about it. It wouldn't sound as scary if Lou Dobbs talked about "America's looming capital account surplus," even though a capital account surplus is logically equivalent to a trade deficit. Right now, foreigners are buying up a small share of our capital goods and sending us consumer goods in exchange. At some point in the future, those same foreigners will sell the capital goods and use them to purchase consumer goods from us. In an of itself, neither situation is something to be concerned about.

It wasn't obvious to me that the anagram clues were anagrams. Woul it really kill you to spell out "anagram?" Maybe even put "Anagram:" before the clue instead of putting it in parentheses afterwards?

What's the point of the "play" button? Why not just give the user a puzzle right out of the gate?

The delete key should let me delete a letter, and probably go back to the previous letter.

There should be some way to choose the direction of my typing with the mouse when I click a square that starts both an across and a down arrow. For example, perhaps add a little "right" arrow and a little "down" arrow in opposite corners of the square that users can push? At the very least, if I'm entering a "down" word and I click a square in that word that's also part of an "across" word, it's confusing for it to switch to the across word.

Let people make their own puzzles. A really easy way to do this would be to simply ask the user to enter 40 or 50 word-clue pairs, which you could then assemble into a new puzzle. This might also be a source for new clue ideas.

Relatedly: let users rate clues. This will allow you to refine your database. Your rating options might be something like "Hard," "medium," "easy," and "unfair." Clues that get several "unfair" ratings could be automatically weeded out of the database. Once you had a substantial database of ratings for clues, you could offer puzzles with varying difficulty levels based on the ratings.

And as another poster said, you shouldn't brag about stuff that's little more than basic functionality. Sorting by date is not a cutting-edge feature. Neither is not spamming the user's friends. Or "easy access to full size." Listing those sorts of things as features makes it look like you have so few real features that you had to stretch to fill out your list.

Finally, you need to figure out what your audience is. It's extremely unlikely that you're going to beat Flickr at their own game, so you need to find a niche they aren't serving well. Frankly, I'm having trouble seeing what that niche would be, but if you want to succeed you're going to have to find it.