Talk:Brian Reid (computer scientist)

Untitled

It says in the article that Brian Reid's experiment with the Usenet Cookbook was an early web publishing project. I vividly remember subscribing to this in approximately 1986, well before the World Wide Web was envisioned. It's more accurate to say that it was a distributed Internet publishing experiment. It also used troff/nroff formatting, in the style of Unix "man" pages, rather than HTML, GML, SGML or anything of that ilk. As I recall, what was novel about it was that it was a moderated group, that attempted to maintain some quality of the recipes. I think there was some sort of voting system to encourage comments on individual recipes. I think there were 3-4 or maybe 5 recipes released each week, which could be printed and inserted in a binder. Brent 01:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

"He was fired in February 2004, nine days before Google's IPO," cannot be accurate, as the IPO was in late summer of '04. I see from the reference that it should be nine days before the announcement of teh IPO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.123.180.213 (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Incomplete?

Over on "Google to employees: don't get old if you want to keep your job", I see in the first comment a long list of accomplishments which don't seem to all be included. --Gwern (contribs) 20:06 8 October 2007 (GMT)

Linked site is currently 404. 121.45.185.9 (talk) 02:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

@ sign

I removed the claim "Reid was on the committee that developed the e-mail protocol and it was his suggestion that led to the adoption of the '@' symbol in the standard e-mail address format." This has been begging for a cite for 7 months. The use of the @-sign in email addresses is generally attributed to Ray Tomlinson; see [1], [2]. TJRC (talk) 22:43, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Too old to matter

The Wikipedia article says that Urs said that Reed was "too old to matter", and it cites a sfgate article as the source. But, the source material says that Urs said that Reed's *IDEAS* we obsolete and "too old to matter". Urs was talking about Reed's ideas as being too old, and not Reed himself. According to the source material. I work at Google, so I am not willing to make the change myself. Branciforte3241 (talk) 19:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Good catch. I've corrected that. It would have been okay for you to have just gone in and made the change, by the way. It seems uncontroversial to bring the article in line with the source. TJRC (talk) 22:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Brian Reid (computer scientist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921054313/http://engineering.stanford.edu/about/faculty-honors/faculty-distinctions to http://engineering.stanford.edu/about/faculty-honors/faculty-distinctions
• Added {{dead link}} tag to ftp://reports.stanford.edu/pub/cstr/reports/csl/tr/81/201/CSL-TR-81-201.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921055550/http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=6572 to http://centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=6572
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150923215536/http://www.doaneacademy.org/about-us/board-trustees-0 to http://www.doaneacademy.org/about-us/board-trustees-0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:33, 25 July 2017 (UTC)