<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Not Quite Genius</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.davidgagne.net/2008/09/09/not-quite-genius/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.davidgagne.net/2008/09/09/not-quite-genius/</link>
	<description>With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 03:58:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aisha</title>
		<link>http://www.davidgagne.net/2008/09/09/not-quite-genius/#comment-368970</link>
		<dc:creator>Aisha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:36:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidgagne.net/?p=6931#comment-368970</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m one of those people who gets incredibly irritated with things that are not indexed properly. However, over the years, I have had to unlearn English indexing conventions, because in Pakistan, people don&#039;t necessarily have family names, and therefore, alphabetizing is done by the first name. It&#039;s particularly confusing since there are multiple ways to transliterate common Pakistani names.  When I tried filing things at work by the last name, no one else could find anything.

If you think about it, there&#039;s no real reason why we should index by surnames. It really is just a question of how the convention has evolved. So while my gut reaction is still the same as yours, I have learned to grin, grit my teeth, and bear it. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m one of those people who gets incredibly irritated with things that are not indexed properly. However, over the years, I have had to unlearn English indexing conventions, because in Pakistan, people don&#8217;t necessarily have family names, and therefore, alphabetizing is done by the first name. It&#8217;s particularly confusing since there are multiple ways to transliterate common Pakistani names.  When I tried filing things at work by the last name, no one else could find anything.</p>
<p>If you think about it, there&#8217;s no real reason why we should index by surnames. It really is just a question of how the convention has evolved. So while my gut reaction is still the same as yours, I have learned to grin, grit my teeth, and bear it. <img src='http://www.davidgagne.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rusty Razor Blade</title>
		<link>http://www.davidgagne.net/2008/09/09/not-quite-genius/#comment-368079</link>
		<dc:creator>Rusty Razor Blade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:36:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidgagne.net/?p=6931#comment-368079</guid>
		<description>[...] a lot of people who don&#8217;t seem to like the genius feature of iTunes. In fact, quite a few seem to hate [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a lot of people who don&#8217;t seem to like the genius feature of iTunes. In fact, quite a few seem to hate [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Gilberator</title>
		<link>http://www.davidgagne.net/2008/09/09/not-quite-genius/#comment-367789</link>
		<dc:creator>The Gilberator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:21:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidgagne.net/?p=6931#comment-367789</guid>
		<description>Perhaps my only gripe - and a quasi-dealbreaker - with Itunes is the very thing you&#039;re lamenting here. Forget Genius for a moment, how can anyone consider Itunes the gold standard when it cannot recognize multiple copies of the same song, despite their names differing by only a simple rewording or omission of a minor syllable OR their tracks ending 1 second earlier or later? For God&#039;s sake, there was a completely worthless cellphone a few months ago that could identify music by playing the tune into the mic!

A real &quot;Genius&quot; would have an application under Tools that allows the user to sort through these versions based on similarity, and sync their info with the master Itunes database, thereby eliminating any confusion of album cover, lyrics, or other supplemental information pertinent to playlist sorting, Genius function, and overall collection management.

In other news, Steve Jobs has a monster schlong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps my only gripe &#8211; and a quasi-dealbreaker &#8211; with Itunes is the very thing you&#8217;re lamenting here. Forget Genius for a moment, how can anyone consider Itunes the gold standard when it cannot recognize multiple copies of the same song, despite their names differing by only a simple rewording or omission of a minor syllable OR their tracks ending 1 second earlier or later? For God&#8217;s sake, there was a completely worthless cellphone a few months ago that could identify music by playing the tune into the mic!</p>
<p>A real &#8220;Genius&#8221; would have an application under Tools that allows the user to sort through these versions based on similarity, and sync their info with the master Itunes database, thereby eliminating any confusion of album cover, lyrics, or other supplemental information pertinent to playlist sorting, Genius function, and overall collection management.</p>
<p>In other news, Steve Jobs has a monster schlong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
