Search Here ….

Tags

affect AI AI slop AI STORIES alumni art autocorrect Blogging book ChatGPT conferences data analysis digital art electronic literature ELMCIP environmental art exhibition flies Gephi history journalister LLMs London machine vision market literature motherhood network analysis norsk open access Pierre Huyghe publication publications research science fiction self-representation selfies social media Surveillance talks teaching tracking trip report twitter UiB visualisation
Uncategorised

layout problems

Jill3 Comments

Any MoveableType experts around? I’d love help on this. You see, if someone sends me a trackback, but the entry it’s sent from doesn’t have a title, MoveableType substitutes the URL of the post instead. The URL is invariably far too long and on PCs this breaks the layout of this site. There’s a nasty overlap thing that happens. Macs (Explorer and Safari, at least) deal with the long URL by elegantly breaking it up. If you’re on a PC you’ll be seeing the ugliness of this right now, because I got a titleless trackback.

Here’s my code for showing the trackbacks:

<MTPings lastn=”7″>
<a href=”<$MTPingURL$>”><$MTPingTitle$></a><br>
(<$MTPingDate format=”%e/%m”$> from <i><$MTPingBlogName$></i>)<br />
</MTPings>

I tried putting in a trim_to=”15″ (one of the global tags) as an attribute to <MTPingTitle>, hoping that would cut the long URLs short enough to show neatly in the menu, but that simply stops titles or links from showing.

Now, MoveableType won’t do if-then statements, will it? I’d love to be able to say “if there’s a title, use it, otherwise, just put in “titleless” and link from that. There’s heaps of other places I’d have liked to use if-thens as well…

So, any suggestions to how to solve this? I really don’t want to have to scrap the trackbacks in the menu or delete trackbacks without titles, though I suppose the second may be the logical choice.

I posted this question to the MT Support Forum too.

Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “layout problems”

  1. Robert

    You could try getting around it, so that instead of

    “>

    you might use

    “>Entry:

    It changes the aesthetics but it might help.

  2. Robert

    (Whoops. When I hit preview it removed all my careful encoding…)

    You could try getting around it, so that instead of

    <a href=”<$MTPingURL$>”><$MTPingTitle$></a>

    you might use

    <a href=”<$MTPingURL$>”>Link</a>: <$MTPingTitle$>

    It changes the aesthetics but it might help.

  3. Jill

    Mm, that might need to be what I do. I could use an icon of some sort instead of the “link” text, too. Or I’ll just have to delete every trackback without a title. I suppose I have only had two in the last two months, and one of those I crafted myself. Silly of me, huh?

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI and algorithmic culture University politics

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.