Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
| AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
| Twitter
Sean Fallon
| Twitter
Jack Loftus
| Twitter
John Herrman
| Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Kyle VanHemert
Comment Account Questions:
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
03/19/09
WHERE THE HELL IS 2,1?
03/19/09
03/19/09
PLEASE don't have such invasive advertising... I don't mean to be rude but I just got a goddamn McDonald's snack wrap or whatever it's called shoved in my face all over my screen without me even doing anything.
Sorry, just... god I hate ads like that... I'm never going to McDonald's again now. Excluding when
I get the munchies. Damn you BongModo...
03/19/09
dude, it's called adblockplus. google it.
03/19/09
Like a cattle prod?
iBDSM! Woo-hoo!
But wait, all Apple products are shiny and HAPPY, which does not fit into the BDSM arena. I wonder what Jonathan Ive has got up his sleeve? Inside a Braun oven?
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
[www.pbsanimalhealth.com]
OR "The Red One Sable-Six!
[www.pbsanimalhealth.com]
03/19/09
03/19/09
why would he come before he has sex with you?
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
or
New iPhone with integrated electrical zapper to herd cows or torture British classmates with.
03/19/09
03/19/09
03/19/09
ban.
03/19/09
Yes, your comment was.
Maybe next time (if you get a next time) try actually putting some thought/content into your comment?
03/19/09
Come on, Giz. Something needs to be done about all this incredibly stupid commenting of late. All the non-Facebook commenters have had to earn the right to be able to comment by first demonstrating they had something at least slightly clever to say. What happened to that? Now with Facebookers being allowed to automatically flood the comments without being screended and without regard to commenting ability, Giz is becoming (has become) a graveyard for dullard dronings.
03/19/09
but then with their existence we can point out their wrongs and show we're generally more correct, less snobby and less annoying (and have a general dislike for) them, in a nice way without violating banhammer rules, of course.
it's like, a segregation between gizmodians and facebookers, almost.
--
anyway.
iProd?
Maybe it's a iPod in the shape and form of a prodding stick. An extra long ipod shuffle perhaps? We might even see a button!
03/19/09
I actually LOVE Facebook, have my own account and am using it to network with filmmakers/photographers. Indeed, I actually welcome Facebookers to Gizmodo; more readers can only be a good thing.
BUT.
Where I am deeply troubled is by the apparent fact that Facebookers arrive in Giz with the ability to comment automatically enabled. So, where some FBrs will have actual fun or insightful things to say, others will be just...well...stupid.
Prior to this new arrangement, AFAIK, for years Gizmodo had it set up that your comments would not appear until you had first been approved by someone in Giz. While not a failsafe way to prevent lameness (and it could also inadvertently block/delay otherwise good/interesting commenters--I know this from firsthand experience) it at least kept the quality of comment up at a much higher level. (Well, sometimes.)
Now, without pre-screening, it's a free-for-all of banality.
03/19/09
I haven't been a member for that long either, although I remember how there was no commenting feature for years, so I guess I'm too old school.
Now get off mah lawn, all of you!
03/19/09
your first few comments are normally not posted until a moderator reads em and gives you the thumbs up. they sit in comment limbo. since most jackasses cant resist being dumbshits on the first comment, it's a reasonably good filter.
03/19/09
That means more $$ for Giz, hence the propensity toward inflamatory articles and less policing on the commenters. A while back, when times weren't so lean, they could afford to seperate the wheat from the chaff, as it were. Now that chaff, though it chafes us, means more potential income for them, and so they tolerate it (with only extreme exceptions).
Note that there hasn't been much disemvowelling or banhammering lately, despite the rampant idiocy. Banning people increases the likelihood that they'll descrease their readership. Especially with Facebook, where the friend-of-a-friend model alters the way Giz gets new click throughs.
02/14/09
02/14/09
02/14/09
02/14/09
With a live studio audience they couldn't use CGI, but that doesnt' mean they can't swap out a real ball for a CGI one between the performance and the broadcast. That's what China did for the fireworks footsteps, after all (only they had to have the CGI version ready to air during a live broadcast). Speaking of which, is this show aired live or not? If it is, then that pretty much kills the idea that it's CGI, on the specific issue that they'd be very quickly outed as having broadcast something that never actually happened.
02/14/09
02/14/09
Really thin strings and a really lightweight ball.
02/14/09
02/14/09
02/14/09
Think, Facebook. THINK.
02/14/09
Think, Hater. THINK.
God this FB hating needs to stop
02/15/09
02/14/09
02/14/09
Dunno about that, but the Harry Potter "lookalike" that they have showing it off looks creepy as hell.