One of the many benefits that FeedBurner publishers will enjoy now that FeedBurner is part of the Google family is a little something we like to call, "more for free!" Beginning today, two of FeedBurner's previously for-pay services, TotalStats and MyBrand, will be free. Not in the sense of soaring high above the clouds or recently sprung from the hoosegow, but free like you'll no longer gladly be billed on Tuesday for a burned feed today. We suspect this will be welcome news to the 450,000+ of you using many of our other free services, but understanding that your feed is your feed, you will need to activate these newly freed-up services in order to partake in their awesomeness.
FeedBurner Stats PRO
PRO is feed analytics taken to the next level. You will now have access to the number of people who have viewed or clicked individual content items in your feed and “Reach,” which estimates the daily number of subscribers who interacted with your feed content. You can turn this on by signing in to your account, navigating to the Analyze tab and heading to the FeedBurner Stats PRO section. Click the "Item Views" checkbox to activate these PRO features.
MyBrand
The MyBrand service (also PRO-level) is located under the "My Account" tab after you've signed in. MyBrand lets you maintain consistency between your feed address and your hosted website's domain, if matchy-matchy is your thing. For example, rather than using feeds.feedburner.com/MyFeedName, your MyBrand-ed feed address can be feeds.myexcellentdomain.net/MyFeedName. To get started with MyBrand, sign into FeedBurner, click the "My Account" link in the upper left-hand corner, and then click "MyBrand". Nota Bene: You must be comfortable playing around with DNS entries and own the rights to the domain whose DNS entries you'll be playing around with in order to successfully activate MyBrand.
Previous "PRO" customers will not be charged for the month of June 2007 and beyond. Also, after newly activating either of these features or services, you'll notice a nifty new "PRO" badge next to your feed(s) on My Feeds page.
Welcome to FreeBurner!
张北海的《侠隐》,拿到书的那天一口气读完,非常好看!
虽然有武有侠,但《侠隐》绝对不是武侠小说,"武侠"对于这本书来说只是一层包装纸; 虽然有家仇国恨,风云际会,但也不是什么历史小说。整部书真正的内容还是老北京的"文化",关于老北京的柴米油盐酱醋茶。关于胡同,关于豆汁儿、春饼...老北京过去什么样子,没几个人知道,从这本书中可以恣意想象。北京又仿佛是作者虚拟出来的城市,遥远而又真实,夜幕降临,主人公李天然穿过大街小巷,跃至屋脊上飞行,一幕幕场景仿佛电影画面。
今年看过的最有趣的图书无疑是这本《侠隐》
--EOF--Posted by randfish
Despite more than a decade of search marketers attempting to educate web surfers about how the search engines operate and how to properly engage in a search marketing campaign, we've still got a very, very long way to go. Tonight I came across a few examples of this that drove the point home.
#1 - Horrifying Marketing that's Nightmarishly Effective
The folks over at Berankednumber1.com (link condom applied) offer the kind of service that makes me nauseous. What's worse is that apparently, their conversions are sky high (heard it through the grapevine). Snake oil salesmen like this (of which there are hundreds in the field) not only give the rest of us a bad name, but continue to misinform individuals and businesses about the process, effectiveness and basics behind search marketing. Just read their "more information" about the service:
Why Do We Not Ask You For "Keywords"
Since we are already submitting all the "text" on your website we do not need to ask you for keywords. Your keywords are already on your site. The keywords generally come directly from your website's text. For example we presume that if you are selling "Ford Trucks" in "Omaha" that you will have the word "Ford", "Trucks" and "Omaha" somewhere on your website. As a result "Omaha Ford Trucks" , "Ford Trucks Omaha" would automatically be submitted (along with many other keyword combinations). As long as your website has "text" on it you are generally not going to have any problem at all.
May the SEO Gods have pity. The worst part? They're not nearly as bad as many other similar services.
#2 - Searches that Make a Legitimate Search Marketer Vomit with Rage
Now, not all of these are awful, but the vast majority show continued ignorance about the process of seach marketing and indicate that, despite years of effort, the industry has failed to even change the dialogue or vocabulary of SEM. On the plus side, the trends point to at least some decline in the use of terms like "search engine submission" and "meta tag optimization," but we've still got a long way to go.
#3 - Cringe-Worthy Answer Selection
Check out the following exchange on Yahoo! Answers:
The sad part is, Vic is really trying to help, and some of his advice is even relatively good. But, the focus on meta tags as the primary ranking element at the engines recalls the mid-1990's, yet this answer was selected only a week ago.
#4 - Hypocrisy from the Search Engine Guidelines
I know that it's impossible for the search engines to completely limit the influence of paid links (and I'm not even sure that as a search marketer, I'd want them to), but the contrast between the links that are helping many, if not most of the sites ranking for competitive queries in specific, commercial fields and the party line - don't buy links - are in direct conflict.
I have to agree with Dave on this one - the SERPs are, by and large, influenced, if not ruled by, financial considerations. For example, try looking at the backlinks of this search:
Honestly, I had trouble identifying a single link to any of those sites that appeared to be editorially given. Granted, in the grand scheme of misinformation about search engines, this is probably the least offensive, but it certainly makes it very challenging for a new entrant to the field to understand how the search engines can claim one position, threaten actions against violators and yet appear to be all but enthralled by those who practice that same technique.
#5 - Wikipedia's Error of Omission
As most folks know, I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia. However, I was somewhat optimistic about the promotion of the Search Engine Optimization (link condom again) article to the home page yesterday. However, despite the article's relative accuracy and balance, the lack of any information about how search engine rank web pages and how SEO is actually performed left me severely dissapointed. What better opportunity to educate and inform the myriad of visitors (and searchers, as the piece still ranks atop queries for SEO & Search Engine Optimization) seeking information about the practice than here?
It's sad to think that in spite of hard work by good folks like Jon Hochman, the piece still can't deliver a succinct look at what to expect from an SEO and what to consider if you're taking on the project yourself. The bickering over accuracy and bias eventually removed entire sections that could have provided some insight and background for those poor souls.
So what are we to do, fellow SEOs? After 10 years of attempting to educate the outside world, is it time to give up the game and just accept the fact that SEO will always have negative, inaccurate associations and a shroud of mystery? Or... are there new approaches that could be taken to better inform a clearly curious and often desperate public?
上一期《新发现》的解惑栏目,读者的问题是:为什么土壤在变湿后,看起来会黑一点?下面是《新发现》给的答案:
我们知道,物体的颜色取决于它反射的光的性质。土壤看起来变得黑了,那一定是因为它反射的光变少了。因此我们可以推测,土壤在打湿以后,对光的吸收能力增强了。
干燥的土壤是由许多松散的细小颗粒构成的,颗粒之间有大把的间隙。当光照射下来,部分光被吸收,部分光被反射。那么,打湿了以后,土壤会发生什么变化呢?
水渗下去以后,土壤颗粒之间的间隙被填充,这时,光线在抵达土壤粒之前,经历的不再是空气,而是水。这些充满水的小间隙,会额外吸收掉一些光。
所以,土壤变湿以后,对光的吸收会增强。如果用透光性更强一点的液体来打湿土壤,它们会变得更为黯淡吧。
然后有读者去信,表达了不同意见:
我不是非常赞同。相信你身边肯定有糙面塑料办公桌,你可以在桌子上倒少许水试一下。倘若是因为水对光线的吸收和反射造成了物体颜色的变暗,那么有水覆盖的桌面应该更暗,但实际上此现象不存在。况且地面变湿时水是紧密吸附于土壤或水泥上的,并没有附水层,因此反射透射和内反射等现象不会发生。
仔细观察会发现水是有选择性的使物体变暗的。像地面和纤维制品等亲水性物质,干燥和浸水两种状态下反光性会有明显变化,而像塑料等非亲水性物质,则没有这种现象。
要揭示这种现象,还真得用到电磁学和量子力学的知识才行,研究反射折射透射的几何光学是无能为力的。
水是强极性物质,遇到纤维等亲水性物质会与其发生电磁作用,吸附在上面。它们结合成的这个系统可以与光线发生相互作用。打个比方,可以将纤维表面看成是天花板,而水分子是吸附于其上的像皮球,由于吸附本身就是电磁作用,当电磁波入射时,只要符合共振条件,橡皮球就开始振动。由于各种分子间的相互作用非常复杂,这种振动很容易转化为热运动,这样光能就被转化为热能,光也就被吸收了,因此看起来会更暗一点。油类物质等非亲水性物质也能使衣物变色,原因就比较复杂了,一是有的油本身就有颜色,二是油比较溶解一些有颜色的物质,三就是非极性的油也能和纤维发生电磁作用,因此也能吸收光线。
来自姬十三的 blog。
《新发现》的回答应该是有问题的。水在可见波段的吸收很小,因此充满水的小间隙,额外吸收掉的光也很小,不足以引起这么大改变。
相比,那位读者的意见就更为专业一点。他所说的物理过程确实有,解释得也足够形象。不过,“土壤变湿后看起来黑一点”这个问题,我感觉,确实挺复杂的,他所说的是否为主要原因也很难说。
我能想到的一个解释与多重散射(multiple scattering)有关。想像土壤由许多微小颗粒组成,干燥的时候,颗粒间是空气;湿润的时候,颗粒间是水。我们能看到土壤,因为它能“反射”一部分阳光(或者月光、灯光,当然)。我们说“反射”,但对于土壤来说,说“散射”才贴切,而且是多重散射(被多个颗粒散射)的结果。光照射土壤,一部分直接被表面的土壤颗粒散射出来,一部分进入内部,或被土壤吸收,或被土壤颗粒散射来散射去,最后逃逸出来。散射强度越大,光能够进入土壤的深度越小,呆的时间也越短。而光在土壤里面呆的时间越长,被吸收的几率也越大。
现在到了问题的关键,当颗粒间是水时,散射强度比空气时会来的小。因为水比空气折射率大,颗粒间是水时,土壤颗粒与周围介质的相对折射率差别小,散射强度也小。
这个如果不是学物理的可能不好理解。我们来想像一玻璃杯玻璃小珠,虽然每颗玻璃珠的材料都是透明的,但整体上看起来白花花的,这就是光在玻璃珠与空气界面被散射的结果。如果我们在杯子里添上水,就看起来透明多了。因为水和玻璃的折射率差别比空气和玻璃来得小。如果我们往杯子加上一种与玻璃折射率相同的油,这时你就看不到玻璃珠,透明了。
希望我表达清楚了。:-(
Google 了一下,看到这篇文章:Reflectance and albedo differences between wet and dry surfaces。它的摘要里对这个问题做了解释,比我说的流畅多了。
The primary reason that natural multiple scattering media such as sand and soils become darker when wet is that the change of the medium surrounding the particles from air to water decreases their relative refractive index, and hence the average degree of forwardness of scattering that is determined by the asymmetry parameter. Incident photons then have to be scattered more times, before reemerging from the medium, and tend to be absorbed.
七月 2007 | ||||||
一 | 二 | 三 | 四 | 五 | 六 | 日 |
1 | ||||||
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
30 | 31 |