> We're talking about interfaces which replace a desktop app - but still > need comparable functionality, speed, and interfaces.
I think AJAX will become particularly popular in intranet environments (once the developer drones wrap their minds around it), especially in larger enterprises. Enterprises have always been wanting web applications because of the ease of deployment, but with all the bells and whistles of desktop apps. Until fairly recently that could be quite hard to provide, and sometimes even harder to explain why it wasn't always possible. But with AJAX and DHTML you can come pretty close to fooling people into thinking they're using a "heavy" client. What's more, it can be quite trivial to migrate legacy apps to the web, sometimes practically copying and pasting big chunks of existing data access code into a web service, and feeding a web front-end from this with very little change. In our ASP/VB environment it can take very little time to copy VB6 code, massage it into VBScript format and have a working web service. People are particularly impressed when you provide the kinds of features that were traditionally very hard to to on the web, such as progress updates during a lengthy operation, and in particular "interruptability"--cancelling the operation gracefully before it is completed. It's just a matter of structuring the web service around a particular "unit of work" and updating the interface after each unit. Sounds trivial, but it can make a world of usability difference, and it's so much more elegantly done in AJAX than with autorefresh.
I can't seem to find any "people behind the spoof" info on these guys. They're obviously not really German, since the German version of the website contains babelfished German. In fact, the entire series seems more like a joke on Germans than anything else. Exquisitely funny, though.
> the average American Marine is a young adult who cares about his or her > country enough to put themselves on the line defending it and its principles.
You don't seriously believe that, do you? Most live flesh-and-blood people I know (and around here in the South I know A LOT) that joined the military will give you that same response, but when pressed harder usually much more mundane and believable reasons will emerge. These same people also bitch and whine when it's time to pay taxes or pay any other dues to the country for which they are so ready to die. Where's the love for the country and its principles when it's time to support it financially? I can list you dozens of REAL reasons for why people join, but a burning love for their country it very rarely is.
> can you imagine a Reformation, Counter-Reformation, and The Thirty Years' War in an age of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons?
Well, that is arguably exactly what we're going through now, with fundamentalist Islam's hate of the West being merely a precursor of a great struggle WITHIN the Moslem world about to erupt. Terrorists do get more TV face time, but there are huge numbers of Moslems that oppose that sort of mentality and are only slowly finding a collective voice.
> that does not mean they have no use for it. It was written for their benefit!
Dude, in that context "Judaism" means the Jewish Religion, and implying that they OUGHT to value the New Testament because it was written "for their benefit" is so deeply cynical that one has to wonder whether you are one of those who believe that the Jews had it coming because "they killed Jesus."
Correction, I read 10% of the article, since the error mentioned is in invention #2 of 20. And if someone commits such a blatant faux pas as attributing the origin of the term "camera obscura" to the Arab word "qamara" without even the slightest etymological apprehension or unease, the remaining 90% seem equally questionable, regardless of what it might look like from your perch upon that high horse. This is not unlike suggesting that Shakespeare is much better in the original Klingon.
Yup, finding such an obvious factual error so high up in the list pretty much stopped me from reading anything further. This list was obviously created by someone on a mission.
> Christianity and Judaism speak to morality and salvation, but do not specify > the political system. Islam does, and specifies crimes, punishments, etc.
I beg your pardon? I guess you haven't read the Bible much, especially the Old Testament. It does very much outline the framework of a political and social system, complete with excruciating detail regarding crimes and their punishment. That we choose not to structure our societies according to those rules ANYMORE is an entirely different matter. Christianity and Islam are a lot similar than you would like to think, and were even more so before the Reformation. Islam merely haven't had their Martin Luther (yet).
Well, I don't know either Niels or Bruce, but I trained Bruce's dog to fetch when it was still a puppy, and I will take this association as sufficient to assure me of Bruce's dog's owner's ex-associate's honest intent.
I guess I have no idea what your point was, then. I thought that by "English degrees are worthless in business" you meant that they're not being valued, even though they should be. The following sentence seems to imply that anyway.
> Is this a new problem? I actually don't think so myself.
You're probably right, but what I think is new is the cockiness and sense of entitlement with which this ignorance is being flaunted. Just look at the aggression with which many posters on Slashdot jump down anyone's throat who has the audacity to point out even the most egregious misuse of language. Out of a feeble sense of self-preservation I have stopped making any such observations long ago.
> Let's see... English degrees worthless... nobody can communicate or read... hmmmm....
You don't need an English degree to communicate well. It used to be--and in many other countries still is--that most essential communication skills were taught to what nowadays would practically be college level by the time you left high school. Of course, there are still the unteachable, but at least you were exposed to the material and had your chance to learn it.
> The last thing I need is someone for whom I am doing a substantial part of their job
But you will end up doing that anyway the moment you decide to rise above average and actually be competent at what you're doing. As soon as that happens, you will become known as the go-to person who gets things done. That way, nobody else has to bother knowing how to.
> Unfortunately, this may be a humbling experience for some applicants.
Sadly, it may be a sobering experience for yourself as well. Depending on where you're located, this bar may be impossibly high for too many applicants, and you will have to settle.
Does he? Perhaps in this case, because the thoughts you were trying to express were so simple. But given that sampling of your writing skills I have absolutely no doubt that you would crash and burn miserably when asked to write anything more complex, such as required in a business setting. Yes, the world does go on, but it goes on DESPITE people such as yourself, not BECAUSE of you. Thankfully there are still sufficient numbers of people who can express themselves to each other to carry on meaningful social and scientific interaction.
Actually, musical rights are governed by a special version of a well known quantum physical law, the RIAA's Musical License-Property Duality. This law stipulates that the rights to musical works depend on the situation: if music is to be resold to a third party, the rights to it behave like a license, thus disallowing such sales. If however the music medium becomes damaged and unplayable, its rights take on the shape of those to physical goods, making medium exchanges impossible and unfair to the manufacturer. It's a very strange and fascinating area of quantum (musical IP) physics.
Slashdot Mirror
> We're talking about interfaces which replace a desktop app - but still
> need comparable functionality, speed, and interfaces.
I think AJAX will become particularly popular in intranet environments (once the developer drones wrap their minds around it), especially in larger enterprises. Enterprises have always been wanting web applications because of the ease of deployment, but with all the bells and whistles of desktop apps. Until fairly recently that could be quite hard to provide, and sometimes even harder to explain why it wasn't always possible. But with AJAX and DHTML you can come pretty close to fooling people into thinking they're using a "heavy" client. What's more, it can be quite trivial to migrate legacy apps to the web, sometimes practically copying and pasting big chunks of existing data access code into a web service, and feeding a web front-end from this with very little change. In our ASP/VB environment it can take very little time to copy VB6 code, massage it into VBScript format and have a working web service. People are particularly impressed when you provide the kinds of features that were traditionally very hard to to on the web, such as progress updates during a lengthy operation, and in particular "interruptability"--cancelling the operation gracefully before it is completed. It's just a matter of structuring the web service around a particular "unit of work" and updating the interface after each unit. Sounds trivial, but it can make a world of usability difference, and it's so much more elegantly done in AJAX than with autorefresh.
I can't seem to find any "people behind the spoof" info on these guys. They're obviously not really German, since the German version of the website contains babelfished German. In fact, the entire series seems more like a joke on Germans than anything else. Exquisitely funny, though.
You've got it exactly backwards, but there's probably no convincing you.
(Dictionary.com: effect, affect)
> Yes I do believe what I wrote.
Well, believing something doesn't make it so.
> the average American Marine is a young adult who cares about his or her
> country enough to put themselves on the line defending it and its principles.
You don't seriously believe that, do you? Most live flesh-and-blood people I know (and around here in the South I know A LOT) that joined the military will give you that same response, but when pressed harder usually much more mundane and believable reasons will emerge. These same people also bitch and whine when it's time to pay taxes or pay any other dues to the country for which they are so ready to die. Where's the love for the country and its principles when it's time to support it financially? I can list you dozens of REAL reasons for why people join, but a burning love for their country it very rarely is.
> can you imagine a Reformation, Counter-Reformation, and The Thirty Years' War in an age of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons?
Well, that is arguably exactly what we're going through now, with fundamentalist Islam's hate of the West being merely a precursor of a great struggle WITHIN the Moslem world about to erupt. Terrorists do get more TV face time, but there are huge numbers of Moslems that oppose that sort of mentality and are only slowly finding a collective voice.
> that does not mean they have no use for it. It was written for their benefit!
Dude, in that context "Judaism" means the Jewish Religion, and implying that they OUGHT to value the New Testament because it was written "for their benefit" is so deeply cynical that one has to wonder whether you are one of those who believe that the Jews had it coming because "they killed Jesus."
Correction, I read 10% of the article, since the error mentioned is in invention #2 of 20. And if someone commits such a blatant faux pas as attributing the origin of the term "camera obscura" to the Arab word "qamara" without even the slightest etymological apprehension or unease, the remaining 90% seem equally questionable, regardless of what it might look like from your perch upon that high horse. This is not unlike suggesting that Shakespeare is much better in the original Klingon.
> So GP was completely correct.
Even even we take that narrow view, he's still only 50% correct, because he also mentioned Judaism, which clearly has no use for the NT.
Yup, finding such an obvious factual error so high up in the list pretty much stopped me from reading anything further. This list was obviously created by someone on a mission.
> Christianity and Judaism speak to morality and salvation, but do not specify
> the political system. Islam does, and specifies crimes, punishments, etc.
I beg your pardon? I guess you haven't read the Bible much, especially the Old Testament. It does very much outline the framework of a political and social system, complete with excruciating detail regarding crimes and their punishment. That we choose not to structure our societies according to those rules ANYMORE is an entirely different matter. Christianity and Islam are a lot similar than you would like to think, and were even more so before the Reformation. Islam merely haven't had their Martin Luther (yet).
Because--as we all know--companies that do have Chief Marketing Officers never commit any PR gaffes. You can never have enough management!
Well, I don't know either Niels or Bruce, but I trained Bruce's dog to fetch when it was still a puppy, and I will take this association as sufficient to assure me of Bruce's dog's owner's ex-associate's honest intent.
No, but it will constantly mutter that it's only a model.
I still think Patsy would have been a much cuddlier name.
Thank you, couldn't have said it better myself.
I guess I have no idea what your point was, then. I thought that by "English degrees are worthless in business" you meant that they're not being valued, even though they should be. The following sentence seems to imply that anyway.
> Is this a new problem? I actually don't think so myself.
You're probably right, but what I think is new is the cockiness and sense of entitlement with which this ignorance is being flaunted. Just look at the aggression with which many posters on Slashdot jump down anyone's throat who has the audacity to point out even the most egregious misuse of language. Out of a feeble sense of self-preservation I have stopped making any such observations long ago.
It was a very fine repartee, nonetheless ;-)
> Let's see... English degrees worthless... nobody can communicate or read... hmmmm....
You don't need an English degree to communicate well. It used to be--and in many other countries still is--that most essential communication skills were taught to what nowadays would practically be college level by the time you left high school. Of course, there are still the unteachable, but at least you were exposed to the material and had your chance to learn it.
> The last thing I need is someone for whom I am doing a substantial part of their job
But you will end up doing that anyway the moment you decide to rise above average and actually be competent at what you're doing. As soon as that happens, you will become known as the go-to person who gets things done. That way, nobody else has to bother knowing how to.
> Unfortunately, this may be a humbling experience for some applicants.
Sadly, it may be a sobering experience for yourself as well. Depending on where you're located, this bar may be impossibly high for too many applicants, and you will have to settle.
> The two tiered pins would make for an exceptionally easy 'layered' approach
This definitely calls for some shrubbery.
> So what, you know exactly what I meant anyway.
Does he? Perhaps in this case, because the thoughts you were trying to express were so simple. But given that sampling of your writing skills I have absolutely no doubt that you would crash and burn miserably when asked to write anything more complex, such as required in a business setting. Yes, the world does go on, but it goes on DESPITE people such as yourself, not BECAUSE of you. Thankfully there are still sufficient numbers of people who can express themselves to each other to carry on meaningful social and scientific interaction.
> They can't have it both ways.
Actually, musical rights are governed by a special version of a well known quantum physical law, the RIAA's Musical License-Property Duality. This law stipulates that the rights to musical works depend on the situation: if music is to be resold to a third party, the rights to it behave like a license, thus disallowing such sales. If however the music medium becomes damaged and unplayable, its rights take on the shape of those to physical goods, making medium exchanges impossible and unfair to the manufacturer. It's a very strange and fascinating area of quantum (musical IP) physics.