"researchers were able to cause a power generator to self-destruct remotely via a hack which changed the operating cycle of the generator"
My dad used to make hard drive cabinets walk across the room by doing a slow read in one direction and a fast read in the other. (Sorry if I'm sketchy on the details, but it was something like that. The story was told long ago and the events happened even longer before that. This was back when hard disk platters were 12" across, copper-colored, and held a few MB each.)
Yeah, and "not optimized" == "impossible to do." Even when all the great minds at Google are involved.
All the mail is stored somehow, all the data is there--it's shown on the screen, for fuck's sake--why can't they sort? I've seen JavaScript code that lets you take a statically-built HTML table and click its headers to sort--surely this could be done by the Gmail team.
I'm not saying they have to change. I'm not even saying they should change. All I'm saying is that they lack a basic feature that has been in every email reader--web or binary--I've ever seen (even Lotus Notes, for crying out loud) and I use that feature a lot, and that is why I don't use Gmail much.
There's still lots of fun stuff that can be done with Web 1.0... even on an iPhone. (shameless plug)
Actually, what I'd really like to see would be a return to true Web 1.0 roots--you know, device independence, things like that. To be honest, the iPhone's method of shrinking web pages is just a not-so-elegant workaround. It's nice sometimes, but I'd prefer it if the iPhone just reflowed plain pages like this to 320 pixels wide (without a viewport specified) like my Axim does.* (I say this as a happy iPhone owner and developer.)
* in landscape mode the iPhone just shows unstyled pages with no zoom, 480px wide, but in portrait mode it shrinks them. Which is fine for sites with columns but I wish it would just say "No styling info? Just show it at 1x" for really plain nothing-but-headings-and-paragraphs type pages.
No, you're totally wrong, but thanks for phrasing that so trollfully. I've used Gmail quite a bit and I know (from all the drooling on Slashdot) that it's super-powerful and the best thing since sliced bread... but if I can't click a button (like I've done with other email clients and services for a decade or so) and get my biggest messages at the top... or the newest... or the oldest... then that's a big lack. Search is NOT the answer to everything, you know. Some people still like to manually organize things, and see things in context. That's why search has not replaced hierarchical and manual organization.
Well, here's just ONE of MANY examples of how I use this: one click, and all the biggest messages go to the top. Bam, there's all my biggest attachments, which are various groups of pictures from various senders, which is EXACTLY what I want. Why the hell would I want to search for "... and size > X MB" when I could just click a column header, like I've been doing with every email client, including Yahoo and Hotmail, FOR OVER TEN YEARS?!?!?
You don't know me. You don't know how I use email. Don't try to tell me how. Yes, there are times when I search, but in general, I much, much prefer to see ALL my mail, GROUPED by sender, date, etc. I *LIKE* a big-picture view--to see how a message fits in among others in time, etc. Searches are NOT the answer to everything. (And neither are labels.)
The bigger question--why does Google NOT ALLOW this behavior? It's not like it's hard to implement. It's not like people aren't used to it. Very much to the contrary--I can't think of any OTHER email program or service that DOESN'T let me do this. Google has gone out of their way to leave out a feature that many people like and use.
(And no, I'm not some old fogey who hates change and wants to do things the way he's always done them, dag nabbit. I appreciate the fact that Google searches well, and labels are handy for some things. But there's no reason for Google to have gotten rid of so much other functionality.)
I registered, not right away, but a few years ago. At the time, once I had jumped through all the hoops, I was presented with an additional option: "Now, that you've registered, you can print request this other form which will be (snail) mailed to you. Fill it out, mail it in, and you'll be permanently removed."
Oh no, wait, I'M TOTALLY WRONG. That was for the "quit sending me pre-approved loan offers" thing. However, that did cut down my junk mail greatly--I used to get an average of more than one offer per day, now I get one every few months or so. Look for the 800-number at the bottom of the next one you get.
'1600x1200' is my screen resolution--no idea why the fuck they want to collect that. (I mean, I have an idea, but it's none of their fucking business.) '*.aens.net' goes into the blocked list.
The status bar has been off by default in Safari since its inception.* I use 10.3 as well (death to Spotlight!) and you can see for yourself--make a new user, log in as that user, and launch Safari. Ta-da! Witness the Web through Steve Jobs' eyes in all its minimalist, borderless glory.
* And "Open 'safe' files automatically" has been on by default as well--the other big security flaw in Safari. As for this point a couple levels up--No more "Open this file" option in download dialogs. Period. If the user cannot manage opening the file themselves from the regular UI, then hopefully they will get stuck and sign up for an introductory computer class.--I couldn't agree more. Like a comedian said, "I'm not saying we should punish stupidity... let's just take all the warning labels off of products and let nature take its course."
Agreed. On a related note: I like Apple a lot in general, but it is ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE that Safari ships with the status bar hidden. By default, millions of users don't know what they're about to click on. True, it's not foolproof--JavaScript can change what's shown (and why that was EVER allowed, I'll NEVER know)--but it's still handy 99% of the time.
As A. Whitney Brown said on Saturday Night Live when China reach a population of one billion: "Even if you're a one-in-a-million kind of person, there's still a thousand people just like you."
NO FUCKING SHIT. Nothing is for everyone. This is such a lame, overused statement. It's just the reviewer trying to sound insightful. There is no system on Earth that is better in every way than whatever it's replacing. I have an iPhone and it's pretty neat but there are many times I miss having physical buttons. Hell, you've got to be looking at it while you slide your finger on it just to answer a damn call. It would be cool if, in addition to the ability to press the power button to silence/decline a call, you could press a volume button once to answer it.
More than that, it's even hard just to figure out which way is up when you first grab it. Even looking at it, I'm used to phones with a slot for the mic and/or a circle where your ear goes--exactly the opposite of the iPhone. As for the iPod functions, I use my iPod in the car all the time and I'd hate to have to look at it every time I wanted to skip a track or two. I've still got it. No sense mentioning that my collection is too big to fit on a 4, 8, or 16 GB model. In fact, that was part of the reason I bought my iPod when I did--it would have been worthless to me if I couldn't have my whole collection with me at all times.
Nice job on the GIF. I'm not usually one to toot my own horn, but this is also a perfect application of the thing I mention in my.sig. Basically, I use PHP to generate some repetitive javascript which, when combined with an image map, creates a neat effect. Source code and examples are here, and here is this technology applied to the Iapetus pics.
I'm too late to get modded up, so tell your friends!:-)
I suspect the intention of these laws was... to restore presidential power that the Republicans were forced to concede during the Ford administration, in wake of the Nixon and Pentagon Papers revelations. I think this has been something Republicans in general, and neocons in particular, have wanted for a long time.
And my favorite question to ask republicans is... "Will you be happy that these laws were passed when Hillary is president?"
I look at kdawson's "grist mill" stories, and click through to the discussion most of the time, because sometimes it's the really boring and/or trite stories that provoke the most interesting (usually offtopic) discussions.
Yeah, except that those are mostly discussions about how much kdawson sucks, and those will eventually get old.:-)
(Half-joking, half-serious.)
Seriously, Slashdot can only do so much of that. Yeah, sometimes something is better than nothing, but it's like eating nothing but sugar--that will only work so long before people get tired of it. I'm evidently in the minority, but I rarely click through obvious flamebait stories or other things that look equally worthless (Is 200X the year of Linux on the desktop? Will Ubuntu defeat Mac OS X? etc etc etc.) If Slashdot is ever nothing but filler stories, it will wither and die.
I had the same though last week when Steve Jobs was talking about how many people have downloaded iTunes. WHO GIVES A FUCK? These numbers are completely without meaning for many reasons. I'm one person and I've downloaded 1.0, 1.5, and/or 2.0 (plus several other minor versions) for my two main computers at home, my two laptops, and my three work machines. Sometimes (especially at work) I've got to get the newest point release (or point-point, or point-point-point--I'm at 1.5.0.2 on one machine.)
Back in the days of dialup--and less-frequent releases--I used to keep installers but I don't anymore. Anywhere that I'll need one, I just download it, a) because I don't have to look for it and b) that ensures that I'll get the newest version. I've probably downloaded Firefox 50 times for machines that I personally use. And the funniest part is, I don't even use Firefox that much--I literally use it maybe 5% of the time. On OS X I prefer Safari, and I use OS X for everything but testing and a couple odd tasks. Mostly, Firefox+UnPlug is my "get video from youtube" appliance. Other than that, I barely touch it.
Same thing with iTunes--who cares? The numbers are ESPECIALLY meaningless when you consider that iTunes has gone from 1.0 to 7.4 in 6 years, and besides all the major revs--1.0, 2.0, 3.0, etc.--there have been many other "must-have" minor versions, either to keep compatibility with the music store, or to gain things like video playback (4.8) or podcast support (4.9). "Number of downloads" has got to be one of the most useless statistics ever, and it gets less and less meaningful with every new version of a program that comes out.
I don't know. The very first kdawson stories (AFAIK) were the ones that used the 'enlightenment' icon incorrectly. No group of slashdot regulars could be that dumb... and at the same time, I don't think the slashdot regulars are smart enough to lay a foundation like that intentionally. I have to think it's one not-so-bright person.
The last computer I had it on took X seconds to get to a POST beep and Y more seconds to get to a BeOS desktop, and X was greater than Y.
Unfortunately, there wasn't a whole lot to do with it but marvel at its boot time and launch a bunch of QuickTime movies. ArtPaint gave me a glimpse of how fast Photoshop could be, but of course a port never came. (Plus ArtPaint crashed a lot.) The 3D music editing demo app was great but it, too, crashed a lot. I'm glad Apple went with NeXT for the basis of OS X because it's more of a "real" UNIX as compared to the single-user BeOS, but I'd probably just as happy in most ways and happier in some if JLG hadn't been so greedy. Of course, no NeXT means no Steve, and no iMac, iLife, iPod, or iPhone--just freakishly fast beige boxes and probably no market share.
OK, got a little off topic here, but the point remains--if you don't want bloat, check out BeOS. (And get a time machine.) Or QNX--they used to have a demo version that fit a GUI, browser, and web server onto a 1.44 MB floppy.
Truth be told, I had an AT (XT? I forget) in college that went from power-off to a C: prompt in seven seconds. It ran Banner Blue Movie Guide (awesome searchable movie database program) and WordPerfect 5.1 just fine, thankyouverymuch.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for one of the best Slashdot posts ever. Very clever. :-)
"researchers were able to cause a power generator to self-destruct remotely via a hack which changed the operating cycle of the generator"
My dad used to make hard drive cabinets walk across the room by doing a slow read in one direction and a fast read in the other. (Sorry if I'm sketchy on the details, but it was something like that. The story was told long ago and the events happened even longer before that. This was back when hard disk platters were 12" across, copper-colored, and held a few MB each.)
Yeah, and "not optimized" == "impossible to do." Even when all the great minds at Google are involved.
All the mail is stored somehow, all the data is there--it's shown on the screen, for fuck's sake--why can't they sort? I've seen JavaScript code that lets you take a statically-built HTML table and click its headers to sort--surely this could be done by the Gmail team.
I'm not saying they have to change. I'm not even saying they should change. All I'm saying is that they lack a basic feature that has been in every email reader--web or binary--I've ever seen (even Lotus Notes, for crying out loud) and I use that feature a lot, and that is why I don't use Gmail much.
There's still lots of fun stuff that can be done with Web 1.0... even on an iPhone. (shameless plug)
Actually, what I'd really like to see would be a return to true Web 1.0 roots--you know, device independence, things like that. To be honest, the iPhone's method of shrinking web pages is just a not-so-elegant workaround. It's nice sometimes, but I'd prefer it if the iPhone just reflowed plain pages like this to 320 pixels wide (without a viewport specified) like my Axim does.* (I say this as a happy iPhone owner and developer.)
* in landscape mode the iPhone just shows unstyled pages with no zoom, 480px wide, but in portrait mode it shrinks them. Which is fine for sites with columns but I wish it would just say "No styling info? Just show it at 1x" for really plain nothing-but-headings-and-paragraphs type pages.
No, you're totally wrong, but thanks for phrasing that so trollfully. I've used Gmail quite a bit and I know (from all the drooling on Slashdot) that it's super-powerful and the best thing since sliced bread... but if I can't click a button (like I've done with other email clients and services for a decade or so) and get my biggest messages at the top... or the newest... or the oldest... then that's a big lack. Search is NOT the answer to everything, you know. Some people still like to manually organize things, and see things in context. That's why search has not replaced hierarchical and manual organization.
Well, here's just ONE of MANY examples of how I use this: one click, and all the biggest messages go to the top. Bam, there's all my biggest attachments, which are various groups of pictures from various senders, which is EXACTLY what I want. Why the hell would I want to search for "... and size > X MB" when I could just click a column header, like I've been doing with every email client, including Yahoo and Hotmail, FOR OVER TEN YEARS?!?!?
You don't know me. You don't know how I use email. Don't try to tell me how. Yes, there are times when I search, but in general, I much, much prefer to see ALL my mail, GROUPED by sender, date, etc. I *LIKE* a big-picture view--to see how a message fits in among others in time, etc. Searches are NOT the answer to everything. (And neither are labels.)
The bigger question--why does Google NOT ALLOW this behavior? It's not like it's hard to implement. It's not like people aren't used to it. Very much to the contrary--I can't think of any OTHER email program or service that DOESN'T let me do this. Google has gone out of their way to leave out a feature that many people like and use.
(And no, I'm not some old fogey who hates change and wants to do things the way he's always done them, dag nabbit. I appreciate the fact that Google searches well, and labels are handy for some things. But there's no reason for Google to have gotten rid of so much other functionality.)
Let me click one button and sort by sender, subject, size, etc. That's the #1 reason I don't use Gmail.
I registered, not right away, but a few years ago. At the time, once I had jumped through all the hoops, I was presented with an additional option: "Now, that you've registered, you can print request this other form which will be (snail) mailed to you. Fill it out, mail it in, and you'll be permanently removed."
/register/Reg.aspx&dcsqry=&dcssip= www.donotcall.gov&WT.tz= 240&WT.ul=en&WT.cd= 32&WT.sr=1600x1200&WT.jo= Yes&WT.ti=National%20Do%20Not%20Call%20Registry
Oh no, wait, I'M TOTALLY WRONG. That was for the "quit sending me pre-approved loan offers" thing. However, that did cut down my junk mail greatly--I used to get an average of more than one offer per day, now I get one every few months or so. Look for the 800-number at the bottom of the next one you get.
In other news, donotcall.gov likes to open a new window for every link you click on, and they're working with some slow-ass stat-collecting site--the page loads, but my 'loading' icon spins because it's waiting to load https://g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net/DCS000003_6D4Q/dcs.gif?&dcsdat= 1190396930826&dcsref= https%3A//www.donotcall.gov/default.aspx&dcsuri=
'1600x1200' is my screen resolution--no idea why the fuck they want to collect that. (I mean, I have an idea, but it's none of their fucking business.) '*.aens.net' goes into the blocked list.
The status bar has been off by default in Safari since its inception.* I use 10.3 as well (death to Spotlight!) and you can see for yourself--make a new user, log in as that user, and launch Safari. Ta-da! Witness the Web through Steve Jobs' eyes in all its minimalist, borderless glory.
* And "Open 'safe' files automatically" has been on by default as well--the other big security flaw in Safari. As for this point a couple levels up--No more "Open this file" option in download dialogs. Period. If the user cannot manage opening the file themselves from the regular UI, then hopefully they will get stuck and sign up for an introductory computer class.--I couldn't agree more. Like a comedian said, "I'm not saying we should punish stupidity... let's just take all the warning labels off of products and let nature take its course."
Agreed. On a related note: I like Apple a lot in general, but it is ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE that Safari ships with the status bar hidden. By default, millions of users don't know what they're about to click on. True, it's not foolproof--JavaScript can change what's shown (and why that was EVER allowed, I'll NEVER know)--but it's still handy 99% of the time.
Smileys were frowned upon.
There's a joke in there somewhere.
As A. Whitney Brown said on Saturday Night Live when China reach a population of one billion: "Even if you're a one-in-a-million kind of person, there's still a thousand people just like you."
"But the iPod touch isn't for everyone."
NO FUCKING SHIT. Nothing is for everyone. This is such a lame, overused statement. It's just the reviewer trying to sound insightful. There is no system on Earth that is better in every way than whatever it's replacing. I have an iPhone and it's pretty neat but there are many times I miss having physical buttons. Hell, you've got to be looking at it while you slide your finger on it just to answer a damn call. It would be cool if, in addition to the ability to press the power button to silence/decline a call, you could press a volume button once to answer it.
More than that, it's even hard just to figure out which way is up when you first grab it. Even looking at it, I'm used to phones with a slot for the mic and/or a circle where your ear goes--exactly the opposite of the iPhone. As for the iPod functions, I use my iPod in the car all the time and I'd hate to have to look at it every time I wanted to skip a track or two. I've still got it. No sense mentioning that my collection is too big to fit on a 4, 8, or 16 GB model. In fact, that was part of the reason I bought my iPod when I did--it would have been worthless to me if I couldn't have my whole collection with me at all times.
Nice job on the GIF. I'm not usually one to toot my own horn, but this is also a perfect application of the thing I mention in my .sig. Basically, I use PHP to generate some repetitive javascript which, when combined with an image map, creates a neat effect. Source code and examples are here, and here is this technology applied to the Iapetus pics.
:-)
I'm too late to get modded up, so tell your friends!
I suspect the intention of these laws was... to restore presidential power that the Republicans were forced to concede during the Ford administration, in wake of the Nixon and Pentagon Papers revelations. I think this has been something Republicans in general, and neocons in particular, have wanted for a long time.
And my favorite question to ask republicans is... "Will you be happy that these laws were passed when Hillary is president?"
I'm just happy this release wasn't 'glistening goatse'. *shudder*
Well, the HTML source might have been longer if they would have added some links, but the time to read would have been identical, and then you, me, and the GP could have saved some time and done something else more productive.
Sorry, I don't have time to read your whole post. Could you summarize your thoughts for me please?
How long until we get Google Iapetus?
I look at kdawson's "grist mill" stories, and click through to the discussion most of the time, because sometimes it's the really boring and/or trite stories that provoke the most interesting (usually offtopic) discussions.
:-)
Yeah, except that those are mostly discussions about how much kdawson sucks, and those will eventually get old.
(Half-joking, half-serious.)
Seriously, Slashdot can only do so much of that. Yeah, sometimes something is better than nothing, but it's like eating nothing but sugar--that will only work so long before people get tired of it. I'm evidently in the minority, but I rarely click through obvious flamebait stories or other things that look equally worthless (Is 200X the year of Linux on the desktop? Will Ubuntu defeat Mac OS X? etc etc etc.) If Slashdot is ever nothing but filler stories, it will wither and die.
I had the same though last week when Steve Jobs was talking about how many people have downloaded iTunes. WHO GIVES A FUCK? These numbers are completely without meaning for many reasons. I'm one person and I've downloaded 1.0, 1.5, and/or 2.0 (plus several other minor versions) for my two main computers at home, my two laptops, and my three work machines. Sometimes (especially at work) I've got to get the newest point release (or point-point, or point-point-point--I'm at 1.5.0.2 on one machine.)
Back in the days of dialup--and less-frequent releases--I used to keep installers but I don't anymore. Anywhere that I'll need one, I just download it, a) because I don't have to look for it and b) that ensures that I'll get the newest version. I've probably downloaded Firefox 50 times for machines that I personally use. And the funniest part is, I don't even use Firefox that much--I literally use it maybe 5% of the time. On OS X I prefer Safari, and I use OS X for everything but testing and a couple odd tasks. Mostly, Firefox+UnPlug is my "get video from youtube" appliance. Other than that, I barely touch it.
Same thing with iTunes--who cares? The numbers are ESPECIALLY meaningless when you consider that iTunes has gone from 1.0 to 7.4 in 6 years, and besides all the major revs--1.0, 2.0, 3.0, etc.--there have been many other "must-have" minor versions, either to keep compatibility with the music store, or to gain things like video playback (4.8) or podcast support (4.9). "Number of downloads" has got to be one of the most useless statistics ever, and it gets less and less meaningful with every new version of a program that comes out.
I don't know. The very first kdawson stories (AFAIK) were the ones that used the 'enlightenment' icon incorrectly. No group of slashdot regulars could be that dumb... and at the same time, I don't think the slashdot regulars are smart enough to lay a foundation like that intentionally. I have to think it's one not-so-bright person.
The last computer I had it on took X seconds to get to a POST beep and Y more seconds to get to a BeOS desktop, and X was greater than Y.
Unfortunately, there wasn't a whole lot to do with it but marvel at its boot time and launch a bunch of QuickTime movies. ArtPaint gave me a glimpse of how fast Photoshop could be, but of course a port never came. (Plus ArtPaint crashed a lot.) The 3D music editing demo app was great but it, too, crashed a lot. I'm glad Apple went with NeXT for the basis of OS X because it's more of a "real" UNIX as compared to the single-user BeOS, but I'd probably just as happy in most ways and happier in some if JLG hadn't been so greedy. Of course, no NeXT means no Steve, and no iMac, iLife, iPod, or iPhone--just freakishly fast beige boxes and probably no market share.
OK, got a little off topic here, but the point remains--if you don't want bloat, check out BeOS. (And get a time machine.) Or QNX--they used to have a demo version that fit a GUI, browser, and web server onto a 1.44 MB floppy.
Truth be told, I had an AT (XT? I forget) in college that went from power-off to a C: prompt in seven seconds. It ran Banner Blue Movie Guide (awesome searchable movie database program) and WordPerfect 5.1 just fine, thankyouverymuch.
Windows 2000 & Office 97 run great on a well-maintained 1 GHz PIII.