Sorry, its not my responsiblirty, nor is there bandwidth here to educate you in economics.
Are you seriously suggesting that everyone educated in economics agrees with you? Really?
How about Milton Friedman? How about John Maynard Keynes? Eddie George? George Soros?
Do you really believe that 100 years of economic thought has produced a consensus as unified as you make out, and as abjectly cretinous as the one you put forward?
Uh, huh. And that means it right, eh? Murder happens in nature. Animals happily kill their competitors, happy for that to continue too? Look at symbiotic creatures... Thats not capitalism, thats (gasp!) communism!
they have only made it worse.
How do you know this? Where is your evidence? What would it've been like if they hadn't tried.
Eliminate the taxes and poverty will go away in a generation. Counter intuitive, but true.
Says who? Where is your evidence? How can you make crass, untrue generalisations like this with a straight face? Let me guess, you're an objectivist, right?
The best use for a setup like this is to bring a good demonstration of the difference between the two to an undergraduate laboratory setting, to hammer into students forever the importance of the difference.
But there are already loads of simple ways to do that with water waves (in stratified fluids, for example). And rather more obvious too, since the phase and group velocities are perpendicular in that case, and you can do it with kit that costs about 5 bucks.
No, George Bush senior was a decorated fighter pilot and war hero. His son flew Trainers for a while, but it didn't take, so he then went AWOL from the Reserves.
Except, here in the UK its on the right. And as anyone who has ever driven both left and right hand drive cars will tell you, whilst it initially takes a little getting used to, within no time at all it becomes second nature to you, even though its not the same. Which is exactly my point. People aren't stupid.
Not only that, but custom interface controls cannot be over-ridden by windows configurations
Well, they can in X. No-one is suggesting that custom widgets should be hard wired. Theres no reason why a well designed my-custom-dialog box shouldn't honour global preferences in exactly the same way as your-generic-dialog-box does. This is a strawman.
Consistent with what? Other toasters? No, it doesn't. One has a dial, one a slider, one had an "emergency eject" button, the other was brute force... one had two slots, the other one long slot. Yet I still figured it out.
the user will have to waste time deducing the behaviour rules of your control
Thats true, but if your new custom is well designed for its specific use, rather than merely cobbled together from generic components then any initial time-wasting will be saved, because a well designed widget is easier for the user to use -- once they get the hang of it. And if they use it everyday for a year, the time saving overpowers any initial learning curve.
People put far too much creedence on "intuitiveness" (usually -- and wrongly -- defined as "similarity to what you've seen before") and not enough on "does this enable the skilled user to do the job efficiently".
By all means take the familiarity and the initial learning curve into account, but it is not the be-all-and-end-all of good interface design, as many make it out to be. Needles and cotten are intuitive and familiar, but if I want to sew every day of my life, and going to learn to use a sewing machine.
I can't agree with some of them. For example:"Don't use non-standard controls".
Now, a developer may appreciate a large stock of standard controls, but sometimes the best controls are non-generic. I light my gas oven by turning the dial and pushing it in. This is not how I operate my toaster (single dial and slider to depress bread) or microwave (timer dial with separate on/off/pause button) or my fridge (single slider for thermostat, built in switch for the light.)
Do you know something? Despite their proximity in the kitchen, I don't find this plethora of different user interfaces confusing. I didn't even have to read the manuals, even though my new toaster is quite different from the old one. Contrary to what interface designers tell us, we can cope perfectly well with this sort of complexity.
Morons lost fortunes. The only people who lost money in the dot.com crash were those stupid enough to invest in, or paid third parties to invest their money in, companies whose prospects were transparently thin. Elsewhere, Slashdotters are terribly quick to pour scorn on those who don't understand basic physics and then act shocked - shocked! - when companies with no source of revenue turn out to have been very poor investments. This is the basic economics -- the equivalent of a perpetual motion machine.
I said the shareholders are the owners of the company, so the money belongs to them, not the managers.
No. The money belongs to the company. Power to dispose of the company's money is invested in the board, subject to the checks and balances of the shareholders. It's not the shareholders money. They may vote to give it to themselves, but its not theirs till they do.
Actually, a simple audit of tax statements will show that, on average, wealthy conservatives generally tend to donate a larger percentage of their money to charity than equally wealthy liberals.
Evidence please. I've long ago stopped believing any such statements on slashdot until I see the numbers.
The shareholders can call a meeting at any time and replace the entire management staff if they so choose, or vote to close the company and liquidate the assets.
Err, exactly like I said then. They own the company, and they can elect whoever (or no-one) to run the damn thing. That doesn't mean that the board as elected has any responsibility not to give money to charity, or that all discretionary money must go as dividend.
The reason it's awful that Ben and Jerry's gave a ton of money to charity is that that money belongs to the shareholders
No, it doesn't. Corporations can decide how much (or little) dividend and how much they spend on anything. Shareholders only have a say in electing / cross examining the board. And anyone who invested in Ben & Jerry without noticing that the owners were hippies is a moron.
The big market teams have huge amounts of money to lavish on the top players, the little guys don't. It's that simple.
If only it were. Every year for the last 5 or so, through good management and an understanding of the game, Oakland have put out a competitive team for almost no money. In the same time period, the Phillies, hamstrung by incompetence at every level, can't compete with shit despite one of the largest fanbases in the Major Leagues.
Theres revenue sharing in the NBA, but it doesn't stop the Bulls and the Lakers from winning 10 of the last 15 championships, did it?
Sure, competitive imbalance is partly about money, but it partly isn't.
Pop quiz hot shot: How deep is the short porch in right field Yankee Stadium? 314 ft.
How deep was it when it Ruth played there? 295 ft
PacBell park is 307 ft down right field line, and usually has the wind coming in off the bay. Tell me again how ballpark dimensions favour the modern player. To call Yankee Stadium "the House That Ruth built" is not just metaphor, its dimensions were designed with left-handed pull hitters (ie The Bambino) in mind.
Need I remind you that Ruth hit everyone of his homeruns off Caucasian pitchers. If the ban on black players didn't water down the talent pool, its hard to imagine what might. And that was when pitchers started on 3 days rest, and threw 120+ pitch complete games. If you think they were throwing as fast as todays relief pitchers throw, you've a weird concept of biomechanics.
a 'hot' baseball
Evidence please. No study of any of the new baseballs has shown the slightest difference. The 'hot' baseball theory is a fiction created by old-timers who couldn't hit for power as well as the present generation (i.e. Joe Morgan). The players are amped up on dietary supplements, serious weight-lifting and (sometimes) steroids. Of course the ball goes a fucking long way when they hit it.
a postage stamp strike zone
Riiiggghhhhtttt. Like that postage stamp Livan Hernandez had in the '97 NLCS...
Hell if Ruth were playing today, he'd hit 100 HR's.
Evidence? A hell of a lot of SABRemetric types have done a lot of work on exactly that question. None has reached the same conclusion as you. Where are your numbers?
I mean, these are premium seats, and the 3 people in the section are all scrambling over the chairs to get to the ball.
If your dad bought you tickets out in the bleachers and told you they were premium seats, he was lying. Premium seats are on the lowest level, behind the batter and up the first and third baselines. Everywhere.
The only people who built the Giants a stadium were the Giants owners. Of all the major new ballparks, you picked the only one that was privately financed.
Slashdot Mirror
How about Milton Friedman? How about John Maynard Keynes? Eddie George? George Soros?
Do you really believe that 100 years of economic thought has produced a consensus as unified as you make out, and as abjectly cretinous as the one you put forward?
No, even you're not that dumb.
No, George Bush senior was a decorated fighter pilot and war hero. His son flew Trainers for a while, but it didn't take, so he then went AWOL from the Reserves.
People put far too much creedence on "intuitiveness" (usually -- and wrongly -- defined as "similarity to what you've seen before") and not enough on "does this enable the skilled user to do the job efficiently".
By all means take the familiarity and the initial learning curve into account, but it is not the be-all-and-end-all of good interface design, as many make it out to be. Needles and cotten are intuitive and familiar, but if I want to sew every day of my life, and going to learn to use a sewing machine.
Now, a developer may appreciate a large stock of standard controls, but sometimes the best controls are non-generic. I light my gas oven by turning the dial and pushing it in. This is not how I operate my toaster (single dial and slider to depress bread) or microwave (timer dial with separate on/off/pause button) or my fridge (single slider for thermostat, built in switch for the light.)
Do you know something? Despite their proximity in the kitchen, I don't find this plethora of different user interfaces confusing. I didn't even have to read the manuals, even though my new toaster is quite different from the old one. Contrary to what interface designers tell us, we can cope perfectly well with this sort of complexity.
I've long ago stopped believing any such statements on slashdot until I see the numbers.
Note the word order: that does not say "the fontconfig page has withdrawn the Microsoft web fonts".
New question: Who's 'At Seventeen' pastiche is less awful, mine or this new one...
Ah, who am I trying to kid: mine stinks, this new one is miles better...
Theres revenue sharing in the NBA, but it doesn't stop the Bulls and the Lakers from winning 10 of the last 15 championships, did it?
Sure, competitive imbalance is partly about money, but it partly isn't.
How deep was it when it Ruth played there? 295 ft
PacBell park is 307 ft down right field line, and usually has the wind coming in off the bay. Tell me again how ballpark dimensions favour the modern player. To call Yankee Stadium "the House That Ruth built" is not just metaphor, its dimensions were designed with left-handed pull hitters (ie The Bambino) in mind.
Evidence please. No study of any of the new baseballs has shown the slightest difference. The 'hot' baseball theory is a fiction created by old-timers who couldn't hit for power as well as the present generation (i.e. Joe Morgan). The players are amped up on dietary supplements, serious weight-lifting and (sometimes) steroids. Of course the ball goes a fucking long way when they hit it.Riiiggghhhhtttt. Like that postage stamp Livan Hernandez had in the '97 NLCS...
Evidence? A hell of a lot of SABRemetric types have done a lot of work on exactly that question. None has reached the same conclusion as you. Where are your numbers?
He hit 46 in '93, 42 in '96, 40 in '97 and 49 in 2000. Check your facts.
Regardless, the original posting said "they take steroids