The only thing I got out of this was rabble rabble communist rabble communist fuck rabble rabble rabble fuck rabble shit rabble rabble communist rabble sheeple. What is your point anyway? Try again in english please.
I'm sorry, I can't see clearly through the laughter generated tears that are flowing down my face... but I think you said that a competitive marketplace will look out for the public interest... Remind me again how Comcast, etc. are looking out for the public interest... Please provide clear examples of their altruistic behavior, or any company's altruistic behavior in general discounting instances where they were called out for bad behavior and scrambled to do something to generate positive PR (as a theoretical example, BP claiming to be altruistic in cleaning up the environment in the gulf after the Horizon disaster)
Have you ever left your car door unlocked and come back to find your radio or other valuables missing? I'm willing to bet that if you had, you were equally pissed at the asshats that stole your stuff, and yourself for forgetting to lock the door. It's happened to me, and I was pretty pissed at myself for allowing the situation that caused my stuff to get stolen. I bore the blame for my part in that interaction, namely leaving my stuff out available to be stolen, even while blaming the little thieves that chose to steal it. The existence of fault on one party's side doesn't preclude the existence of fault on the other. I don't think a single person here has said that Anon is not to blame for the issue here, but there is some responsibility on the part of an organization that is in charge of children's medical information to exercise a little due diligence in ensuring that data is secure. If that comes down to hiring an independent contractor to perform an assessment of their proposed hosting solution because nobody at the hospital has the skill to perform such an assessment themselves, then so be it.
Well, "fairly recently" is subjective I guess, since it's been 20 years since that concept was first introduced to the mainstream by Win95. I do recall DOS, having started out with PCs in the late 80s/early 90s, and I still use CLI quite extensively. My point is that for desktop environments, the start menu interface is a proven concept that works (otherwise it would have been abandoned back with Win98 or even XP). The touch style interface is a novel concept in a desktop environment, but it really isn't practical for power users. Shoehorning that concept into a server environment such as Server 2012 is laughable, because who's going to waste money on a touchscreen for a server.
By all means, MS should develop tablet friendly interfaces for their mobile offerings, but it doesn't really have a place in the desktop world. I don't mind a bit of eye candy to update the OS, win7 was decidedly more visually appealing than XP (won't go into Vista, that was an OS that really shouldn't have happened) but it kept the same basic concept for an interface. The most important thing for Microsoft to remain viable is to increase their customer base into new areas, without pissing off and alienating the customer base that made them the company they are today. Given the amount of complaint (be it justified in your opinion or not) being heard from the power user community over this change, I'd say they are most definitely alienating that key demographic that has paid their salaries for the last twenty odd years.
On a side note, love the sig, one of my favorite books;)
Well, I'm using it to write test code to test and MSP software my company writes. The server application for the MSP software has to run from a windows server, so naturally my dev environment is a windows server as well. I'm exactly the demographic that MS is ignoring in their quest to capture the Apple "my user interface has to be pretty" crowd.
If you think the US, UK, and the many other allies that drove Saddam's army from Kuwait in 1991 was spurious your are suffering from extreme moral confusion. If you think that holding Saddam to account was spurious you are badly confused.
All of the reasons put forth by the US/UK have turned out to be lies.
drove Saddam's army from Kuwait in 1991
Again, you're confusing the 1991 gulf war (as the previous poster indicated, with '1991') with the more recent invasion regarding the (admittedly false) claims of WMD in Iraq. The 1991 gulf war was entirely justified. Iraq annexed a sovereign nation to get control of their extremely lucrative oil fields. The US opposed this action. The opposition to that action was completely justified. The 2000s invasion of Iraq was a different story, but again that's not what was being referenced.
re: the tone, fair enough. It's often easy to stomp on toes when you're speaking in your non-native language. Re: efficiency, I do a lot of development work with VM environments for my job. As a result, I'm working out of a window for my environment, and recently I've had the misfortune of having to deal with Server 2012. Like Win8, they've forced the metro interface in that environment (I won't even go into my opinion regarding pushing this interface onto a server OS). One of my chief complaints is that in order to get to the control panel, or any other settings (or even to power down the system) I have to drag the mouse to the lower right corner of the "desktop" in order to pop up that settings icon to click on it. It only shows up when your mouse is in the furthest lower right corner of the screen, but since I'm in a VM environment, my mouse slips past that lowest point and out of the window frequently. It's a dumb way to provide access to that section of the OS, and it serves no purpose toward efficiency. It's a band-aid approach to provide functionality to the non-touch environment. I don't want an OS where the environment that I spend 90% of my computing time has a crowbarred work-around as the primary means of getting into the guts of the OS. Metro is great for what it is, the problem is that MS wants it to be great for everything, and that's just never going to happen. Tools should suit the job, rather than trying to wrap the job around the tool you have available.
As do I, thank you very much, but it was the most efficient interface for the scenario. There were early alternative interfaces for cars that didn't make the cut either. I'm not denigrating Win8 for its usage in tablet environments, that's a new hardware space and the interface makes sense for that scenario, I'm just saying that a unified interface like that is a stupid idea cross platform, because it's inefficient in the desktop space (which I note your response fails to rebut). The desktop computer is not going away, as much as Microsoft would love for it to. It will always have its place among power users. If you don't need to do anything beyond what a tablet can do, then great, I'm happy that the Win8 interface works for you, but putting others down for having an issue with having their workflow interrupted in order to foist more useless eye candy on them is rude and it shows your lack of understanding about the issue in the first place.
That's a much more palatable way of expressing it. I was only saying that as a vehicle for convincing others of your viewpoint, using (what some could consider to be) inflammatory terms to describe the opposition to that viewpoint isn't conducive to constructive debate or discussion. I'd most certainly agree with your assertion that it's possible to be for a safety net without toppling over the edge into completely supporting people. The issue here lies not in the social welfare programs per se, but rather with the lack of options that people have to get off those programs. College tuition is prohibitively high, and currently the only way financially disadvantaged groups can get access to it is to basically sell themselves into indentured servitude to acquire it (I know, I'm currently serving in such an indentured servitude). There need to be more paths to elevate oneself above the level of McDonalds wage slave. That does nothing but perpetuate the issue. Rather, I'd like to see money put towards making tuition at state colleges free for those below a certain income level. That would provide a path to higher education, and the savings from those that would be graduating past the social safety nets would offset the cost of supplying tuition to those same people. The nation gets more productive folks (possibly in the woefully underrepresented STEM fields) and less folks sucking the "government teat" as it has been so eloquently put. Bottom line is we need to stop viewing these people as leeches on society, and start viewing them as untapped potential. Tarring an entire class of people with the same brush simply because Reagan put forth this concept of the welfare queen thirty odd years ago is disingenuous and prejudicial.
"so it's easier to escape by just moving away"
Moving away isn't as simple or as easy as you make it seem. I've been trying to save enough money to leave Florida for ten years, but the pay rates here are so shitty I make just enough to pay my bills and put food on the table. My point is that crowing about small government changes nothing. We've seen where small government got us in terms of worker conditions. Sweatshops in the 1800s with ten year olds sewing clothes. Companies that dump toxic waste into the backyards of low income neighborhoods. Indentured servitude. Big corporations are just as bad as big government, and in fact might be worse. At least the government's stated aim is to work for the people. Big business works only for the CEOs and shareholders. The constitution limits what government can do to you. The only control we have over business is regulation, it's our "constitution" limiting how badly they can fuck us over. If you think that removing all government regulation wouldn't return us to the sweatshop days, then you're hopelessly naive.
I'd disagree with the comparison to Windows 8. If you must use the start button debate as a point of reference, a more apt analogy would be if Tesla were to change the pedal style accelerator (the standard interface to "go" in a car ever since cars started being built) with a trigger mounted to the steering wheel. Changing the guts under the hood in Windows wouldn't be a complaint for most people (barring major issues in how the OS performed as a result) but changing the interface that has been the standard for 20 years on a desktop computer is idiocy. It's not change for improvement's sake (as with Tesla's advancing powerplant technology) but rather change for the sake of change alone, without any appreciable improvement in efficiency in the operation of the product. Metro works fine for touch based devices, but not all desktop/laptops are touch, and to be frank touch interfaces are far less efficient than a mouse in a desktop environment. Who wants to sit at their desk with their hands on the keyboard and, when needing to interact with the GUI, have to reach up and touch the monitor rather than moving their hand over a few inches to move the mouse.
I doubt that would solve anything...
"There is substantial academic literature suggesting that smaller government units are easier for small, concentrated industries to capture than large ones. For example a group of states or provinces with a large timber industry might have their legislature and/or their delegation to the national legislature captured by lumber companies. These states or provinces then becomes the voice of the industry, even to the point of blocking national policies that would be preferred by the majority across the whole federation. Moore and Giovinazzo (2012) call this "distortion". - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
It's odd, your post is rather long, and clearly represents the intent to change peoples minds to your point of view, and yet you throw the word "lefty" around to a ridiculous degree, which indicates your post is simply ranting at other people for their beliefs. I'd venture to say that ad hominem attacks are not going to be the best method to convert others to your point of view. Perhaps you should provide more information, and try a little less to be quite so antagonistic if you're attempting to convince others of your point of view.
"Grandma" could conceivably be as young as 40 years old (or perhaps younger depending on circumstances) so I can envision a number of circumstances that she might want to update her firmware. The grandparents of today are the people who were dicking around with computers when they first came out. The concept that all grandparents are technically clueless and can't even fumble their way through an AOL login has become somewhat obsolete
Chances for autism in children has been rising not because of vaccines, but rather because of greater refinement in diagnosis. Correlation != causation. The pollster is correct. You are not using the scientific method.
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing I got out of this was rabble rabble communist rabble communist fuck rabble rabble rabble fuck rabble shit rabble rabble communist rabble sheeple. What is your point anyway? Try again in english please.
I'd venture to say that shooting someone and burying them alive and in agony is pretty damn 18th century...
I'm sorry, I can't see clearly through the laughter generated tears that are flowing down my face... but I think you said that a competitive marketplace will look out for the public interest... Remind me again how Comcast, etc. are looking out for the public interest... Please provide clear examples of their altruistic behavior, or any company's altruistic behavior in general discounting instances where they were called out for bad behavior and scrambled to do something to generate positive PR (as a theoretical example, BP claiming to be altruistic in cleaning up the environment in the gulf after the Horizon disaster)
as long as the mosquitoes don't find another source for lysine o.O
Have you ever left your car door unlocked and come back to find your radio or other valuables missing? I'm willing to bet that if you had, you were equally pissed at the asshats that stole your stuff, and yourself for forgetting to lock the door. It's happened to me, and I was pretty pissed at myself for allowing the situation that caused my stuff to get stolen. I bore the blame for my part in that interaction, namely leaving my stuff out available to be stolen, even while blaming the little thieves that chose to steal it. The existence of fault on one party's side doesn't preclude the existence of fault on the other. I don't think a single person here has said that Anon is not to blame for the issue here, but there is some responsibility on the part of an organization that is in charge of children's medical information to exercise a little due diligence in ensuring that data is secure. If that comes down to hiring an independent contractor to perform an assessment of their proposed hosting solution because nobody at the hospital has the skill to perform such an assessment themselves, then so be it.
Well, "fairly recently" is subjective I guess, since it's been 20 years since that concept was first introduced to the mainstream by Win95. I do recall DOS, having started out with PCs in the late 80s/early 90s, and I still use CLI quite extensively. My point is that for desktop environments, the start menu interface is a proven concept that works (otherwise it would have been abandoned back with Win98 or even XP). The touch style interface is a novel concept in a desktop environment, but it really isn't practical for power users. Shoehorning that concept into a server environment such as Server 2012 is laughable, because who's going to waste money on a touchscreen for a server.
;)
By all means, MS should develop tablet friendly interfaces for their mobile offerings, but it doesn't really have a place in the desktop world. I don't mind a bit of eye candy to update the OS, win7 was decidedly more visually appealing than XP (won't go into Vista, that was an OS that really shouldn't have happened) but it kept the same basic concept for an interface. The most important thing for Microsoft to remain viable is to increase their customer base into new areas, without pissing off and alienating the customer base that made them the company they are today. Given the amount of complaint (be it justified in your opinion or not) being heard from the power user community over this change, I'd say they are most definitely alienating that key demographic that has paid their salaries for the last twenty odd years.
On a side note, love the sig, one of my favorite books
Dammit... "write test code to test *an MSP software my company writes"
Well, I'm using it to write test code to test and MSP software my company writes. The server application for the MSP software has to run from a windows server, so naturally my dev environment is a windows server as well. I'm exactly the demographic that MS is ignoring in their quest to capture the Apple "my user interface has to be pretty" crowd.
If you think the US, UK, and the many other allies that drove Saddam's army from Kuwait in 1991 was spurious your are suffering from extreme moral confusion. If you think that holding Saddam to account was spurious you are badly confused.
All of the reasons put forth by the US/UK have turned out to be lies.
drove Saddam's army from Kuwait in 1991
Again, you're confusing the 1991 gulf war (as the previous poster indicated, with '1991') with the more recent invasion regarding the (admittedly false) claims of WMD in Iraq. The 1991 gulf war was entirely justified. Iraq annexed a sovereign nation to get control of their extremely lucrative oil fields. The US opposed this action. The opposition to that action was completely justified. The 2000s invasion of Iraq was a different story, but again that's not what was being referenced.
re: the tone, fair enough. It's often easy to stomp on toes when you're speaking in your non-native language. Re: efficiency, I do a lot of development work with VM environments for my job. As a result, I'm working out of a window for my environment, and recently I've had the misfortune of having to deal with Server 2012. Like Win8, they've forced the metro interface in that environment (I won't even go into my opinion regarding pushing this interface onto a server OS). One of my chief complaints is that in order to get to the control panel, or any other settings (or even to power down the system) I have to drag the mouse to the lower right corner of the "desktop" in order to pop up that settings icon to click on it. It only shows up when your mouse is in the furthest lower right corner of the screen, but since I'm in a VM environment, my mouse slips past that lowest point and out of the window frequently. It's a dumb way to provide access to that section of the OS, and it serves no purpose toward efficiency. It's a band-aid approach to provide functionality to the non-touch environment. I don't want an OS where the environment that I spend 90% of my computing time has a crowbarred work-around as the primary means of getting into the guts of the OS. Metro is great for what it is, the problem is that MS wants it to be great for everything, and that's just never going to happen. Tools should suit the job, rather than trying to wrap the job around the tool you have available.
As do I, thank you very much, but it was the most efficient interface for the scenario. There were early alternative interfaces for cars that didn't make the cut either. I'm not denigrating Win8 for its usage in tablet environments, that's a new hardware space and the interface makes sense for that scenario, I'm just saying that a unified interface like that is a stupid idea cross platform, because it's inefficient in the desktop space (which I note your response fails to rebut). The desktop computer is not going away, as much as Microsoft would love for it to. It will always have its place among power users. If you don't need to do anything beyond what a tablet can do, then great, I'm happy that the Win8 interface works for you, but putting others down for having an issue with having their workflow interrupted in order to foist more useless eye candy on them is rude and it shows your lack of understanding about the issue in the first place.
That's a much more palatable way of expressing it. I was only saying that as a vehicle for convincing others of your viewpoint, using (what some could consider to be) inflammatory terms to describe the opposition to that viewpoint isn't conducive to constructive debate or discussion. I'd most certainly agree with your assertion that it's possible to be for a safety net without toppling over the edge into completely supporting people. The issue here lies not in the social welfare programs per se, but rather with the lack of options that people have to get off those programs. College tuition is prohibitively high, and currently the only way financially disadvantaged groups can get access to it is to basically sell themselves into indentured servitude to acquire it (I know, I'm currently serving in such an indentured servitude). There need to be more paths to elevate oneself above the level of McDonalds wage slave. That does nothing but perpetuate the issue. Rather, I'd like to see money put towards making tuition at state colleges free for those below a certain income level. That would provide a path to higher education, and the savings from those that would be graduating past the social safety nets would offset the cost of supplying tuition to those same people. The nation gets more productive folks (possibly in the woefully underrepresented STEM fields) and less folks sucking the "government teat" as it has been so eloquently put. Bottom line is we need to stop viewing these people as leeches on society, and start viewing them as untapped potential. Tarring an entire class of people with the same brush simply because Reagan put forth this concept of the welfare queen thirty odd years ago is disingenuous and prejudicial.
"so it's easier to escape by just moving away" Moving away isn't as simple or as easy as you make it seem. I've been trying to save enough money to leave Florida for ten years, but the pay rates here are so shitty I make just enough to pay my bills and put food on the table. My point is that crowing about small government changes nothing. We've seen where small government got us in terms of worker conditions. Sweatshops in the 1800s with ten year olds sewing clothes. Companies that dump toxic waste into the backyards of low income neighborhoods. Indentured servitude. Big corporations are just as bad as big government, and in fact might be worse. At least the government's stated aim is to work for the people. Big business works only for the CEOs and shareholders. The constitution limits what government can do to you. The only control we have over business is regulation, it's our "constitution" limiting how badly they can fuck us over. If you think that removing all government regulation wouldn't return us to the sweatshop days, then you're hopelessly naive.
I'd disagree with the comparison to Windows 8. If you must use the start button debate as a point of reference, a more apt analogy would be if Tesla were to change the pedal style accelerator (the standard interface to "go" in a car ever since cars started being built) with a trigger mounted to the steering wheel. Changing the guts under the hood in Windows wouldn't be a complaint for most people (barring major issues in how the OS performed as a result) but changing the interface that has been the standard for 20 years on a desktop computer is idiocy. It's not change for improvement's sake (as with Tesla's advancing powerplant technology) but rather change for the sake of change alone, without any appreciable improvement in efficiency in the operation of the product. Metro works fine for touch based devices, but not all desktop/laptops are touch, and to be frank touch interfaces are far less efficient than a mouse in a desktop environment. Who wants to sit at their desk with their hands on the keyboard and, when needing to interact with the GUI, have to reach up and touch the monitor rather than moving their hand over a few inches to move the mouse.
I doubt that would solve anything... "There is substantial academic literature suggesting that smaller government units are easier for small, concentrated industries to capture than large ones. For example a group of states or provinces with a large timber industry might have their legislature and/or their delegation to the national legislature captured by lumber companies. These states or provinces then becomes the voice of the industry, even to the point of blocking national policies that would be preferred by the majority across the whole federation. Moore and Giovinazzo (2012) call this "distortion". - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
Bacon Radio FTW...
It's odd, your post is rather long, and clearly represents the intent to change peoples minds to your point of view, and yet you throw the word "lefty" around to a ridiculous degree, which indicates your post is simply ranting at other people for their beliefs. I'd venture to say that ad hominem attacks are not going to be the best method to convert others to your point of view. Perhaps you should provide more information, and try a little less to be quite so antagonistic if you're attempting to convince others of your point of view.
I dunno, but if you keep playing with it, you'll go blind ;)
How many of that 1/5 collect welfare checks?
I was more commenting on the general tendency of the pitchfork wielders to wield pitchforks rather than a specific comment on the big bang theory.
That was a pretty huge leap to make? Care to toss on a kenyan muslim socialist reference for good measure?
"Grandma" could conceivably be as young as 40 years old (or perhaps younger depending on circumstances) so I can envision a number of circumstances that she might want to update her firmware. The grandparents of today are the people who were dicking around with computers when they first came out. The concept that all grandparents are technically clueless and can't even fumble their way through an AOL login has become somewhat obsolete
Lots of minerals though
That would likely just complete the circle, because odds are, that's where he got it from...
Chances for autism in children has been rising not because of vaccines, but rather because of greater refinement in diagnosis. Correlation != causation. The pollster is correct. You are not using the scientific method.