Other pictures (about 1200) from the Albert Kahn collection, from other parts of the world: http://albert-kahn.hauts-de-seine.net/archives-de-la-planete...
There are some wonderful pictures in that collection. My preferred are the ones with people living in a way that doesn't exist anymore like the ones from the Ottoman Empire (Turkey), Ireland, Benin and South East Asia.
The photographs were taken on three black and white plates with RGB filters in front of them, and could only be seen projected on a screen.
This is an article describing how the original images were composed to create the color version http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/making.html this is about the russian guy, Prokudin-Gorskii, but the process he used to take the pictures was the same.
On the LOC website you can see the originals and composite http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/prk2000000200/
Some of the ones at the LOC, even more so. Moving water has a particularly curious, shimmering quality.
For this set of photos of Paris, especially cool is to post a link to
(a multilingual website) on the basis of the Hacker News guideline
"Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter."
The http://www.paris1914.com/ site has the worst user experience I've seen in quite a while. Somebody went to a lot of work to make the site have all those bells and whistles, and they totally blew it. It's just ridiculous! I move the mouse over a picture and the picture flips around to show me some info about it. OK, but what happened to the picture? I wanted to see the picture. So I try to click, and that only works half the time. You have to catch it quick before it flips around to display the title card. Good luck with that. Then if the click registers, it does this weird two-way-but-not-both-at-once animation and finally shows me the picture. Then I can close that, lose my place, and pick some other picture to look at more or less randomly.
This is NOT the way to make a photo gallery.
By contrast, the "blogspam" page has all the pictures in a simple page that I can scroll up and down. Nothing fancy, nothing I can't figure out, and no way to lose my place.
I was showing these pictures to a friend and it would have taken a good half hour to poke our way through the paris1914 site. But thanks to the blogspam page, we were able to enjoy all the photos in the time we had, without having to fumble through some kind of misguided navigation.
Again, I don't disagree with your point about posting original sources, but in this specific case, the blogspam was very beneficial to me at least.
Edit: So I thought to myself, maybe I should give this thing another chance. Once you get one of the photos open, maybe you can just skip from photo to photo right there? Indeed you can, and it even has a keyboard interface: the left and right arrows work just as expected.
But what's all this scrolling? It doesn't just change photos like a slide show, it does an enormous sideways scroll of the whole thing. It's very disorienting visually and not at all fun.
Startup/business takeaway: don't underestimate humankind's ability to transition into and out of roles while keeping the machinery moving.
Original source: http://www.paris1914.com/
There are hundreds of them taken in the trenches of WWI in Central Europe, Balkans and the Ottoman Empire. It is quite shocking to see how the poor and simple people where impacted by the war.
Also: that first picture is a subway station.
(It is Ulysses Grant btw.)
His clothing looks out of date, but it just seems so real.
(Photo shamelessly stolen from www.reddit.com/r/colorizedhistory)
When discussing the salience of possible referents context is the major determinant, especially with things like geographical proximity to one of a possible set of similarly named cities.
If someone in Columbus, Ohio (as opposed to Georgia) is discussing travelling to London, there's a non-trivial possibility that they were talking about London, Ohio, rather than London, England.
Traveling Southwestern Ontario provides similar circumstance, given that the British decided to name the entire province after England. London (Ontario) sits at the fork of the Thames River, an hours drive from Stratford, which likewise rests on the Avon.
So sure, maybe if you live in Europe, "normal" people always use "London" to refer to the UK, but "normal" people in Toronto, probably mean the city in Ontario when they use the name.
tl;dr: you're being a cultural imperialist.
I believe you're arguing with a particularly useless troll anyway.
The assumption that you were trolling was the charitable one. This is a very petty issue to start a thread-derailing argument about.
Incidentally, as a non-American who happens to love America and things American I have found myself in the past trying to defend the habit in conversation with others; "Well, it makes sense, you see there is a Paris in Texas too". Eventually I realised the cause was hopeless and gave up, "No, you're right it's just a crazy habit they have".
Anyway, enough, as you say it's a tiny thing. I will move on.
Cambridge is more or less the only exception when it comes to Anglophone cities with the same name and similar levels of international fame