Aside from the other respondents showing issues with this idea, I can tell you that with the Solar Stormwatch program they run, our data was compiled and recognized sooner than I was expecting (my participation, along with over 210 other collaborators, confirmed seven CMEs).
Why would you expect co-authorship or an email for basic data processing? Meanwhile, they HAVE recognized I've contributed to detection of seven CME's, but I am just one of over 210 people who collaborated. Their appreciation was considerate but hardly necessary.
However I bet the data used to confirm the solar prominence you referred to didn't come from them, afaik they are only working on historical CME data. The "Spot" and latest "Incoming" data aren't even being applied yet.
As for the "you are the first person to view this data", since those video feeds get updated regularly as the satellites download the data, it's common to receive that message--I'm more surprised when I don't see it. But only the last few seconds of the feed actually is new, most of it covers the previous few days of real time (it's time lapsed).
It seems your expectations might not have been in line with reality? You might have asked in their forums, their team is VERY responsive and appreciative of all input.
Study fails the acid test. What's an Adult bully? A mugger/robber/assailant. Is standing up to robbers/assailants/masked figures making demands or taunting @, good for you? The answer should be sometimes. Sometimes it is essential, sometimes it is suicidal. Sometimes it is just smart, that would be when the bully is bluffing, and you are the one with the gun.
Muggers/robbers/assailants are not adult bullies. An adult bully is the boss who demeans you in front of others. The woman who connives with others to put you down. The guy who goes out of his way to target you on the sporting field/court.
Just like children, if you permit these people to continue, they will persist.
Back on your muggers/robbers front, when they have the upper hand it might not be wise to risk death, but if you are appropriately armed/defended, then it's your duty to stand up to them. In both cases (kids and adults), physical pain will heal (death excluded), but emotionally there's a benefit. Since you also can't remember physical pain (you can only remember having had experienced it), I'd argue the benefits outweigh the risks.
In the case of adults, you also are responsible for fellow man, so protecting others is part of the defense process. The mugger you let get away with it today might mug your wife/mother/friend/lover tomorrow. Easy targets also will be targeted again, sometimes when someplace is burglarized the same location is hit repeatedly.
In many areas, I have low confidence in myself, and I do all the better for it. I was unsure of how I would do when I studied computer science at the university level, and as a result I got mostly A+ grades my first year. As I grew more confident, my grades actually decreased. It also works the other way. How many incompetent boobs have you seen who are overconfident in their abilities? I would say their confidence does not depend on their skills, and thus they lack any motivation to try harder. Why would they? They're perfect already!
When it comes to asking girls on dates, overconfidence really does result in better performance. Women flock to overconfident jerks.
"As I grew more" complacent "my grades actually decreased."
Overconfidence is not confidence (as you pointed out, no correlation to skill levels). Overconfidence is usually ignorance--in your final example, a lack of fear of rejection. Women flock to confident people as well, they also marry them.
Don't confuse confidence with symptoms of confidence or portrayals of confidence.
Relating this back to the topic, most overconfident bullies were perceived as wimps who would never follow through. The expression "put up or shut up" pertains here.
Actually, from the Google information on their SSL search, "As another layer of privacy, SSL search turns off a browser's referrers. Web browsers typically turn off referrers when going from HTTPS to HTTP mode to provide extra privacy. By clicking on a search result that takes you to an HTTP site, you could disable any customizations that the website provides based on the referrer information."
Nah, it was the collection in your history of Disney.com, gurl.com, Barbie.com, JustinBieberMusic.com, GirlsOnlyForum.com...actually...the gurl.com in there might enhance your "bad girl" persona.
When you played the barbie dress up game, did you dress her as a rocker chick?
You might not have done enough, there were ugly thin ones as well as attractive skinny ones, flat chested boy shaped thin ones and curvaceous, too short, too tall, just right, etc. There were all those varieties in not too skinny/not too overweight as well as the fat ones.
The amount of variety bordered on the amount of variety in actual women. (I only saw 100+ silhouettes, far fewer than RL women various body shapes I've seen.)
I couldn't pick out any attractive ones because their faces were all pixelated!
Actually, if you looked at more than 4, you might have noticed that they were changing different ratios in the body shapes. Size was just one factor. They ask for 30 but let you continue on, I did over 100 until their site choked (as others have mentioned).
The size of pelvis changed, both width and height (from crotch to waist). Obviously waist changed (3-dimensionally, IE they had different amounts of belly fat compared to what would be "muffin top").
Breast size changed, shoulder width changed, height changed. There's a good example, height didn't just change overall, leg length changed separately from torso length.
It was very rare to have all the things they were altering fall into a pleasing range--just like it's very rare in humans to have every aspect be "10".
We know from earlier studies that preferred waist to hip ratios tend to be universal regardless of size. This study might be trying to discern if that applies to other ratios as well.
(Or it might just be seeing how long people willingly keep clicking through ugly silhouettes to be rewarded with attractive ones.)
I hate to say this, because I love your post's sentiment, but I wouldn't mind being able to change the ratio of my speedometer according to tire size alterations.
Similarly, some cars have issues with ABS or traction control with different tires, it would be lovely to not be restricted in choices by being able to adjust things to accommodate that.
Thankfully my car doesn't have that issue, but I dread moving to a current tech car because of that.
However there are also legal ramifications, as US Federal code requires speedometers to read 0-5 mph high, being able to adjust them would certainly affect court cases.
The problem might have been the client. The second developer might have said, "I'll have to spend X hours to recreate the existing framework and add your new requests."
Client balking at cost, "Could you just add the new features using what's already in existence?"
Developer, leery, "Technically that's possible, but it creates a mish-mosh you'll have problems maintain in the future."
Client, believing the Developer is trying to make more money, "I'd rather just add the new features than rebuild what I already paid for please."
Developer, "Okay, we'll do that then, but don't say I didn't warn you!"
The THIRD developer saw that this was a problem client and did the wise thing, cut his losses, oh I'm sorry, as the summary put it "disappeared".
Now this guy gets part of the story and is stuck with the cleanup. Meanwhile, the site owner never learns that it's cleaner/cheaper/more efficient to do invest a little bit extra up front to ease maintenance down the road--investing in the future almost always pays off.
PS: Any wonder the "client" keeps needing new developers instead of one wanting to continue working with him?
Wow, the original query and this are a fraction of the keys I manage, the trick (sorry, skipping the pun) is to break them down into categories.
Left pocket has a ring with keys to all the cars and one house key (mine).
Right pocket has backup keys/loaner keys to the cars (the keys I clip off for the shop or another driver) as well as other peoples' homes and the basement of mine.
I've never gotten locked out of my car since switching to this system.
A separate ring has work related keys. Those live elsewhere and I don't see them most the time. Those contain a large main clip with multiple sub tags/rings hanging from it. The main one can clip to a belt loop and contains common keys, padlock keys, lockbox keys, etc. The other rings are separate floors.
In case any go missing, there are copies in the safe.
Kwikset now makes locks that you can re-key yourself with a simple tool. You can unify many of your locks to use one key with that.
Not technically "real-time" but certainly live...a few years ago I attended a live music performance in Second Life where the trio were around the world, one in Tokyo, one in Georgia, one in a city in Canada doing vocals/harmonica, keyboard and guitar all together.
They used software that allowed the subsequent performers to hear the first's stream and mix them together for the next. They also had themselves on video (ustream) so you could choose your own camera and watch them all separately from their avatars on stage in Second Life.
There were nearly 100 people in the audience enjoying their improvisations. (To give credit, I believe Komuso came up with the idea of combining all the technologies...the other performers I think were Noma and Hathead iirc.)
Here's the problem: if you're on a social network that few have heard of, what's the point?
Agreed, unless you seek to interact with those who pursue non-mainstream alternatives.
Isn't the purpose of say, Facebook, the fact that nearly everyone uses it? How would a "social network" without other people even work?
That's the problem with Facebook, it was an ivory tower that wasn't publicly accessible to your friends, now it's a marketers' morass.
To answer the original query, decide first what and with whom you wish to share, then go to the service that offers the most convenience for that/them.
That's why a communication service like Twitter is so useful, instead of being a limited social network, you are accessible via the Web, web searches, RSS feeds, SMS, email, all without people needing to make accounts or change their reading habits, and you are not limited in what media you wish to convey. (Although people typically won't be watching videos if they follow you via SMS obviously.)
The original criteria emphasizes sharing links and reading about others, I'd suggest a microblog suits that perfectly.
Why would they edit MP3s? It's a single song, at optimum quality, with lots space on present phones, and each transcoding lowering its quality.
Creativity? Mash-ups? Humor? Make their own ring tones?
I know someone recently who wanted an MP3 of silence because his wife's phone could assign a unique ring tone to different SMS contacts but could not turn one "off" (silly).
Back in the era of answering machines, I made a tape with explosions and gunfire featuring us shouting over it "We can't get to the phone right now!!!"
Of course it used to be quicker/easier to edit several audio files than pay for one.
When the complexity of a system grows, it becomes more unstable. No shit.
Why would you accept that? It's not true for the development of the internal combustion engine. It's not true in the development of locomotives. It's not true for airplanes. Sure, I'm comparing mechanical/electronic to electronic, but the former have to endure incredible stresses at the limits of physical capabilities and wear over millions of rotations with extreme pressures.
As the complexity increased, the cost has decreased, the safety has improved, and reliability has become far greater--all in a couple decades.
The thing is, people don't want a toaster-like PC which can only do one thing; they want a machine that can do hundreds or thousands of things with the reliability of a machine that only does one. It's simply not possible.
Well, back when I began with computers we used them for all sorts of things. My first and only computer class covered a wide range, from publishing, to financial, to graphics, to databases, to audio, to programming, to communications, to computer maintenance and even entertainment.
Now most people I know use a computer for one primary thing: texting. Secondarily computers seem to be used for phone calls and web browsing, the later including TV/movie watching and reading all sorts of sources.
Those who I know who even own printers have them buried under a pile of papers in the corner. Most people I know don't do their own taxes and have never even seen a spreadsheet. I'm the only person I know who has published and sold newsletters. Most pictures I see people upload directly from their phones unedited. Most MP3s people have downloaded to their phones unedited.
Actually the very point of TFA is that most users of computers want them to do one thing.
That one thing is get out of the way and let me accomplish what I set out to accomplish with the least amount of fuss possible! IE, help produce, don't hinder production with needless complexity.;-)
Just thought I'd bring it home for ya' there at the end...
(As the author of the article pointed out, compare installing software on Linux to Windows. In my personal experience, compare the reliability of my GPSr, with multiple processors, a couple I/O ports, games, utilities, several databases, backup capability, storage, other models with voice communication...yet completely dependable and easy to use.)
Come to think of it, if Garmin made a general purpose computer to the same standard, I might have to buy it.
However just like Honda not being able to afford to sell lawn tractors in this market anymore, likewise getting traction with a more reliable/useful computing system would be nigh impossible I'd imagine.
However a start might be to stop assuming adding complexity requires reducing functionality?
Ironically, before your '00s, back in the 80s, computers WERE appliances that did exactly what was expected of them. You turned them on, performed your task and got predictable results 100% of the time. In fact, they replaced typewriters as they were more efficient. Some of the systems in the '90s as well, but sadly other computer systems displaced those.
It's amazed me, that a system based on a completely digital structure, has evolved into such a mess. We used to have an expression represented by the "GIGO" acronym: "Garbage In, Garbage Out". But nowadays, you can get garbage out just by turning the damn thing on, without inputting a thing!
(Yes, before everyone replies and reminds me that's not literally the case, as other things are putting garbage in on the user's behalf--but the end result is the same.)
If a toaster starts to burn my toast, I can adjust it's setting. If a computer were a toaster, you'd go to it one morning and it wouldn't heat, you'd have to update it and then resolve something, relying on obscure resources, taking until lunchtime--THEN it would burn your bread and produce less satisfactory results than before the update.
For more irony, if one needs to prepare printed documents now, it would probably be more efficient and cost effective to use a typewriter. (Thinking of how much I've spent on printers, cables, ink, and time wasted with issues over the years--and I don't print much! Just a few times a month...)
PS: You wouldn't be out of a job, there used to be typewriter repair places.
Thanks! Installed and now Slashdot has a nice non-blinding dark background and easily readable green text.
I loved the Amiga days, back in the 90's to 2000's when I used AWeb for web browsing, which allowed colors of my choice.
It always amazes me that "modern" systems have fewer user controls among their excessive "options". I mean one of the first things people ask to do when they start learning to browse the web is "can I change the colors?"
Of course Stylish requires you know things I don't. Thankfully I was able to copy some Slashdot style someone else made, and through experimentation figure out which colors were which and change them all numerically. It's now over an hour later and past when I wanted to be in bed. Now if only I could apply this to other websites rather than just this one, which I usually read in an RSS feed mostly anyway.
Hopefully some day we'll achieve the level of functionality we had back in the 80s and 90s...I can dream right?
PS: For the person mentioning Lynx below, it was my first Web experience, it produced useful results faster through 2400 bps dial-up than many pages do now via fiber!
PPS: I also searched Firefox addons for an alternative, there was one that simply inverses colors that sounded much easier, but it fails with 3.6...someone needs to update or create a plug-in that does that automagically!
And the airlines have done no testing, experimentation, trials, or paid for such research to maintain their business model in the face of a recurring natural occurrence?
Responding to the airlines, we haven't done better because YOU HAVEN'T DONE BETTER!
(I realize it's a competitive industry subject to heavy safety regulation, but imagine how much money the one would be making that had ash pre-burners or filters or use ash for power or something.)
This is why I don't like having the same cookies/login for multiple sites. I use a Yahoo email for Google Calendar and Google Voice for exactly that reason. But this reminds me to download/archive my calendar. (I know someone who lost their gmail account and there calendar went bye-bye too.)
I wonder if sharing it with another account would insure against that risk?
In my case, I don't put all my eggs in one basket.
Slashdot Mirror
Aside from the other respondents showing issues with this idea, I can tell you that with the Solar Stormwatch program they run, our data was compiled and recognized sooner than I was expecting (my participation, along with over 210 other collaborators, confirmed seven CMEs).
Why would you expect co-authorship or an email for basic data processing? Meanwhile, they HAVE recognized I've contributed to detection of seven CME's, but I am just one of over 210 people who collaborated. Their appreciation was considerate but hardly necessary.
However I bet the data used to confirm the solar prominence you referred to didn't come from them, afaik they are only working on historical CME data. The "Spot" and latest "Incoming" data aren't even being applied yet.
As for the "you are the first person to view this data", since those video feeds get updated regularly as the satellites download the data, it's common to receive that message--I'm more surprised when I don't see it. But only the last few seconds of the feed actually is new, most of it covers the previous few days of real time (it's time lapsed).
It seems your expectations might not have been in line with reality? You might have asked in their forums, their team is VERY responsive and appreciative of all input.
Study fails the acid test. What's an Adult bully? A mugger/robber/assailant. Is standing up to robbers/assailants/masked figures making demands or taunting @, good for you? The answer should be sometimes. Sometimes it is essential, sometimes it is suicidal. Sometimes it is just smart, that would be when the bully is bluffing, and you are the one with the gun.
Muggers/robbers/assailants are not adult bullies. An adult bully is the boss who demeans you in front of others. The woman who connives with others to put you down. The guy who goes out of his way to target you on the sporting field/court.
Just like children, if you permit these people to continue, they will persist.
Back on your muggers/robbers front, when they have the upper hand it might not be wise to risk death, but if you are appropriately armed/defended, then it's your duty to stand up to them. In both cases (kids and adults), physical pain will heal (death excluded), but emotionally there's a benefit. Since you also can't remember physical pain (you can only remember having had experienced it), I'd argue the benefits outweigh the risks.
In the case of adults, you also are responsible for fellow man, so protecting others is part of the defense process. The mugger you let get away with it today might mug your wife/mother/friend/lover tomorrow. Easy targets also will be targeted again, sometimes when someplace is burglarized the same location is hit repeatedly.
In many areas, I have low confidence in myself, and I do all the better for it. I was unsure of how I would do when I studied computer science at the university level, and as a result I got mostly A+ grades my first year. As I grew more confident, my grades actually decreased. It also works the other way. How many incompetent boobs have you seen who are overconfident in their abilities? I would say their confidence does not depend on their skills, and thus they lack any motivation to try harder. Why would they? They're perfect already!
When it comes to asking girls on dates, overconfidence really does result in better performance. Women flock to overconfident jerks.
"As I grew more" complacent "my grades actually decreased."
Overconfidence is not confidence (as you pointed out, no correlation to skill levels). Overconfidence is usually ignorance--in your final example, a lack of fear of rejection. Women flock to confident people as well, they also marry them.
Don't confuse confidence with symptoms of confidence or portrayals of confidence.
Relating this back to the topic, most overconfident bullies were perceived as wimps who would never follow through. The expression "put up or shut up" pertains here.
Actually, from the Google information on their SSL search, "As another layer of privacy, SSL search turns off a browser's referrers. Web browsers typically turn off referrers when going from HTTPS to HTTP mode to provide extra privacy. By clicking on a search result that takes you to an HTTP site, you could disable any customizations that the website provides based on the referrer information."
Agreed, also now nobody else will know which words I need to look-up the spelling of, relieving my virtual embarrassment!
(Did you know there are two "r"s in "embarrassment"?)
Botnets doesn't belong because it's the only one without the letter "p" in it.
Nah, it was the collection in your history of Disney.com, gurl.com, Barbie.com, JustinBieberMusic.com, GirlsOnlyForum.com...actually...the gurl.com in there might enhance your "bad girl" persona.
When you played the barbie dress up game, did you dress her as a rocker chick?
You might not have done enough, there were ugly thin ones as well as attractive skinny ones, flat chested boy shaped thin ones and curvaceous, too short, too tall, just right, etc. There were all those varieties in not too skinny/not too overweight as well as the fat ones.
The amount of variety bordered on the amount of variety in actual women. (I only saw 100+ silhouettes, far fewer than RL women various body shapes I've seen.)
I couldn't pick out any attractive ones because their faces were all pixelated!
Actually, if you looked at more than 4, you might have noticed that they were changing different ratios in the body shapes. Size was just one factor. They ask for 30 but let you continue on, I did over 100 until their site choked (as others have mentioned).
The size of pelvis changed, both width and height (from crotch to waist). Obviously waist changed (3-dimensionally, IE they had different amounts of belly fat compared to what would be "muffin top").
Breast size changed, shoulder width changed, height changed. There's a good example, height didn't just change overall, leg length changed separately from torso length.
It was very rare to have all the things they were altering fall into a pleasing range--just like it's very rare in humans to have every aspect be "10".
We know from earlier studies that preferred waist to hip ratios tend to be universal regardless of size. This study might be trying to discern if that applies to other ratios as well.
(Or it might just be seeing how long people willingly keep clicking through ugly silhouettes to be rewarded with attractive ones.)
I hate to say this, because I love your post's sentiment, but I wouldn't mind being able to change the ratio of my speedometer according to tire size alterations.
Similarly, some cars have issues with ABS or traction control with different tires, it would be lovely to not be restricted in choices by being able to adjust things to accommodate that.
Thankfully my car doesn't have that issue, but I dread moving to a current tech car because of that.
However there are also legal ramifications, as US Federal code requires speedometers to read 0-5 mph high, being able to adjust them would certainly affect court cases.
The problem might have been the client. The second developer might have said, "I'll have to spend X hours to recreate the existing framework and add your new requests."
Client balking at cost, "Could you just add the new features using what's already in existence?"
Developer, leery, "Technically that's possible, but it creates a mish-mosh you'll have problems maintain in the future."
Client, believing the Developer is trying to make more money, "I'd rather just add the new features than rebuild what I already paid for please."
Developer, "Okay, we'll do that then, but don't say I didn't warn you!"
The THIRD developer saw that this was a problem client and did the wise thing, cut his losses, oh I'm sorry, as the summary put it "disappeared".
Now this guy gets part of the story and is stuck with the cleanup. Meanwhile, the site owner never learns that it's cleaner/cheaper/more efficient to do invest a little bit extra up front to ease maintenance down the road--investing in the future almost always pays off.
PS: Any wonder the "client" keeps needing new developers instead of one wanting to continue working with him?
"a ways to go" might be an idiom? Heck, "a ways" might be.
In this case, "ways to go" might be thought of as singular, so "a ways to go" makes sense in a roundabout way.
"He has a ways to go" would mean he needs to grow.
"They have a ways to go" would mean they are far from reaching their goal.
"They had a ways to go yet" would mean the destination is still quite a ways off.
I don't know the proper grammar terminology/explanation for it, but it's correct.
Yeah, I wondered about not fully inserting the new key and been a bit paranoid, thanks for the confirmation caution!
Wow, the original query and this are a fraction of the keys I manage, the trick (sorry, skipping the pun) is to break them down into categories.
Left pocket has a ring with keys to all the cars and one house key (mine).
Right pocket has backup keys/loaner keys to the cars (the keys I clip off for the shop or another driver) as well as other peoples' homes and the basement of mine.
I've never gotten locked out of my car since switching to this system.
A separate ring has work related keys. Those live elsewhere and I don't see them most the time. Those contain a large main clip with multiple sub tags/rings hanging from it. The main one can clip to a belt loop and contains common keys, padlock keys, lockbox keys, etc. The other rings are separate floors.
In case any go missing, there are copies in the safe.
Kwikset now makes locks that you can re-key yourself with a simple tool. You can unify many of your locks to use one key with that.
Not technically "real-time" but certainly live...a few years ago I attended a live music performance in Second Life where the trio were around the world, one in Tokyo, one in Georgia, one in a city in Canada doing vocals/harmonica, keyboard and guitar all together.
They used software that allowed the subsequent performers to hear the first's stream and mix them together for the next. They also had themselves on video (ustream) so you could choose your own camera and watch them all separately from their avatars on stage in Second Life.
There were nearly 100 people in the audience enjoying their improvisations. (To give credit, I believe Komuso came up with the idea of combining all the technologies...the other performers I think were Noma and Hathead iirc.)
Here's the problem: if you're on a social network that few have heard of, what's the point?
Agreed, unless you seek to interact with those who pursue non-mainstream alternatives.
Isn't the purpose of say, Facebook, the fact that nearly everyone uses it? How would a "social network" without other people even work?
That's the problem with Facebook, it was an ivory tower that wasn't publicly accessible to your friends, now it's a marketers' morass.
To answer the original query, decide first what and with whom you wish to share, then go to the service that offers the most convenience for that/them.
That's why a communication service like Twitter is so useful, instead of being a limited social network, you are accessible via the Web, web searches, RSS feeds, SMS, email, all without people needing to make accounts or change their reading habits, and you are not limited in what media you wish to convey. (Although people typically won't be watching videos if they follow you via SMS obviously.)
The original criteria emphasizes sharing links and reading about others, I'd suggest a microblog suits that perfectly.
Why would they edit MP3s? It's a single song, at optimum quality, with lots space on present phones, and each transcoding lowering its quality.
Creativity? Mash-ups? Humor? Make their own ring tones?
I know someone recently who wanted an MP3 of silence because his wife's phone could assign a unique ring tone to different SMS contacts but could not turn one "off" (silly).
Back in the era of answering machines, I made a tape with explosions and gunfire featuring us shouting over it "We can't get to the phone right now!!!"
Of course it used to be quicker/easier to edit several audio files than pay for one.
When the complexity of a system grows, it becomes more unstable. No shit.
Why would you accept that? It's not true for the development of the internal combustion engine. It's not true in the development of locomotives. It's not true for airplanes. Sure, I'm comparing mechanical/electronic to electronic, but the former have to endure incredible stresses at the limits of physical capabilities and wear over millions of rotations with extreme pressures.
As the complexity increased, the cost has decreased, the safety has improved, and reliability has become far greater--all in a couple decades.
The thing is, people don't want a toaster-like PC which can only do one thing; they want a machine that can do hundreds or thousands of things with the reliability of a machine that only does one. It's simply not possible.
Well, back when I began with computers we used them for all sorts of things. My first and only computer class covered a wide range, from publishing, to financial, to graphics, to databases, to audio, to programming, to communications, to computer maintenance and even entertainment.
Now most people I know use a computer for one primary thing: texting. Secondarily computers seem to be used for phone calls and web browsing, the later including TV/movie watching and reading all sorts of sources.
Those who I know who even own printers have them buried under a pile of papers in the corner. Most people I know don't do their own taxes and have never even seen a spreadsheet. I'm the only person I know who has published and sold newsletters. Most pictures I see people upload directly from their phones unedited. Most MP3s people have downloaded to their phones unedited.
Actually the very point of TFA is that most users of computers want them to do one thing.
That one thing is get out of the way and let me accomplish what I set out to accomplish with the least amount of fuss possible! IE, help produce, don't hinder production with needless complexity. ;-)
Just thought I'd bring it home for ya' there at the end...
(As the author of the article pointed out, compare installing software on Linux to Windows. In my personal experience, compare the reliability of my GPSr, with multiple processors, a couple I/O ports, games, utilities, several databases, backup capability, storage, other models with voice communication...yet completely dependable and easy to use.)
Come to think of it, if Garmin made a general purpose computer to the same standard, I might have to buy it.
However just like Honda not being able to afford to sell lawn tractors in this market anymore, likewise getting traction with a more reliable/useful computing system would be nigh impossible I'd imagine.
However a start might be to stop assuming adding complexity requires reducing functionality?
Ironically, before your '00s, back in the 80s, computers WERE appliances that did exactly what was expected of them. You turned them on, performed your task and got predictable results 100% of the time. In fact, they replaced typewriters as they were more efficient. Some of the systems in the '90s as well, but sadly other computer systems displaced those.
It's amazed me, that a system based on a completely digital structure, has evolved into such a mess. We used to have an expression represented by the "GIGO" acronym: "Garbage In, Garbage Out". But nowadays, you can get garbage out just by turning the damn thing on, without inputting a thing!
(Yes, before everyone replies and reminds me that's not literally the case, as other things are putting garbage in on the user's behalf--but the end result is the same.)
If a toaster starts to burn my toast, I can adjust it's setting. If a computer were a toaster, you'd go to it one morning and it wouldn't heat, you'd have to update it and then resolve something, relying on obscure resources, taking until lunchtime--THEN it would burn your bread and produce less satisfactory results than before the update.
For more irony, if one needs to prepare printed documents now, it would probably be more efficient and cost effective to use a typewriter. (Thinking of how much I've spent on printers, cables, ink, and time wasted with issues over the years--and I don't print much! Just a few times a month...)
PS: You wouldn't be out of a job, there used to be typewriter repair places.
Stylish does that for FireFox...
Thanks! Installed and now Slashdot has a nice non-blinding dark background and easily readable green text.
I loved the Amiga days, back in the 90's to 2000's when I used AWeb for web browsing, which allowed colors of my choice.
It always amazes me that "modern" systems have fewer user controls among their excessive "options". I mean one of the first things people ask to do when they start learning to browse the web is "can I change the colors?"
Of course Stylish requires you know things I don't. Thankfully I was able to copy some Slashdot style someone else made, and through experimentation figure out which colors were which and change them all numerically. It's now over an hour later and past when I wanted to be in bed. Now if only I could apply this to other websites rather than just this one, which I usually read in an RSS feed mostly anyway.
Hopefully some day we'll achieve the level of functionality we had back in the 80s and 90s...I can dream right?
PS: For the person mentioning Lynx below, it was my first Web experience, it produced useful results faster through 2400 bps dial-up than many pages do now via fiber!
PPS: I also searched Firefox addons for an alternative, there was one that simply inverses colors that sounded much easier, but it fails with 3.6...someone needs to update or create a plug-in that does that automagically!
And the airlines have done no testing, experimentation, trials, or paid for such research to maintain their business model in the face of a recurring natural occurrence?
Responding to the airlines, we haven't done better because YOU HAVEN'T DONE BETTER!
(I realize it's a competitive industry subject to heavy safety regulation, but imagine how much money the one would be making that had ash pre-burners or filters or use ash for power or something.)
This is why I don't like having the same cookies/login for multiple sites. I use a Yahoo email for Google Calendar and Google Voice for exactly that reason. But this reminds me to download/archive my calendar. (I know someone who lost their gmail account and there calendar went bye-bye too.)
I wonder if sharing it with another account would insure against that risk?
In my case, I don't put all my eggs in one basket.
In some places, he could be denied renewing his driving license based upon overdue books. ;-)
What happens when they come in with neighbors' or extended family members' coupons?
I remember coupon clubs where people would collect and swap for products they needed others didn't.
It sounds like you are creating higher value coupons that could potentially be traded on a market or even sold on eBay...