Your analogy fails because it's not relevant to politics. Politics always involves compromises and negotiation. Both parties persisted in making "offers" that they knew from the start would be completely unacceptable to the other -- the Democrats, as well as the Republicans, invited the standoff.
And self checkout does not save time. Each item scans slower, bagging is problematic, and it randomly halts requiring assistance.
It does if there's a line of half a dozen people waiting for a clerk, and there's no line for a self-checkout station.
This is why I prefer shopping at a store that hires sufficient staff to man the checkout lines. But that is not always the most practical choice. Especially if I'm only buying a few items, it is most efficient to use the self-checkout at this particular grocery store.
Remember, my original objection was to the person who claimed that people that use the self-checkout are those that don't value their time. That's obviously wrong, because the reason why I do use it is because I do value my time.
Next time, wait to use a manned line. Once you're through, complain about the long wait time to a manager.
That's not productive if my goal is to save time.
Instead, when it's convenient to do so, I shop at a different grocery store that hires enough staff that I don't have to wait in line. It's further from my home, though, so it only saves time if I am already in that area.
If you're even moderately so, you can afford to pay for the convenience because your time is more valuable/important than that.
Typically, the reason why people choose self-checkout is because they want to save time. There is no faster way for me to buy my groceries than to go to the closest grocery store and then use the self-checkout.
Let me remind you all of Senator Obama's words from 2006 regarding the raising of the debt ceiling. He voted against raising the debt ceiling at that time.
The debt ceiling really isn't related to the government shutdown. The media (and certain politicians) are trying to conflate the two -- and it seems that they're succeeding, because most people don't seem to realize that there's a difference.
This is really down to familiarity. You are used to considering "0-100" the normal range. That's not even true for everyone.. for instance, where I live, the range of 30-120 F is much more useful. But it doesn't really matter, because once you've used it for a while, you will naturally learn the temperature range that you experience. Same with Celcius. Note that essentially everyone who grew up in countries that use Celcius prefer it.
The list of actual benefits and drawbacks for either scale are pretty minor -- ease of conversion to K is one, and consistency with other countries is another. I can't think of any others, and honestly neither of those outweighs the cost of trying to switch.
Didn't you read the summary? It makes Facebook three to four times more usable. Which, given the specificity of that statement, we can assume to be scientifically measured and verified.
This is about the behavior of the display server, not the user interface. So no, this has nothing to do with using a unified interface for different form factors.
Hm. Let's see what Ubuntu says:
The purpose of Mir is to enable the development of the next generation Unity. (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/Mir)
The purpose of Mir is to support their "converged interface." They are making design decisions of the display server based on the design requirements of their mobile interface, ignoring the existing desktop interface.
Mir could have done the same, but doesn't because of a conscious design decision - in the Ubuntu Phone world, clients stop doing things when they're told to. Ubuntu Desktop is expected to behave the same way.
So they're letting design decisions for their phone interface dictate how they implement their desktop interface. It's the same stupidity that the Gnome developers are engaged in. A desktop is not "just another kind of phone," and if you treat your primary users as second-class citizens, they'll all jump ship.
Wouldn't a well-designed website make use of the available space, so that the user who likes multiple narrow windows can have that, while the user who prefers to fill the screen with the website that they're reading can do so too?
On my 1920x1080 LCD, it looks retarded. There's as much whitespace running down the sides as there is content running down the middle.
It's even worse if you try to read the comments on a story. You know, the only reason why people actually come to slashdot rather than other websites with editors that actually make some effort. At 1920x1080, the comments take up a maximum of about 575 pixels -- less if they're nested. That means that more than 70% of the screen is wasted whitespace.
I have a large screen for a reason. If I want to read text in a narrow column, I'll resize the browser window.
All the news stories have been about "which political party should we blame."
You want to know who to blame? All of the twits who have been cheering on "their team" while this has been going on, instead of pressuring their representatives to do their job. The members of Congress -- in both major parties -- feel no pressure to actually resolve the situation, because they've managed to trick their supporters in the media into giving them a pass while they wasted time instead of actually trying to come up with a solution that has a chance of working.
To preempt right wing whining, I refer to Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) on Latinos: "there's another 100 out there that weigh 130 pounds and they've got calves the size of cantaloupes because they're hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57598020/rep-steve-king-stands-by-divisive-immigration-comments/ By the way, this asshat thinks he has a shot as the next Republican President.
You know, if you're going to resort to bald-faced lying by misrepresenting what someone says (hint: that comment was not about "Latinos" in general), you probably shouldn't link to a source that includes the quote in context.
insurance companies promise customers that they're not tracking their movement.
Here's the easier way of finding out where someone's driven: get the government to go ask the insurance company for their records. Do you actually believe them when they say that they're not keeping track of your location?
How is disagreeing with someone a sign of fear (phobia)?
Because a phobia is a mental disorder, and people like to take the easy way out of an argument by claiming that their opponent is wrong because "their brain is broken." It's easier than rational debate.
no, show me a hobbyist open source project that went 27 years with nothing usable.
Head over to sourceforge and start clicking on random projects. Half-finished projects with minimal practical use are common. The only real difference is that the Hurd gets lots of press despite its state.
Slashdot Mirror
Really? Name one member of Congress who tried to make a proposal acceptable to both major parties before the shutdown?
Your analogy fails because it's not relevant to politics. Politics always involves compromises and negotiation. Both parties persisted in making "offers" that they knew from the start would be completely unacceptable to the other -- the Democrats, as well as the Republicans, invited the standoff.
No thanks, I'll vote based on the individual's actual performance, not because some kind of sweeping generalization steeped in rhetoric.
There wasn't a single person in Congress, Democrat or Republican, who actually attempted to avert the shutdown.
And self checkout does not save time. Each item scans slower, bagging is problematic, and it randomly halts requiring assistance.
It does if there's a line of half a dozen people waiting for a clerk, and there's no line for a self-checkout station.
This is why I prefer shopping at a store that hires sufficient staff to man the checkout lines. But that is not always the most practical choice. Especially if I'm only buying a few items, it is most efficient to use the self-checkout at this particular grocery store.
Remember, my original objection was to the person who claimed that people that use the self-checkout are those that don't value their time. That's obviously wrong, because the reason why I do use it is because I do value my time.
Whatever. When you go to Wal-Mart, you have to give up time while the security guard reviews the purchase anyway.
Why would you think I shop at Wal-Mart? I don't.
Next time, wait to use a manned line. Once you're through, complain about the long wait time to a manager.
That's not productive if my goal is to save time.
Instead, when it's convenient to do so, I shop at a different grocery store that hires enough staff that I don't have to wait in line. It's further from my home, though, so it only saves time if I am already in that area.
What makes the same people eat up LOTR or the Hobbit with total suspension of disbelief...
Not all of us do!
If you're even moderately so, you can afford to pay for the convenience because your time is more valuable/important than that.
Typically, the reason why people choose self-checkout is because they want to save time. There is no faster way for me to buy my groceries than to go to the closest grocery store and then use the self-checkout.
Let me remind you all of Senator Obama's words from 2006 regarding the raising of the debt ceiling. He voted against raising the debt ceiling at that time.
The debt ceiling really isn't related to the government shutdown. The media (and certain politicians) are trying to conflate the two -- and it seems that they're succeeding, because most people don't seem to realize that there's a difference.
Widespread where? In countries where it's not already banned, I expect.
Yes, that was my point. It's becoming widespread, and eventually the places that ban it will change their laws.
I know that some Chevy cars have it as an option from the manufacturer. I would be surprised if they were the only ones.
I think you might have that part backwards.
Well, evidently not, if we are to take remote ignition as an example -- the feature is widespread already, and the laws are lagging behind.
Wouldn't that make the already-common remote ignition feature illegal?
I know that this is a pretty wild concept, but maybe, just maybe, it would be possible to change such laws if this sort of feature becomes common.
This is really down to familiarity. You are used to considering "0-100" the normal range. That's not even true for everyone .. for instance, where I live, the range of 30-120 F is much more useful. But it doesn't really matter, because once you've used it for a while, you will naturally learn the temperature range that you experience. Same with Celcius. Note that essentially everyone who grew up in countries that use Celcius prefer it.
The list of actual benefits and drawbacks for either scale are pretty minor -- ease of conversion to K is one, and consistency with other countries is another. I can't think of any others, and honestly neither of those outweighs the cost of trying to switch.
Don't mention what the fuck it does or anything.
Didn't you read the summary? It makes Facebook three to four times more usable. Which, given the specificity of that statement, we can assume to be scientifically measured and verified.
This is about the behavior of the display server, not the user interface. So no, this has nothing to do with using a unified interface for different form factors.
Hm. Let's see what Ubuntu says:
The purpose of Mir is to enable the development of the next generation Unity. (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/Mir)
From the very beginning, Unity's concepts were tailored with a converged world in mind... (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnityNextSpec)
The purpose of Mir is to support their "converged interface." They are making design decisions of the display server based on the design requirements of their mobile interface, ignoring the existing desktop interface.
FTFA:
Mir could have done the same, but doesn't because of a conscious design decision - in the Ubuntu Phone world, clients stop doing things when they're told to. Ubuntu Desktop is expected to behave the same way.
So they're letting design decisions for their phone interface dictate how they implement their desktop interface. It's the same stupidity that the Gnome developers are engaged in. A desktop is not "just another kind of phone," and if you treat your primary users as second-class citizens, they'll all jump ship.
Wouldn't a well-designed website make use of the available space, so that the user who likes multiple narrow windows can have that, while the user who prefers to fill the screen with the website that they're reading can do so too?
On my 1920x1080 LCD, it looks retarded. There's as much whitespace running down the sides as there is content running down the middle.
It's even worse if you try to read the comments on a story. You know, the only reason why people actually come to slashdot rather than other websites with editors that actually make some effort. At 1920x1080, the comments take up a maximum of about 575 pixels -- less if they're nested. That means that more than 70% of the screen is wasted whitespace.
I have a large screen for a reason. If I want to read text in a narrow column, I'll resize the browser window.
All the news stories have been about "which political party should we blame."
You want to know who to blame? All of the twits who have been cheering on "their team" while this has been going on, instead of pressuring their representatives to do their job. The members of Congress -- in both major parties -- feel no pressure to actually resolve the situation, because they've managed to trick their supporters in the media into giving them a pass while they wasted time instead of actually trying to come up with a solution that has a chance of working.
To preempt right wing whining, I refer to Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) on Latinos: "there's another 100 out there that weigh 130 pounds and they've got calves the size of cantaloupes because they're hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57598020/rep-steve-king-stands-by-divisive-immigration-comments/ By the way, this asshat thinks he has a shot as the next Republican President.
You know, if you're going to resort to bald-faced lying by misrepresenting what someone says (hint: that comment was not about "Latinos" in general), you probably shouldn't link to a source that includes the quote in context.
insurance companies promise customers that they're not tracking their movement.
Here's the easier way of finding out where someone's driven: get the government to go ask the insurance company for their records. Do you actually believe them when they say that they're not keeping track of your location?
How is disagreeing with someone a sign of fear (phobia)?
Because a phobia is a mental disorder, and people like to take the easy way out of an argument by claiming that their opponent is wrong because "their brain is broken." It's easier than rational debate.
no, show me a hobbyist open source project that went 27 years with nothing usable.
Head over to sourceforge and start clicking on random projects. Half-finished projects with minimal practical use are common. The only real difference is that the Hurd gets lots of press despite its state.
Does anyone know why this project is stalling so much?
Because there's no strong need for it to be completed. It's progressing the same way as any number of hobbyist open source projects.
I would tell you that it doesn't matter if a Republican president gets elected, he still has to implement the laws that Congress has passed.
Although if the current presidency is any indication, I guess that's no longer true.