Thanks for the pro-life pitch but, according to that argument, a slug is as conscious as a fetus...which is actually a fair argument for the pro-choice side.
It's a non-argument for both sides. The legality of abortion was settled on the basis of the adult's freedom, not the fetus' consciousness, awareness, sentience or sapience, or lack thereof.
If the latter at all mattered in the legal debate, then it would have set precedence to kill children who do not demonstrate consciousness, awareness, sentience or sapience at birth (i.e. most all of them).
The most "user friendly" design is one that does the right thing every time.
The Right Thing!(tm) differs from person to person, and may even change for a single person as circumstances change.
For example, a menu-driven program in domain $FOO is great for a novice in that domain but as that novice turns into an expert in domain $FOO they will prefer using shortcuts and muscle memory for common tasks.
For novices an exploratory interface is great - it allows them to learn the limits of what can be done. For experts a command interface is better - they already know what can be done and the command interface allows them to apply muscle memory to get things done.
Anyway, this statement:
It will provide a clear workflow: top - bottom, left-right, corner to corner -- whatever, it will be CLEAR what to do first, next and to finish.
contradicts this statement
A good design will not railroad a user into one single path, one single process or one single methodology.
Finally...
I look forward to the day - at the rate of progress, in the dim and distant future, when user interfaces work like this. Without any "I have just crashed and wiped out all your work. OK" style messages,
I look forward to the day that user interface designers read "The design of everyday things" by Donald E. Norman and use it as a checklist against their designs before unleashing crap like Metro and Gnome 3 on the general public with the poor attitude of "You All Are Too Stupid To See The Greatness Of Our Design"(tm).
I'm getting the impression that knowing how to read automatically removes the user from consideration in the Ubuntu (and Gnome as well) worlds.
The message you send by making video-only text-based content is:"If you can read you're way too smart to be the target of this content. This content is for people too stupid to read, so go away!"
My Motorola Droid Turbo supports fast charging on a regular USB cable, with it's own special brick.
I've a blackberry passport. It charges from 10% to 60% in about 45 minutes. It doesn't need a special brick (I've been using the usb charger than came with my twisp).
Many businesses have only one feature to support their business model: TRUST. Symantec is one. Equifax another. All the financial firms: Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, B of A... Some manufacturers: Volkswagen, Gerber baby products, Mylan pharmaceuticals... Many of these and more have disgraced themselves at some time and somehow survived; the others are forgotten.
They may have many products & services, or only a few, but without TRUST they have nothing.
I think just about every single company you've listed proves your point wrong - we have seen time and time again that companies who lose the trust of their userbase still manage to stay in business, sometimes even thrive.
Companies have proven in practice that without TRUST it'll still be business as usual.
It indeed seems like a lot left to the imagination. 12 minutes is a "long" period of inactivity and 7 is "short"? There is a lot of implied precision here which I wonder if the stats fully bear out to a meaningful level of confidence.
I thought I was doing well with the Pomodoro method (in my implementation, 25 minutes of work, 5 minutes of getting up and walking around) but apparently I should be doing 7 minute work intervals?
Ironically, smokers may be getting some benefit after all:-)... I leave me desk and walk down three flights to smoke for 5 minutes (vaping these days, though), then walk back up 3 flights. This happens roughly once every hour.
WebOS had a feature that permitted the user to switch apps by swiping up from the bottom of the screen to see the backgrounded apps. (Note: Android already has a similar feature, accessed by the square icon at screen bottom)
My two year old BB has that - very very convenient to simply swipe up and get a scrollable collection of thumbnails of all apps.
assuming you can find someone who wants to buy $1m worth of bit/lite/chigga-wigga-whatevercoin per day.
2.5 billion dollars of bitcoin changed hands in the last 24hrs, and 1.7 billion in Litecoin.
Moving a single million is not difficult.
Parent didn't ask about moving bitcoin, parent asked about selling them (a subset of moving them). It's perfectly possible to move 2.5b worth of Bitcoin around without a single one of them getting changed for dollars.
Basically, hyphens have no banned usage. That is merely a matter of style.
I beg to differ:-)
Where they are required, they are required only to maintain internal consistency. To actually be incorrect, it would have to change the meaning in a way that would conflict with the rest of the statement
For example: That's a sweet-ass ride vs That's a sweet ass-ride
My prediction last year that if Trump won, his Administration would eventually become so alienated that even Congressional Republicans would turn their back on him is coming true,
Your prediction for last year was, IIRC, that Trump would never win, and that his support was only amongst racists and misogynists. Your prediction was wrong then.
Correction: autistic and self-obsessed people who think they are smart don't like to travel. Intelligent people look forward to the experience. Your opinion is biased by your limited and bigoted view, which stems from the sad fact that you only deal with narrow-minded, socially-deficient elements like yourself. Dismissed.
I've traveled a lot. I've worked in a number of different countries across the East and West. The stupidest bunch of travelers are, without fail, those that are under some sort of misguided notion that travel broadens the mind (Yes, I read that above, so what?)
The majority of travelers are the type who find out what McDonalds taste like in other countries. Fewer travelers are the type to actually learn something from their trip.
I'm sorry - I see very few smart travelers. Most of the people I see who like traveling aren't going to win any fields medals anytime soon.
you end up with a train. And we already have those.
Yes but what we lack is train tracks going to every single pick-up and drop-off point.
I highly doubt that even a tiny convoy of container trucks is going to be able to go to every single pickup and/or drop-off point. What will happen is that the convoy will originate at and end at a depot, and smaller trucks of varying (small) size will be used to ferry goods to and from the depot and actual pickup and drop-off points.
Because scaling the transactions was becoming a problem. SegWit is supposed to allow for future development of the 'lighting network' which is supposed to allow thousands of transactions a second instead of just hundreds.
Interesting times if you are an amateur economist.
Firstly, they're not yet able to do hundreds. Secondly, when they *do* manage to do thousands of transactions/sec the world would have single card providers doing hundreds of millions of transactions per second (they already do 10s of millions/sec, btw) using less computational power
The problem is why Bitcoin forked. Before the fork, the entire network can handle a whopping 7 transactions per second. That's it.
The fork improved the processing times such that the entire network can now handle a staggering 56 transactions per second.
That's basically 18 transactions per second for all three of the people who use BTC to buy things.
I'm sure you'll agree that, at this point in time, the BTC network has more capacity than it knows what to do with, which leaves me wondering why people say it can't scale because you can safely double the number of people paying for things in BTC and still not have all six of them be capable of shopping fast enough to slow down the network.
Slashdot Mirror
When I was a kid, adults perceived supernatural tattoos as garish, undesirable - really, any tattoos, esp. on women.
They still do
(Thank you. I'll be here all week. Be sure to try the fish)
Quick fix - don't fly seriously.
Nothing 'twisted' about it. The idea that women should be enslaved to their embryos is fundamentally tyrannical.
I agree, but why limit it to women? Should men also be enslaved to an embryo?
Thanks for the pro-life pitch but, according to that argument, a slug is as conscious as a fetus...which is actually a fair argument for the pro-choice side.
It's a non-argument for both sides. The legality of abortion was settled on the basis of the adult's freedom, not the fetus' consciousness, awareness, sentience or sapience, or lack thereof.
If the latter at all mattered in the legal debate, then it would have set precedence to kill children who do not demonstrate consciousness, awareness, sentience or sapience at birth (i.e. most all of them).
Pro-choice is literally "give me the choice".
"It's different this time!"
*pop*
oh
The most "user friendly" design is one that does the right thing every time.
The Right Thing!(tm) differs from person to person, and may even change for a single person as circumstances change.
For example, a menu-driven program in domain $FOO is great for a novice in that domain but as that novice turns into an expert in domain $FOO they will prefer using shortcuts and muscle memory for common tasks.
For novices an exploratory interface is great - it allows them to learn the limits of what can be done. For experts a command interface is better - they already know what can be done and the command interface allows them to apply muscle memory to get things done.
Anyway, this statement:
It will provide a clear workflow: top - bottom, left-right, corner to corner -- whatever, it will be CLEAR what to do first, next and to finish.
contradicts this statement
A good design will not railroad a user into one single path, one single process or one single methodology.
Finally...
I look forward to the day - at the rate of progress, in the dim and distant future, when user interfaces work like this. Without any "I have just crashed and wiped out all your work. OK" style messages,
I look forward to the day that user interface designers read "The design of everyday things" by Donald E. Norman and use it as a checklist against their designs before unleashing crap like Metro and Gnome 3 on the general public with the poor attitude of "You All Are Too Stupid To See The Greatness Of Our Design"(tm).
I'm getting the impression that knowing how to read automatically removes the user from consideration in the Ubuntu (and Gnome as well) worlds.
The message you send by making video-only text-based content is :"If you can read you're way too smart to be the target of this content. This content is for people too stupid to read, so go away!"
My Motorola Droid Turbo supports fast charging on a regular USB cable, with it's own special brick.
I've a blackberry passport. It charges from 10% to 60% in about 45 minutes. It doesn't need a special brick (I've been using the usb charger than came with my twisp).
Many businesses have only one feature to support their business model: TRUST. Symantec is one. Equifax another. All the financial firms: Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, B of A... Some manufacturers: Volkswagen, Gerber baby products, Mylan pharmaceuticals... Many of these and more have disgraced themselves at some time and somehow survived; the others are forgotten.
They may have many products & services, or only a few, but without TRUST they have nothing.
I think just about every single company you've listed proves your point wrong - we have seen time and time again that companies who lose the trust of their userbase still manage to stay in business, sometimes even thrive.
Companies have proven in practice that without TRUST it'll still be business as usual.
Captcha: "gofuckyourelf"
My poor elf!
It indeed seems like a lot left to the imagination. 12 minutes is a "long" period of inactivity and 7 is "short"? There is a lot of implied precision here which I wonder if the stats fully bear out to a meaningful level of confidence.
I thought I was doing well with the Pomodoro method (in my implementation, 25 minutes of work, 5 minutes of getting up and walking around) but apparently I should be doing 7 minute work intervals?
Ironically, smokers may be getting some benefit after all :-) ... I leave me desk and walk down three flights to smoke for 5 minutes (vaping these days, though), then walk back up 3 flights. This happens roughly once every hour.
Hate to break this to you but that's how things work. Do you think your modern computer just jumped out perfected from the sweat of the giant Ymir?
Theory first - practice later. Just doing things without theoretical background is generally a waste of time and money (with a few exceptions).
I hate to break it to you, but I first read about IBM reaching this stage of qubits in a magazine in the mid-nineties. I've been waiting ever since.
Oh fuck every part of that. If Oracle bought RHat, RHat would die. Nobody can afford Oracle who doesn't have monopoly power.
So would systemd. Without RH artificially propping it up it would have been stillborn.
WebOS had a feature that permitted the user to switch apps by swiping up from the bottom of the screen to see the backgrounded apps. (Note: Android already has a similar feature, accessed by the square icon at screen bottom)
My two year old BB has that - very very convenient to simply swipe up and get a scrollable collection of thumbnails of all apps.
assuming you can find someone who wants to buy $1m worth of bit/lite/chigga-wigga-whatevercoin per day.
2.5 billion dollars of bitcoin changed hands in the last 24hrs, and 1.7 billion in Litecoin.
Moving a single million is not difficult.
Parent didn't ask about moving bitcoin, parent asked about selling them (a subset of moving them). It's perfectly possible to move 2.5b worth of Bitcoin around without a single one of them getting changed for dollars.
Basically, hyphens have no banned usage. That is merely a matter of style.
I beg to differ :-)
Where they are required, they are required only to maintain internal consistency. To actually be incorrect, it would have to change the meaning in a way that would conflict with the rest of the statement
For example: That's a sweet-ass ride vs That's a sweet ass-ride
Huh - looks like I didn't differ after all)
The state of modern, Western political discourse makes me drink heavily.
Don't be like that - I'm sure it has its bad points too.
My prediction last year that if Trump won, his Administration would eventually become so alienated that even Congressional Republicans would turn their back on him is coming true,
Your prediction for last year was, IIRC, that Trump would never win, and that his support was only amongst racists and misogynists. Your prediction was wrong then.
It is just you. My 3 year old phone is good enough to do everything that your insured phone does, including posting this message.
Correction: autistic and self-obsessed people who think they are smart don't like to travel. Intelligent people look forward to the experience. Your opinion is biased by your limited and bigoted view, which stems from the sad fact that you only deal with narrow-minded, socially-deficient elements like yourself. Dismissed.
I've traveled a lot. I've worked in a number of different countries across the East and West. The stupidest bunch of travelers are, without fail, those that are under some sort of misguided notion that travel broadens the mind (Yes, I read that above, so what?)
The majority of travelers are the type who find out what McDonalds taste like in other countries. Fewer travelers are the type to actually learn something from their trip.
I'm sorry - I see very few smart travelers. Most of the people I see who like traveling aren't going to win any fields medals anytime soon.
"I would not like the journey, and I detest America."
My experience with smart people is that they hate travel, and with stupid people is that they like travel.
Which kinda makes sense to me...
you end up with a train. And we already have those.
Yes but what we lack is train tracks going to every single pick-up and drop-off point.
I highly doubt that even a tiny convoy of container trucks is going to be able to go to every single pickup and/or drop-off point. What will happen is that the convoy will originate at and end at a depot, and smaller trucks of varying (small) size will be used to ferry goods to and from the depot and actual pickup and drop-off points.
Much like a train, actually.
3. Bitcoin is legal tender in Japan.
I keep hearing this but cannot get an english language article that is not from coindesk or some other pro-bitcoin news site.
Because scaling the transactions was becoming a problem. SegWit is supposed to allow for future development of the 'lighting network' which is supposed to allow thousands of transactions a second instead of just hundreds. Interesting times if you are an amateur economist.
Firstly, they're not yet able to do hundreds. Secondly, when they *do* manage to do thousands of transactions/sec the world would have single card providers doing hundreds of millions of transactions per second (they already do 10s of millions/sec, btw) using less computational power
The problem is why Bitcoin forked. Before the fork, the entire network can handle a whopping 7 transactions per second. That's it.
The fork improved the processing times such that the entire network can now handle a staggering 56 transactions per second.
That's basically 18 transactions per second for all three of the people who use BTC to buy things.
I'm sure you'll agree that, at this point in time, the BTC network has more capacity than it knows what to do with, which leaves me wondering why people say it can't scale because you can safely double the number of people paying for things in BTC and still not have all six of them be capable of shopping fast enough to slow down the network.