I'm a C&H fan, but this is a pretty obvious joke, probably been repeated in one form or another since pilots (or whoever) started using the clock face for position. Surely you can think of a better example demostrating watterson's quality? This one woouldn't draw flies to shit;)
Rest assured, though there are many "pure-takers" such as yourself, there are also many people who give as well as take. If this weren't true, open source wouldn't work. Fortunately, it is true. Even small contributions can add up: providing bug reports or helping on a mailing list or testing or documentation or coding or whatever.
Some people will never get it. If you only work on projects because you get paid, or if you only pay for things or contribute money because you have to, or if you only offer help to a cause when required by work or for survival, you will probably never get it.
The fact that some people will never get the open source concept does not reduce the success of the concept for those that do get it.
I'm selling slashdot accounts. Though the main site has run out of new accounts, I still have some available for a resonable price because I was able to stockpile back in the great slashdot-account glut of 2001. If you'd like to buy one, I'd be happy to sell you one at a reasonable price. Just think, with your very own account, you'll be able to post non-AC!!!! Here are the account names I have, please select one and we'll discuss payment plans:
He may have done some funny stuff in the past (don't know which episodes he wrote), doesn't mean I have to respect his poor attemts at comedy he makes now.
Conan O'Brien is the poster-child of mediocrity in pop culture. His success is a promise to the dull, unfunny, untalented, and lazy that they too can have their fame in today's world. He has reached new lows for the art form known as the late-night talk show monologue. Watching him beat a dead horse, repeat the same joke in several differnt forms, or jump to the obvious punchline makes me want to tear my ears off. It's as if the writers for TV's friend gave a crash course in how come up with the obvious joke, and Conan passed the course in flying colors. Conan, if I ever meet you, I will punch you in your unfunny throat.
If your idea of humor is posting the "nerds don't get no sex!!1!" joke for every even remotely appropriate slashdot story, you might like the comic stylings of Conan o'Brien.
Let's see, from MW, we have these objectionable definitions for "liberal":
Main Entry: 1liberal Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&l Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lEodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free Date: 14th century 1 a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth 2 a : marked by generosity : OPENHANDED b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way c : AMPLE, FULL 3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : LICENTIOUS 4 : not literal or strict : LOOSE 5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms 6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
Yep, those are pretty horrible things. Good thing I hate liberals like a good Rush disciple.
Oh, I wasn't aware that the original post was Bjarne. Thanks for setting me straight anonymous coward! If Bjarne thinks that C++ should be a multi-paradigm language, who is he to argue with the wisdom of the drive-by comments of the slashdot AC?
No apparent intelligence? You obviously haven't spent much time with infants; or else you haven't spent much time thinking about the massive complexity of the things they have to learn and understand. Recognizing faces, for example.
I haven't spent a ton of time with infants, but I used to be one. Anyway, we're talking about newborns, not infants in general. Neborns don't recognize faces or anything else for much longer than 3 days. But they figure out the nipple. There is really nothing else a newborn figures out in the first week or longer of its life other than the nipple. Or perhaps you can name something? What are the "other instinctive abilities" of which you speak? Please constrain yourself to the time period in which the newborn "learns" the nipple, which I'm being generous in letting you set at 3 days, although everyone I've talked to has said the newborn figures it out passibly well the first day or even first hour of their lives.
I don't consider a simple operation that takes three days to learn "intuitive".
It wouldn't take you (hopefully) 3 days to learn, It takes something with virtually no skills for interfacing with the outside world (less than) 3 days to learn.
Why are we having this conversation again? Oh yeah, I said "nothing is intuitive, except the nipple". You're saying "the nipple is not intuitive". Since you're not arguing that other things are intuitive while the nipple is not, you are in effect arguing that nothing is intuitive, including the nipple, I conclude that our positions are close enough that we would appear to be bickering extremists to the outside observer. So on that count, I would agree to disagree with you over the point of the nipple.
The point of the quote "the only intuitive interface is the nipple, everything else is learned" is not really to pontificate on the nipple, but instead to point out that almost everything humans do is learned, and the ease of a task is greatly impacted by the abilities and experiences of the taskee. Your objections with respect to the veracity of the clause about the nipple don't affect the main purpose of the quote at all.
So, here you've sidetracked me into quibbling about nipples, but I don't care about the nipple. Instead, I would rather discuss the meaningfulness of the phrase "intuitive interface". If you don't want to discuss that issue and would rather focus on the nipple, you can just bugger off.
Have we had this conversation before? The fact that a newborn baby, a creatrure with no apparent intelligence, survival skills, or other self-defense capabilities, can figure out the nipple in a few days makes it pretty fucking intuitive, in by book.
It's a readers choice award. The fact that they picked a programer's editor (vim, though the same could be said of emacs) indicates that the readers that voted were largely programmers. There are plenty of free mickey-mouse pointy-go-clicky editors available for X/linux, too. Any moron can program an editor with the sophistication of MS notepad with modern toolkits in under a day. Go to freshmeat and search for editors - there are probably many dozens. If you're prefer one of those to something with power, fine, just don't complain that Vim or emacs might be a tool of choice for someone who uses an editor all day long, every day.
And I don't recall that an "intuitive interface" was a criteria for any of the awards, nor even a criteria for a good application. It can help, but it's not always the most important consideration. The only "intuitive interface" is the nipple - everything else is learned.
And Python is fast enough that RedHat uses it for its GUI tools, and
most people can't tell the difference.
I can tell the difference on my redhat 9 system when the up2date program
(written python) doesn't refresh while it's doing its niggly little network
fetching tasks. This might be a redhat-coding problem or a python-gtk or a
python problem, don't really know. Not a huge deal, I suppose.
Imagine a progression of the type of restriction you think is "not a bad idea":
limited by law to 110 emails a day
limited by law to 100 emails a day
limited by law to 90 emails a day
limited by law to 80 emails a day
limited by law to 70 emails a day
limited by law to 60 emails a day
limited by law to 50 emails a day
limited by law to 40 emails a day
limited by law to 30 emails a day
limited by law to 20 emails a day
limited by law to 10 emails a day
limited by law to 5 emails a day
limited by law to 4 emails a day
limited by law to 3 emails a day
limited by law to 2 emails a day
limited by law to 1 emails a day
limited by law to 1 emails a day, reviewd by government
Tell me at what point you agree with this hypothetical "liberal judge" that "free speech" rights are being infringed. Can I call you a fascist without the moderators calling this flamebait?
Slashdot Mirror
I think I love you!!!!
Some people will never get it. If you only work on projects because you get paid, or if you only pay for things or contribute money because you have to, or if you only offer help to a cause when required by work or for survival, you will probably never get it.
The fact that some people will never get the open source concept does not reduce the success of the concept for those that do get it.
IMHO
Why is "skepticism" called "skepticism"?
- stoopid_lazy_fuck
- moron
- knuckle-dragger
- Sheep-lover
- last-person-alive-without-an-email-address-requ
i red-to-create-accounts
- Tortoise-mollestor
- Happathy
Look forward to doing business with you!!!!Then do you your own goddamn benchmark, coward. He even posted his code to make it easy for you.
Just kidding, coward. Log in, if you want to have a conversation, bitch.
He may have done some funny stuff in the past (don't know which episodes he wrote), doesn't mean I have to respect his poor attemts at comedy he makes now.
Take my wife, please !!!!!!!!!
If your idea of humor is posting the "nerds don't get no sex!!1!" joke for every even remotely appropriate slashdot story, you might like the comic stylings of Conan o'Brien.
Let's see, from MW, we have these objectionable definitions for "liberal":
Main Entry: 1liberal
Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lEodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
Date: 14th century
1 a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a : marked by generosity : OPENHANDED b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way c : AMPLE, FULL
3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : LICENTIOUS
4 : not literal or strict : LOOSE
5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
Yep, those are pretty horrible things. Good thing I hate liberals like a good Rush disciple.
I do this occaisonally while I wait in line or in traffic in my car. Loads of fun.
Oh, I wasn't aware that the original post was Bjarne. Thanks for setting me straight anonymous coward! If Bjarne thinks that C++ should be a multi-paradigm language, who is he to argue with the wisdom of the drive-by comments of the slashdot AC?
Yeah!! And if seatbelts are such a good idea in cars, how come they weren't in the first Model T?? HuH??
And if small cell phones are such a good idea, how come the first cell phones were BIG?? Well, mister smarty pants?
And if journalling filesystems are so fucking hot, how come linux first came out with non-journalling filesystems!!!!? Huh
And if Swing is such a great toolkit for Java, can you tell my why Java first came out with AWT?? Well, can you, genius??
I haven't spent a ton of time with infants, but I used to be one. Anyway, we're talking about newborns, not infants in general. Neborns don't recognize faces or anything else for much longer than 3 days. But they figure out the nipple. There is really nothing else a newborn figures out in the first week or longer of its life other than the nipple. Or perhaps you can name something? What are the "other instinctive abilities" of which you speak? Please constrain yourself to the time period in which the newborn "learns" the nipple, which I'm being generous in letting you set at 3 days, although everyone I've talked to has said the newborn figures it out passibly well the first day or even first hour of their lives.
It wouldn't take you (hopefully) 3 days to learn, It takes something with virtually no skills for interfacing with the outside world (less than) 3 days to learn.
Why are we having this conversation again? Oh yeah, I said "nothing is intuitive, except the nipple". You're saying "the nipple is not intuitive". Since you're not arguing that other things are intuitive while the nipple is not, you are in effect arguing that nothing is intuitive, including the nipple, I conclude that our positions are close enough that we would appear to be bickering extremists to the outside observer. So on that count, I would agree to disagree with you over the point of the nipple.
The point of the quote "the only intuitive interface is the nipple, everything else is learned" is not really to pontificate on the nipple, but instead to point out that almost everything humans do is learned, and the ease of a task is greatly impacted by the abilities and experiences of the taskee. Your objections with respect to the veracity of the clause about the nipple don't affect the main purpose of the quote at all.
So, here you've sidetracked me into quibbling about nipples, but I don't care about the nipple. Instead, I would rather discuss the meaningfulness of the phrase "intuitive interface". If you don't want to discuss that issue and would rather focus on the nipple, you can just bugger off.
HAND
Have we had this conversation before? The fact that a newborn baby, a creatrure with no apparent intelligence, survival skills, or other self-defense capabilities, can figure out the nipple in a few days makes it pretty fucking intuitive, in by book.
And I don't recall that an "intuitive interface" was a criteria for any of the awards, nor even a criteria for a good application. It can help, but it's not always the most important consideration. The only "intuitive interface" is the nipple - everything else is learned.
Mod parent +1 insightful, thank you.
Boy are you confused.
I think it's more of a toolkit/X11/window manager/backing store issue. Many signle threaded apps get it right. I'm no expert though.
I can tell the difference on my redhat 9 system when the up2date program (written python) doesn't refresh while it's doing its niggly little network fetching tasks. This might be a redhat-coding problem or a python-gtk or a python problem, don't really know. Not a huge deal, I suppose.
- limited by law to 110 emails a day
- limited by law to 100 emails a day
- limited by law to 90 emails a day
- limited by law to 80 emails a day
- limited by law to 70 emails a day
- limited by law to 60 emails a day
- limited by law to 50 emails a day
- limited by law to 40 emails a day
- limited by law to 30 emails a day
- limited by law to 20 emails a day
- limited by law to 10 emails a day
- limited by law to 5 emails a day
- limited by law to 4 emails a day
- limited by law to 3 emails a day
- limited by law to 2 emails a day
- limited by law to 1 emails a day
- limited by law to 1 emails a day, reviewd by government
Tell me at what point you agree with this hypothetical "liberal judge" that "free speech" rights are being infringed. Can I call you a fascist without the moderators calling this flamebait?Or unless 250 million other American disagree with them. Or unless they're just stupid.
Yeah, baby.