<?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: Foxmarks, A Super Easy Way To Sync Firefox Bookmarks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://laughingsquid.com/foxmarks-a-super-easy-way-to-sync-firefox-bookmarks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://laughingsquid.com/foxmarks-a-super-easy-way-to-sync-firefox-bookmarks/</link>
	<description>art, culture and technology from San Francisco and beyond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:36:25 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Taff</title>
		<link>http://laughingsquid.com/foxmarks-a-super-easy-way-to-sync-firefox-bookmarks/comment-page-1/#comment-542266</link>
		<dc:creator>Taff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:57:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laughingsquid.com/?p=5241#comment-542266</guid>
		<description>FoxMarks works fine for storing and updating the bookmarks from one PC but are they overloaded? I cannot get the second to bring up a complete login box. It looks as though their servers are too busy to server the https login page. Has anyone else seen this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FoxMarks works fine for storing and updating the bookmarks from one PC but are they overloaded? I cannot get the second to bring up a complete login box. It looks as though their servers are too busy to server the https login page. Has anyone else seen this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amberella</title>
		<link>http://laughingsquid.com/foxmarks-a-super-easy-way-to-sync-firefox-bookmarks/comment-page-1/#comment-542265</link>
		<dc:creator>amberella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:30:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laughingsquid.com/?p=5241#comment-542265</guid>
		<description>I used to use Foxmarks, then switched to GMarks and finally onto Weave.  I can&#039;t say I&#039;ve been that impressed (yet), especially with how they&#039;re still working things out and so every time I close a browser window I get a &quot;Syncing with Weave&quot; popup that won&#039;t go away.  Still, it&#039;s like, v. 0.2 so I&#039;m holding out.  The management interface and tagging system beats Foxmarks to a pulp.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to use Foxmarks, then switched to GMarks and finally onto Weave.  I can&#39;t say I&#39;ve been that impressed (yet), especially with how they&#39;re still working things out and so every time I close a browser window I get a &#8220;Syncing with Weave&#8221; popup that won&#39;t go away.  Still, it&#39;s like, v. 0.2 so I&#39;m holding out.  The management interface and tagging system beats Foxmarks to a pulp.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: frozeno</title>
		<link>http://laughingsquid.com/foxmarks-a-super-easy-way-to-sync-firefox-bookmarks/comment-page-1/#comment-542264</link>
		<dc:creator>frozeno</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:31:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laughingsquid.com/?p=5241#comment-542264</guid>
		<description>Using Weave at the moment (signed up recently, so I must&#039;ve snuck in at the last second). It definitely looks promising. Once they get the performance and stability issues sorted out, it should overtake the alternatives. Fairly flexible so far, fully encrypted, etc.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Not sure when they plan on updating it, but I definitely recommend checking it out once you get another chance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using Weave at the moment (signed up recently, so I must&#39;ve snuck in at the last second). It definitely looks promising. Once they get the performance and stability issues sorted out, it should overtake the alternatives. Fairly flexible so far, fully encrypted, etc.</p>
<p>Not sure when they plan on updating it, but I definitely recommend checking it out once you get another chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
