by Jonny | Jul 11, 2013 | Updates
Social Media has been a highly contested issue as to whether it’s a waste of time or something that opens the mind up to new ideas. In my opinion, coming from a workplace that was only connected to a local intranet, I feel that Social Media is a waste of time – but the internet as a whole is not. Working in a restricted environment does do damage to your work force as they are humans and from time to time people do need small two minute breaks to look at what their friends are doing or to have a look at their email for anything important they’ve been waiting on — just to stay sane.
Social Media also includes websites like Reddit, which offers a vast array of help and information on nearly every subject you can think of, while websites such as Facebook, Google+ and Pinterest do not really add to learning new things, but seeing your friends who are having the time of their lives in Spain or some other exotic country. I feel that “Social Media” can be bad, but can also be a good thing. I think there needs to be a balance somewhere and employers need to strike that balance for their particular business to function well.
Here’s a cool nifty social media & the workplace info-graphic I found on the inter-webs:
Info-graphic provided by Income Protection company, Unum.
by Jonny | Feb 26, 2013 | Updates
I just came across this brilliant video about getting people to learn how to code. It’s amazing. It features a handful of creators in the past century who have created something with code and who have become successful.
The Code.org website is about teaching people to program and to encourage those who may have had a slight interest to have an even bigger interest. It has certainly got me excited. Perhaps, I won’t have to go to university after-all, and I can learn how to program completely free – this I think is the premise behind Code.org.
by Jonny | Sep 17, 2012 | Updates
I have a gripe with journalists who do not know their military terminologies yet who write articles as if they are some sort of professional on the subject or who sensationalize articles by using more tabloid-type terminologies for the average viewer. These people in combination with their degrees that I assumed they earned in journalism also get their articles checked by others who also supposedly don’t know military terminologies.
So, you are asking yourself which article, from which journalist do I have a gripe with about. Well, it’s this article, here.
Firstly, it is the term “battleship” that bothers me the most. Battleships were invented a long time ago, they were called battleships considering they had very large guns on them, thus large and were equipped to take on most combat situations. They were soon phased out during WW2 as they were considered obsolete at the arrival of the aircraft carrier.
However, in this article, the author mentions battleship twice. I can assure you that no navy in the world now operates battleships, the US Navy was the last to use battleships in a combat role. That has now ceased.
What the author of this article wrongly labels as “battleships” are mere destroyers, missile cruisers, mine sweepers, aircraft carriers etc, which he does mention and I’ll give him credit on that. But this sensationalist type of journalism where they mention the word “battleship”, let’s just say it makes the article seem more prominent and seems as if something is going to happen. The key word “battle” is that sensationalist word. It makes his article seem so ridiculous when he mentions the word, and to someone who enjoys the history of the military it just seems stupid that he would be using that terminology altogether.
There has even been the same reaction on Reddit by some users who also believe this is sensationalist writing on the authors part. But, perhaps it’s due to the authors ineptitude.
And perhaps I’m overreacting, but these people are supposed to be professionals.
EDIT:
It seems that the Telegraph has changed the title of their article. It no longer features “battleship”.
by Jonny | Sep 13, 2012 | Updates
I’ve totally stopped using Infolinks, I don’t think the return is worth it, especially for websites which don’t receive as many visitors that I’d like, thus equaling not so much profit. I think it might also make my sites a little off-putting and without any big results, it has become more or less a waste of time. Perhaps in the future I will use them again, however I’ve taken a screenshot of my entire earnings since last year.
Full earning report
As you can see, earnings are negligible, which is why I have decided to drop Infolinks altogether. However, that’s just for now. As for AdSense, I’m making a bit of money, unfortunately for Infolinks, not so much money. The results and testing that I’ve done with Infolinks over a 9 month period has been a huge failure. I remember blogging before saying that Infolinks can be an extra source of revenue, however perhaps you should really have a large website to get any real gains out of it.
by Jonny | Sep 10, 2012 | Updates
I’m quite impressed how I have managed to increase the traffic on my political site I now have up and running. I’ve been running this blog for a couple years now. However, this new site has only been running since July of this year. (2012)
The site I’m taking about is a little hard to maintain as I’m personally writing all the new articles. Before, the site was using an autoblogging script, which sucked ass. So I disabled it and then started writing my own articles as I’m quite interested in US politics.
I managed to get it un-banned from the search engines, most notably Google and now there are SERP results for particular keywords coming in. I also created the logo, which I’m pretty happy about. 🙂
