Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Office 97 or something have floating tool-windows that could be docked on the toolbar, or the sides (any side) of the document window?
It's almost like they've replaced market-research with pure-fantasy.
Asked and answered: the new paradigm at MS is design-by-focusgroup and design-by-the-windows-feedback-program. Both activities that only people who are semi-retarded visavi computers participate in. Ergo, everything is now shiny, clumsy, basic, in-your-face and nagging you.
Well, sure, I too have an agenda. But I tire of the people who try and use "The science says so! The science!" when they argue to increase governmental power, as if that course of action was somehow favoured by nature rather than just their opinon.
You do realize that even if "The climate is changing" is true, the perpetual - sometimes implied, sometimes expressed - follow-up "...and therefore we must have more socialism and more power to the government" is not a scientific conclusion, right? The natural sciences does not have a political agenda.
Sure. It's both, of course. It is probably a good idea to lock items as dangerous and valuable as firearms in a safe or something similar at times when one cannot monitor them.
There is also the freedom of speech aspect to all this. We may not like it, it may be very inappropriate, it may be inconvenient or dangerous to many people, but the freedom of speech should not be abridged; private persons should be allowed to publish whatever they want. (This is the nutty libertarian view. I understand that very few people agree.)
In some places it can also expose you to stigma. Imagine not getting a job (and not being told why) because you're on one of these lists.
I am actually fine with that. People hiring should get to decide who they want to hire. If someone does not want to hire gun nuts (or any other category, real or imagined), he should be allowed not to. And if he doesn't want to say why, he shouldn't have to either.
I am not a Gun Owner, but if I were, I don't want to be on a public list to say I am one of "those people".
I don't own any guns but I could probably stand being on a list of houses that it is potentially life-threatening to break into because the owners are dangerous gun-owning lunatics. (Also note how none of my neighbours are on that list, crooks.)
Those too. You should want to wear a seatbelt and helmet. However if you do not, it is your own damn fault if something happens. However you should have to have insurance because if you do get injured or killed, then you are affecting other people from your injury.
Everything I do affects other people. Why is injuring myself special?
Yeah. Remember when the main differences between "us" and "them" was that our side did not monitor their subjects' every move, and did not torture people? Those were the days.
It's amazing (and depressing) how many take offense rather than express thankfulness when strangers help them write less like third-graders, for free. Don't let the ignoramuses discourage you, azav!
Have you missed the new Windows UI paradigm, where you just type in a few letters and - get this - it finds and starts the program you want to run? Finally, someone invented an easily useable interface. Thank you, Microsoft!
Like climate change, where 97% of studies conclude that climate change is real.
What leftists fail to appreciate is that from there it does not follow "and therefore we must have more regulations, more winner-picking, more surveillance, or higher taxes".
Who do you think will be the only ones able to handle the regulatory burden that comes with producing the raw materials for this machine? Also, National Health Ministries will have a field day with this. Now they can finally monitor and make sure that all citizens eat healtily and according to regulations and recommendations every day.
Slashdot Mirror
Strange how no-one "rejected change" in any other office version. Except for the one with Clippy.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Office 97 or something have floating tool-windows that could be docked on the toolbar, or the sides (any side) of the document window?
Or we could, you know, have both as options.
That's crazy talk.
It's almost like they've replaced market-research with pure-fantasy.
Asked and answered: the new paradigm at MS is design-by-focusgroup and design-by-the-windows-feedback-program. Both activities that only people who are semi-retarded visavi computers participate in. Ergo, everything is now shiny, clumsy, basic, in-your-face and nagging you.
Huh? What makes you think I am rejecting global warming?
I'm against using global warming as an excuse to increase governmental power, but that is not the same thing as not believing in global warming.
Well, sure, I too have an agenda. But I tire of the people who try and use "The science says so! The science!" when they argue to increase governmental power, as if that course of action was somehow favoured by nature rather than just their opinon.
You do realize that even if "The climate is changing" is true, the perpetual - sometimes implied, sometimes expressed - follow-up "...and therefore we must have more socialism and more power to the government" is not a scientific conclusion, right? The natural sciences does not have a political agenda.
I wouldn't worry. Surely Microsoft is Too Big To Fail.
Sure. It's both, of course. It is probably a good idea to lock items as dangerous and valuable as firearms in a safe or something similar at times when one cannot monitor them.
There is also the freedom of speech aspect to all this. We may not like it, it may be very inappropriate, it may be inconvenient or dangerous to many people, but the freedom of speech should not be abridged; private persons should be allowed to publish whatever they want. (This is the nutty libertarian view. I understand that very few people agree.)
In some places it can also expose you to stigma. Imagine not getting a job (and not being told why) because you're on one of these lists.
I am actually fine with that. People hiring should get to decide who they want to hire. If someone does not want to hire gun nuts (or any other category, real or imagined), he should be allowed not to. And if he doesn't want to say why, he shouldn't have to either.
I am not a Gun Owner, but if I were, I don't want to be on a public list to say I am one of "those people".
I don't own any guns but I could probably stand being on a list of houses that it is potentially life-threatening to break into because the owners are dangerous gun-owning lunatics. (Also note how none of my neighbours are on that list, crooks.)
You want me to trust some company? I trust Stallman. End of list.
It won't affect our sociograms one bit, so go ahead.
Those too. You should want to wear a seatbelt and helmet. However if you do not, it is your own damn fault if something happens. However you should have to have insurance because if you do get injured or killed, then you are affecting other people from your injury.
Everything I do affects other people. Why is injuring myself special?
Yeah. Remember when the main differences between "us" and "them" was that our side did not monitor their subjects' every move, and did not torture people? Those were the days.
It's amazing (and depressing) how many take offense rather than express thankfulness when strangers help them write less like third-graders, for free. Don't let the ignoramuses discourage you, azav!
Good thing that the terr'ists won't be able to print 3D guns now, then, thanks to this law.
Have you missed the new Windows UI paradigm, where you just type in a few letters and - get this - it finds and starts the program you want to run? Finally, someone invented an easily useable interface. Thank you, Microsoft!
For the non-USAians here, what do you mean? Are jurors not allowed to see the words "jury nullification", or what?
What is a "right"? What does it mean to have a "right to life"?
You definitely need to fill up on sarcassium. The sarcasm disclaimer on that is, like, written in ten-foot high neon letters.
So... Are you saying that you disagree with our views on how to run this place?
You're right. I should have left out "surveillance" from that list.
Like climate change, where 97% of studies conclude that climate change is real.
What leftists fail to appreciate is that from there it does not follow "and therefore we must have more regulations, more winner-picking, more surveillance, or higher taxes".
Who do you think will be the only ones able to handle the regulatory burden that comes with producing the raw materials for this machine? Also, National Health Ministries will have a field day with this. Now they can finally monitor and make sure that all citizens eat healtily and according to regulations and recommendations every day.