Scotland.
Just you wait and see. Solving the West Lothian question the hard way whilst simultaneously removing the hardest core of Labour support from the electorate.
The vast majority of users are right handed, and mouse right handed. Thus, the scrollbar is on the right side, and an idle mouse cursor is on the right side.
This doesn't actually follow like this you know. Think about it. The scroll bar needn't be on the right just because your mouse is because the control device and the display are divorced. Your statement would make more sense for a touch screen, maybe... but I think the 'scroll bar right' convention came about long before these were generally available.
Just saying 'thus' doesn't automatically make something true.
Democracy - literally meaning rule/government by (the) people. Your stated reasons for open source being 'democratic' (don't like something? then you can do it differently) have no relation to this.
'Pure' Democracy requires equality, for sure, but it is NOT primarily, or even peripherally about freedom.
Any form of 'government' is the restriction of individual freedoms of action by its very nature. If it were not, it would not be 'governing' anything.
Put someone into a job that's beyond their capacity they'll do it poorly, be miserable while doing it, and make everyone everyone miserable in the process.
It *did* have an actual budget. Approximately 2 pence and as much cardboard as they could steal from the local dump per episode, true, but it was still a budget.
If there's one thing Apple are known for it's *not* opening up their kit to outside influences. Apples game plan is (and always has been) about rather more strict control of what happens when you use a bit of their kit then, for instance, MS. If you like the way Apple does things then that's all good. If you don't, its not.
In any case, Apple and Google are doing different things. Google are trying to establish their mobile device operating system, Apple are trying to establish their physical device that happens to carry a unique operating system. As long as iPhone OS is unavailable on any other device, it cannot become the dominant mobile device operating system because, plain fact, most people don't spend that much cash on a phone.
Now, in terms of revenue (the 'success' criteria for the businesses), I don't pretend to know which is going to work out better in the long run. But, in terms of cold, hard, world domination experience, I'm going to go with Google. After all, for all the success Apple have had over the years, they've never verbed their brand. (with all credit to Calvin and Hobbes for the term 'verbed').
"To make voting convenient, you can select advisers to cast your votes for you"
What a great new idea, people to cast votes on issues on your behalf. In Britain we could call them MPs. For you, our colonial Brethren, why not call them Congressmen.
What you've just done is describe a political party. You might envisage more robust accountability mechanisms, and you might see a large role for technology in easing inclusion for the party members, but its still just a political party, not anything new or radical.
...developers can not, on a fundamental level:
1. Talk to each other directly
2. Understand what the customer needs
3. Deliver software on time. To be fair though, this does sound about right to me. And I speak as a developer here. Of course, this doesn't mean problem solved, since I would (turn and turn about) assume that management, of nearly every stripe can't:
1: Talk to the customer without unrealistically inflating their expectations and WON'T talk to the developers to see if what they just promised is even possible.
2: Understand what the customer might be able to get for a given amount of cash and time.
3) Deliver software on time.
I call it the 'Yes, but I've told the customer it will shoot lasers' syndrome.*
Either way, the concept of Program Manager is hardly unique to MS. Sadly.
*. Sadly, this doesn't work as derogatory if you work in a Laser laboratory.
I'm surprised theres not more here about emergent behaviour. Any true sandbox (i.e. 'here's a world, go play') should support emergent behaviour. GTA, as much fun as it is, never really lets you do anything the devs didn't design in. Sure, you CAN do things much more than the devs intended you to, but its hard to do something new.
Personally, I've only ever seen/done one true bit of emergent play, in a game called Urban Chaos on PS1. Not realising the 'proper' route, I spent quite a while forcing a truck up an alley, so I could climb onto it and get over a wall into a target location. Once inside it became quickly apparent that the whole mission was broken by my doing this. NOTHING worked. So I guess thats actually 'almost' emergent, since whilst I managed to do something the devs clearly had not planned for, the engine was not robust enough to cope.
Oh, maybe S.T.A.L.K.E.R. too. More games like that please.
I just happened to have read the Hobbit, and have just started LOTR again so...
Characters who appear in 'The Hobbit' and 'LOTR'
Bilbo Elrond Gandalf Gloin (in the books he is at the council, though I don't think he made the film cut) Gwahir, the eagle lord Lobelia Sackville-Baggins Gollum Tom, William and... the other troll (though they are admittedly immobile stone in LOTR)
That's it for actual appearances, though many are talked about in both (Dain, Sauron, Bard, Beorn.. the list is long).
As to ages, well, when Frodo sets out in LOTR he is meant to be about the same age as Bilbo was circa 'The Hobbit' (around 50-51), so we would presumably expect to see an actor of the same apparent age as ole-square-face Elijah Wood. Though I think he was a tiny bit too young looking for a hobbit 51, since this is meant to be early middle age (think around 40 in a human).
"In Australia it's all paper... Am I missing something here?"
Yes, the fact that it HAS to be paper in Oz because there isn't a computer in existence that could cope with the complexities of the Australian PR implementation.
Thanks, I'm here all week. Try the fish. It's lovely.
I can go with Linux being a clone of UNIX (and I don't think anyone would disagree)
BUT!
KDE/Gnome hardly 'rip off' Windows. That would imply that Windows 'invented' WIMP (since this is why they seem alike), and this is demonstrably not so...
On that note does GNOME remind anyone else of GEM on the old ST's? I always get this strange feeling of deja vu when I see a GNOME desktop...
"you'd think that someone who was getting paid $100K+ a year would have a clue about data security"
No, not really. I'd think they'd have a clue about climbing the greasy pole to get their snouts in the trough, but I would only assume they were any good at the job if I'd seen some actual evidence of intellect. Most definitely not a given... After all the most 'senior' American, Mr. George W. Bush, is not exactly a beacon of searing intelligence is he (come on, even if you're Republican, you have to admit he's not terribly bright)? And look how far he managed to get.
I'm struck by the number of people posting things along the lines of:
Open Office isn't as good because it doesn't do [something] the way MS Office does it
or
OO isn't as good because it won't render MS Office stuff properly.
Now, I have no real preference for either (I have both on my Machine, since the other half needs MS Office to be compatible with a course she's doing, and I had OO originally cause it was free...) But why are these things that make *Open Office* 'worse'?
Why are there never winges about 'MS Office just doesn't render Open Office format docs properly' or 'MS is rubbish because the tab key behaves differently to OO'?
A lot of people, including AANZ, seem to be confusing familiarity with quality, when it ain't necessarily so...
doing neither. Try Physics (or any other *real* science, its just that physics can, if work the system right, contains substantial amounts of computing courses. Plus its better. And yes, I am a physics grad). I'm not really trolling here. Its just that I'd much rather see people taught how to think in under-graduate level courses rather than taught how to *do*.
Of course, if its too late (i.e. your A-levels aren't focused in the right direction), CS over a more practically focused course, any day of the week. The amount of 'IT' grads I've met who have precisely no clue as to how to approach a *new* problem is not insignificant. I'm not saying these people were stupid, I'm saying that their education did not teach them to THINK. And that, really, is what ANY job is all about.
Oh, and a wee note for our colonial chums, we don't do the Major/Minor, points (course credits) win prizes thing over here. That's why its reasonable for us to call them Universities, since you tend to study ONE (uni) thing, and its fair that you call them colleges, cause you do tend to study multiple things. So, 'Both', is probably not a viable option.
And cue flame war on the relative merits of the two systems...
Flip Answer: Well, it IS the *UK* national archive. Also, I think you'll find its the *English* language. Even as mangled by my colonial friends.
Sarcastic Answer: I maybe thought you had a point until you said the Font matters for... Poems. Really, the font matters for poetry? I think you're kind of missing the point of poems (to make angsty teenagers feel arty, at length, of course...)
Reasoned Answer: Hmm, you're kind of proving my point. Your trying to find an electronic answer to every single problem before you even get started. Its the wrong approach. You stay as simple as possible and complicate as required. Basically, text can be captured as ASCII or UTF or whatever (Its not that important, as long as its simple), and anything else can be scanned in the simplest possible BITMAP format. Voila, everything covered.
I'm kinda posted out now, but remember, the primary goal for this kind of archive is to
MAKE IT LAST A LONG TIME IN AN EASILY UNDERSTOOD OR TRANSLATED MEDIUM.
Everything else needs to be subservient to that. Really.
Its a bit different for company archives. The goals there aren't for true longevity in the national interest, just long enough to last till you shred it when the fraud office comes calling...
give it a hundred years. Yes, their hyperbole was a bit extreme, but in the long run... Fancy having a go at translating an old wax cylinder with just your modern PC? (No cheating and whipping out that wax cyclinder player you have sitting round in the attic.)
And also, that said, I went to transfer some stuff from a floppy at work to day... ulp, my PC (standard company issue) had no floppy drive.
Slashdot Mirror
I dread to think what Cameron will come up with.
Scotland. Just you wait and see. Solving the West Lothian question the hard way whilst simultaneously removing the hardest core of Labour support from the electorate.
The vast majority of users are right handed, and mouse right handed. Thus, the scrollbar is on the right side, and an idle mouse cursor is on the right side.
This doesn't actually follow like this you know. Think about it. The scroll bar needn't be on the right just because your mouse is because the control device and the display are divorced. Your statement would make more sense for a touch screen, maybe... but I think the 'scroll bar right' convention came about long before these were generally available. Just saying 'thus' doesn't automatically make something true.
Democracy - literally meaning rule/government by (the) people. Your stated reasons for open source being 'democratic' (don't like something? then you can do it differently) have no relation to this. 'Pure' Democracy requires equality, for sure, but it is NOT primarily, or even peripherally about freedom. Any form of 'government' is the restriction of individual freedoms of action by its very nature. If it were not, it would not be 'governing' anything.
Put someone into a job that's beyond their capacity they'll do it poorly, be miserable while doing it, and make everyone everyone miserable in the process.
Ah, so you've met Gordon Brown then?
It *did* have an actual budget. Approximately 2 pence and as much cardboard as they could steal from the local dump per episode, true, but it was still a budget.
To have someone set some damn passwords? (10th Paragraph).
If there's one thing Apple are known for it's *not* opening up their kit to outside influences. Apples game plan is (and always has been) about rather more strict control of what happens when you use a bit of their kit then, for instance, MS. If you like the way Apple does things then that's all good. If you don't, its not. In any case, Apple and Google are doing different things. Google are trying to establish their mobile device operating system, Apple are trying to establish their physical device that happens to carry a unique operating system. As long as iPhone OS is unavailable on any other device, it cannot become the dominant mobile device operating system because, plain fact, most people don't spend that much cash on a phone. Now, in terms of revenue (the 'success' criteria for the businesses), I don't pretend to know which is going to work out better in the long run. But, in terms of cold, hard, world domination experience, I'm going to go with Google. After all, for all the success Apple have had over the years, they've never verbed their brand. (with all credit to Calvin and Hobbes for the term 'verbed').
"To make voting convenient, you can select advisers to cast your votes for you"
What a great new idea, people to cast votes on issues on your behalf. In Britain we could call them MPs. For you, our colonial Brethren, why not call them Congressmen.
Hang on a minute, that sounds familiar...
What you've just done is describe a political party. You might envisage more robust accountability mechanisms, and you might see a large role for technology in easing inclusion for the party members, but its still just a political party, not anything new or radical.
...developers can not, on a fundamental level: 1. Talk to each other directly 2. Understand what the customer needs 3. Deliver software on time1: Talk to the customer without unrealistically inflating their expectations and WON'T talk to the developers to see if what they just promised is even possible.
2: Understand what the customer might be able to get for a given amount of cash and time.
3) Deliver software on time.
I call it the 'Yes, but I've told the customer it will shoot lasers' syndrome.*
Either way, the concept of Program Manager is hardly unique to MS. Sadly.
*. Sadly, this doesn't work as derogatory if you work in a Laser laboratory.
You must be working in tech geek heaven because I note that actually talking to people isn't on your list.
I'm surprised theres not more here about emergent behaviour. Any true sandbox (i.e. 'here's a world, go play') should support emergent behaviour. GTA, as much fun as it is, never really lets you do anything the devs didn't design in. Sure, you CAN do things much more than the devs intended you to, but its hard to do something new. Personally, I've only ever seen/done one true bit of emergent play, in a game called Urban Chaos on PS1. Not realising the 'proper' route, I spent quite a while forcing a truck up an alley, so I could climb onto it and get over a wall into a target location. Once inside it became quickly apparent that the whole mission was broken by my doing this. NOTHING worked. So I guess thats actually 'almost' emergent, since whilst I managed to do something the devs clearly had not planned for, the engine was not robust enough to cope. Oh, maybe S.T.A.L.K.E.R. too. More games like that please.
"but can take what you want on coming home."
Not everywhere, actually. I recently flew back to the UK from Paris, and they had the liquid restrictions.
Not that this makes them any more sensible, mind, but the French are following the idiocy too.
Good point, hadn't occurred to me. So, we want a short, early middle aged actor who's a bit of pompous idiot with hairy feet....
I've got it! Tom Cruise.
I just happened to have read the Hobbit, and have just started LOTR again so...
Characters who appear in 'The Hobbit' and 'LOTR'
Bilbo
Elrond
Gandalf
Gloin (in the books he is at the council, though I don't think he made the film cut)
Gwahir, the eagle lord
Lobelia Sackville-Baggins
Gollum
Tom, William and... the other troll (though they are admittedly immobile stone in LOTR)
That's it for actual appearances, though many are talked about in both (Dain, Sauron, Bard, Beorn.. the list is long).
As to ages, well, when Frodo sets out in LOTR he is meant to be about the same age as Bilbo was circa 'The Hobbit' (around 50-51), so we would presumably expect to see an actor of the same apparent age as ole-square-face Elijah Wood. Though I think he was a tiny bit too young looking for a hobbit 51, since this is meant to be early middle age (think around 40 in a human).
'what we have here is fascism....Well, neoconservatism, which as far as I can tell is the same thing, only with better suits.'
Are you kidding? Everyone knows the Nazi's always had the sharpest uniforms in WWII. In a style war, black ALWAYS wins.
"In Australia it's all paper... Am I missing something here?"
Yes, the fact that it HAS to be paper in Oz because there isn't a computer in existence that could cope with the complexities of the Australian PR implementation.
Thanks, I'm here all week. Try the fish. It's lovely.
"But our Siberia will be a whole, whole lot warmer..."
Now, that ain't true. I knew you guys were hanging on to the bits of Alaska without oil for a reason.
I can go with Linux being a clone of UNIX (and I don't think anyone would disagree)
BUT!
KDE/Gnome hardly 'rip off' Windows. That would imply that Windows 'invented' WIMP (since this is why they seem alike), and this is demonstrably not so...
On that note does GNOME remind anyone else of GEM on the old ST's? I always get this strange feeling of deja vu when I see a GNOME desktop...
In which case I'll just be off to make a good strong cup of tea.
"you'd think that someone who was getting paid $100K+ a year would have a clue about data security"
No, not really. I'd think they'd have a clue about climbing the greasy pole to get their snouts in the trough, but I would only assume they were any good at the job if I'd seen some actual evidence of intellect. Most definitely not a given... After all the most 'senior' American, Mr. George W. Bush, is not exactly a beacon of searing intelligence is he (come on, even if you're Republican, you have to admit he's not terribly bright)? And look how far he managed to get.
I'm struck by the number of people posting things along the lines of:
Open Office isn't as good because it doesn't do [something] the way MS Office does it
or
OO isn't as good because it won't render MS Office stuff properly.
Now, I have no real preference for either (I have both on my Machine, since the other half needs MS Office to be compatible with a course she's doing, and I had OO originally cause it was free...)
But why are these things that make *Open Office* 'worse'?
Why are there never winges about 'MS Office just doesn't render Open Office format docs properly' or 'MS is rubbish because the tab key behaves differently to OO'?
A lot of people, including AANZ, seem to be confusing familiarity with quality, when it ain't necessarily so...
doing neither. Try Physics (or any other *real* science, its just that physics can, if work the system right, contains substantial amounts of computing courses. Plus its better. And yes, I am a physics grad). I'm not really trolling here. Its just that I'd much rather see people taught how to think in under-graduate level courses rather than taught how to *do*.
Of course, if its too late (i.e. your A-levels aren't focused in the right direction), CS over a more practically focused course, any day of the week. The amount of 'IT' grads I've met who have precisely no clue as to how to approach a *new* problem is not insignificant. I'm not saying these people were stupid, I'm saying that their education did not teach them to THINK. And that, really, is what ANY job is all about.
Oh, and a wee note for our colonial chums, we don't do the Major/Minor, points (course credits) win prizes thing over here. That's why its reasonable for us to call them Universities, since you tend to study ONE (uni) thing, and its fair that you call them colleges, cause you do tend to study multiple things. So, 'Both', is probably not a viable option.
And cue flame war on the relative merits of the two systems...
Flip Answer: Well, it IS the *UK* national archive. Also, I think you'll find its the *English* language. Even as mangled by my colonial friends. Sarcastic Answer: I maybe thought you had a point until you said the Font matters for... Poems. Really, the font matters for poetry? I think you're kind of missing the point of poems (to make angsty teenagers feel arty, at length, of course...) Reasoned Answer: Hmm, you're kind of proving my point. Your trying to find an electronic answer to every single problem before you even get started. Its the wrong approach. You stay as simple as possible and complicate as required. Basically, text can be captured as ASCII or UTF or whatever (Its not that important, as long as its simple), and anything else can be scanned in the simplest possible BITMAP format. Voila, everything covered. I'm kinda posted out now, but remember, the primary goal for this kind of archive is to MAKE IT LAST A LONG TIME IN AN EASILY UNDERSTOOD OR TRANSLATED MEDIUM. Everything else needs to be subservient to that. Really. Its a bit different for company archives. The goals there aren't for true longevity in the national interest, just long enough to last till you shred it when the fraud office comes calling...
give it a hundred years. Yes, their hyperbole was a bit extreme, but in the long run... Fancy having a go at translating an old wax cylinder with just your modern PC? (No cheating and whipping out that wax cyclinder player you have sitting round in the attic.) And also, that said, I went to transfer some stuff from a floppy at work to day... ulp, my PC (standard company issue) had no floppy drive.