
Meeting Ticker - chaostheory
http://tobytripp.github.com/meeting-ticker/
======
dugmartin
Nice. I was told by an ex-Disney exec years ago that they implemented the
exact same thing for high level meetings there. I can't imagine what a one
hour meeting there costs.

------
dasrecht
Very nice approach. But it scares me to start this ticker when i look at the
meeting schedules in our company ...

------
uggedal
Trying it out to see if it will help us have shorter and less frequent
meetings.

------
rman666
Doesn't work in IE6!

------
pclark
reminds me of "a meeting without an agenda is a chat"

------
jasongullickson
Brilliant, I can't wait to use this (or rather... I can).

------
davedevelopment
I knocked one of these up a while ago, used a stylesheet that's supposed to be
good for an iphone, I haven't got one to try myself.

<http://www.davedevelopment.co.uk/meetingclock/>

------
rntz
Nice app.

However, it assumes certain things about the size of the font displayed,
without which it displays incorrectly. And guess what? In my case, it assumes
wrong. Bad web design.

~~~
lallysingh
Indeed, it didn't work for me in the latest Chrome or IE.

------
Raphael
Alternatively, leave this open throughout the day to see how much money you've
earned.

~~~
cubicle67
Alternatively, leave this open throughout the day to see how much money you
could've earned, but didn't because you're reading the internet.

~~~
patio11
Yay for business models that decouple money earned from hours worked for the
sake of working hours. After I get 3.0 of my app launched the website won't
suddenly throw a FatalLackOfButtInChairException, even if I'm e.g. sleeping or
on a date when I could be working.

------
sho
IMO Github made a mistake in allowing this kind of personal web page. It's
very nice and all but has nothing to do with their business.

~~~
jrockway
What do you mean? Github hosts git repositories. git repositories are a great
way to manage your website. github charges you money to use your own domain
name for your github website, but lets you try it out for free.

The github pages concept adds value to your subscription, which seems like
something that's very good for their business. Seeing this page is like free
advertising for Github. "Wow, I could have a page like this too. Wow, I can
manage it with git. Hey, only $7/month to get private repositories and my own
domain name for this site. <buy>."

~~~
sho
Actually, the site at the top of the thread is free: tobytripp.github.com. You
only have to pay if you want the CNAME support, as you suggest, but this
example is not of that. So I suppose it adds value to the free subscription,
yeah.

But .. is it really worth diluting the brand, and diverting the team's
attention? I have seen personal articles on a username.github.com blog which
have nothing to do with code. Someone seeing the site via one of these avenues
for the first time would come away with the impression github is a free blog
provider. And, amongst other things, they are!

And what happens when people start, saying, hosting large media files? It
might not have happened yet but it will. Then one of them gets slashdotted,
the site slows to a crawl, and the team's running around putting out fires
caused by some free service which doesn't have anything to do with version
control, just "adds value" to having an account on that site.

Well, I guess they've thought all this through and decided it's in their
interests. I was just surprised, is all.

~~~
jrockway
_And what happens when people start, saying, hosting large media files?_

There is a size limit. But unless Github is hosted off of someone's DSL line,
this is probably nothing to worry about.

~~~
sho
The size limit is 300M. You might be surprised what a 50M file being
downloaded a few thousand times in quick succession can do to even a 100Mb
link.

~~~
m_eiman
These downvotes for sho seem to be done more along the lines of "let's
downvote the heretic who doesn't love github" than actually being related to
the arguments made. IMHO.

If I end up with a minus five too, I guess I was right :P

~~~
teej
It's because the original comment only complained about Github, without adding
to the discussion of the link.

The other Github bashing didn't even make sense. Github offering personal
websites doesn't expose them to any more risk of bandwidth issues. Someone can
already make a public repository full of 50MB files that can be downloaded by
anyone. Having a lightweight interface that lets you display HTML files in
your repository doesn't change that.

~~~
tome
It didn't complain about github. It raised an interesting discussion about
github's business model. But you're right: it was not adding to the discussion
of _the link_.

