I submit that assisting the Chinese government in masking their censorship just so you can remain in the market most certainly qualifies as "evil."
No. It's "neutral." There is a friggin' third choice.
Google's not "be good." It's "not be evil." Thus, they're "neutral." And neutral parties will make compromises like this one.
Re:Joe Sixpack is looking for "useful life"
on
Less Might Be More
·
· Score: 1
Most of those features work incorrectly most of the time.
Not really. Most of those features, especially in XP or 2003, not only work as designed and intended, but they're clear about what they've done and right-then can be undone or turned off.
Oh, and even if you don't trust Office's "transfer files and settings" appellet, expanding Word's spelling lexicon should be trivial--especially for a geek able to turn the spellchecker off.
You have to stop and look at what Joe-sixpack does with his word processor; not what us geeks do. Joe six-pack loads it up... and types. Then he clicks on all the fancy formatting buttons that are on the toolbar to make his composition look pretty. He doesn't go into the menus, and he probably runs it in the default dumb menu mode where all the options are hidden anyway.
WHAT "default dumb mode"? Do you mean the "auto-hide" mode, which is easy enough for joe sixpack to use, or are you talking about something else?
But he doesn't care that it can be scripted, do mail merges, format your document as a template so you dont have to manually format each block or do the rest of the things that Word is apparantly capable of.
I'll note that those things you deride are (1) a good idea for the word processor to have and often rather useful and (2) something that Mr. Businessman does use, even if Joe Sixpack never does.
Granted, it's only 50K, but that's beside the point.
No, it isn't.
Firefox ALREADY is half an FTP client. Web browsers have been doing this for years, and IE does it seamlessly.
A 50k extension or even a 50k increase in the base program file is entrely appropriate. Complaining about it is like complaining about shockwave flash.
And, since it IS an extension, you should just be quiet about "bloat." "Extensibility" is just about the complete inverse of "bloat"", and you know it.
Re:Joe Sixpack is looking for "useful life"
on
Less Might Be More
·
· Score: 1
Word 2 ran just as fast as Word XP. Word 2 had all the features that probably 95% of the population would have ever needed (let-alone used).
I have to disagree with you here. Most of the background-task features in Word are ones that really do make it easier to use than Word 2--and a good percentage of the population does use them.
You're arguing that it's all bloat, and unnecessary. I'm not saying that it's bloat-free, but that a good proportion of the increased complexity really is as "needed" as any feature in Word 2.
Re:Joe Sixpack is looking for "useful life"
on
Less Might Be More
·
· Score: 1
Software expands to fill the available hardware capacity. I still remember running Word 2 on Windows 3.11 on a 386/40 with 8M RAM. It was just as quick for most things as Word XP on Windows XP. Just Word/windowsXP is so much more bloated that it needs more computing power than my old 386 had just to run the OS and draw all the eye candy they've added.
Faulty example.
32-bit versions of MS Word (95 or later) don't just sit there idling like the old 16-bit versions did. They run a half-dozen processes in the background, in addition to the same "render text" model.
And the office document model's gotten more complex (Multimedia, styles, and real layout) and able to handle larger files.
Take a file that would crash word 2, and load it in Word XP. You'll probably notice that it doesn't even blink at it.
True. I have way more power than I need--256 DDR with an AMD 2200 doesn't do the writing job much better than the 128 SDR with a duron 700 that it replaced.
But they both do the job better than the 44 mhz 486 I started out with.
Oh, and keep in mind... Bush wasn't elected, he was appointed technically. Which I think means that he can actually run and be elected 2 more times. Since this term doesn't count.:)
Bush was elected. Only one of fifty vote-sections was decided de-facto judicially
And the Constition doesn't care HOW a president was elected for terms of eligibility. If Bush & Cheney had been killed on 9/11, Collen Powell would only be able to be elected once more, not twice. (You can't run if you would wind up serving over a total of 10 years.)
A couple of examples: Obi Wan stashes Luke on the same planet where Anakin grew up. Oh yeah, DarthAnakin would never think to look there...
You mean Couruscant? Oh, no, you mean the place where his mother was killed and he lived a wretched existance.
Remember: it isn't that Darth didn't look for the kids. It's that he didn't know they lived for awhile.
And Leia is supposed to be Plan B should Luke fail but Darth can't sense that the Force is strong in her, even when he's personally overseeing her torture?
Nope. The force wasn't strong in Leia--never was, even in the books.
It had a decent plotline and was fun to watch, which is a lot more than you can say about star wars 1,2, and 6, and probably 3.
The plot has hardly been Lucas's problem -- it's the dialogue, script, & directing. Plot-wise, he's fine.:)
It has acting and writing at a level that George Lucas can only dream about.
It [The last starfighter] is a "kid goes into video game" story, with a corney super-maguffin that would never fly in a real video game and makes Lucas's plot twists seem genius.
OTOH, it [still TLS] doesn't try and be more than it is, and no one holds it up as more than it is.
We must be talking about different Iron Mountains. (Ah, you must mean www.ironmountain.com, a MA based company)
There's a significant chance of water seepage at Iron Mountain, MI. It was the site of a significant iron mine (duh) in Michigain's UP. However, if you can tolerate the cold and find the bandwidth, there isn't a safter place in the country.
Well, maybe somewhere in the Rockies--but even come a nuclear exhcange, Iron Mountain would probably just still be sitting there.
A space elevator will be a cheap-to-operate lifter once it's in place, and it'll have the nice advantage of being able to take items FROM space as well.
Maybe the problem is with people like YOU who think the way the current government/administration thinks things should be done is the ONLY way things should be done.
Excellent way to argue in-kind.
I'll only respond to the gun restriction point. John Kerry's campaign is the first in years to have a Democratic platform that explicity supports gun rights. By saying that both Kerry and Bush are "against gun rights", he's setting himself quite a bit outside of the political discussion.
Further slaming them for supporting a legislative action done in haste to stop an eminent threat and supporting a war that is at least indirectly related to the "war on terrorism" just settles the question for me.
Iraq: Yes, Saddam and Osama didn't get along at all. Yes, the USA made horrible mistakes. Yes, there are other places we could strike.
But we were embroiled in Iraq since 1991, Saddam DID support terrorism by training his own anti-Iraeli terrorist army & donating dollars to terrorist widows, and plenty of folk have already called out on the problems in fighting the war.
PATRIOT act: Yes, it's too much. Yes, it needs to be re-worked. But the tangle of our justice system was exploited by terrorists, and some of the new authority from the act has apparantly helped catch terrorists.
The fact is that they both support the war in Iraq. They both oppose gun rights. They both supported the PATRIOT Act.
So the guy doesn't think we should continue the war against terrorism, he's not for any gun restriction, and he thinks we can just ignore that, yes, terrorist cells are/were operating in this country.
Third parties aren't marginalized because of some collusion by the major parties. They're marginalized because they're radicals out of touch with the American will. (Well, that and the major parties to a great job of co-opting any legitimate issue the smaller party might have, which is really how democracy works.)
Is it wrong to think we shoulda withheld medical technology from people incapable of using it properly so it would still work for us?
No. It would be wrong to refuse to TREAT those people, and wrong of us not to teach them the proper way to use the tech, but not wrong to think "man, we shouldn't give that kid a gun without teaching him how to shoot."
Slashdot Mirror
I submit that assisting the Chinese government in masking their censorship just so you can remain in the market most certainly qualifies as "evil."
No. It's "neutral." There is a friggin' third choice.
Google's not "be good." It's "not be evil." Thus, they're "neutral." And neutral parties will make compromises like this one.
Most of those features work incorrectly most of the time.
Not really. Most of those features, especially in XP or 2003, not only work as designed and intended, but they're clear about what they've done and right-then can be undone or turned off.
Oh, and even if you don't trust Office's "transfer files and settings" appellet, expanding Word's spelling lexicon should be trivial--especially for a geek able to turn the spellchecker off.
You have to stop and look at what Joe-sixpack does with his word processor; not what us geeks do. Joe six-pack loads it up... and types. Then he clicks on all the fancy formatting buttons that are on the toolbar to make his composition look pretty. He doesn't go into the menus, and he probably runs it in the default dumb menu mode where all the options are hidden anyway.
WHAT "default dumb mode"? Do you mean the "auto-hide" mode, which is easy enough for joe sixpack to use, or are you talking about something else?
But he doesn't care that it can be scripted, do mail merges, format your document as a template so you dont have to manually format each block or do the rest of the things that Word is apparantly capable of.
I'll note that those things you deride are (1) a good idea for the word processor to have and often rather useful and (2) something that Mr. Businessman does use, even if Joe Sixpack never does.
Granted, it's only 50K, but that's beside the point.
No, it isn't.
Firefox ALREADY is half an FTP client. Web browsers have been doing this for years, and IE does it seamlessly.
A 50k extension or even a 50k increase in the base program file is entrely appropriate. Complaining about it is like complaining about shockwave flash.
And, since it IS an extension, you should just be quiet about "bloat." "Extensibility" is just about the complete inverse of "bloat"", and you know it.
My wife disagrees with you.
Remember: there are she-dorks as well.
Word 2 ran just as fast as Word XP. Word 2 had all the features that probably 95% of the population would have ever needed (let-alone used).
I have to disagree with you here. Most of the background-task features in Word are ones that really do make it easier to use than Word 2--and a good percentage of the population does use them.
You're arguing that it's all bloat, and unnecessary. I'm not saying that it's bloat-free, but that a good proportion of the increased complexity really is as "needed" as any feature in Word 2.
Software expands to fill the available hardware capacity. I still remember running Word 2 on Windows 3.11 on a 386/40 with 8M RAM. It was just as quick for most things as Word XP on Windows XP. Just Word/windowsXP is so much more bloated that it needs more computing power than my old 386 had just to run the OS and draw all the eye candy they've added.
Faulty example.
32-bit versions of MS Word (95 or later) don't just sit there idling like the old 16-bit versions did. They run a half-dozen processes in the background, in addition to the same "render text" model.
And the office document model's gotten more complex (Multimedia, styles, and real layout) and able to handle larger files.
Take a file that would crash word 2, and load it in Word XP. You'll probably notice that it doesn't even blink at it.
D'oh!
130k word. Not page. That works out to (roughly) 500 pages. On the higher end of the novel, but not abnormally so.
130,000 pages would be a lifetime's achievement--close to a thousand standard-sized novels.
True. I have way more power than I need--256 DDR with an AMD 2200 doesn't do the writing job much better than the 128 SDR with a duron 700 that it replaced.
But they both do the job better than the 44 mhz 486 I started out with.
Writing / editing a 130,000 page novel or 10+MB RPG supplements with as-I-go spellcheck, with music in the background.
So, where's the nerdish reason to vote for Bush?
Don't recall the book - probably either the Jedi Academy Trilogy or one of the Dark Empire series.
But Leia pushing Luke out isn't skill with the force--it's her iron-hard will. Remember, Leia couldn't be tortured to get anything out of her.
Carbon nanotubes, or a derivitve technology thereof.
Oh, and keep in mind... Bush wasn't elected, he was appointed technically. Which I think means that he can actually run and be elected 2 more times. Since this term doesn't count. :)
Bush was elected. Only one of fifty vote-sections was decided de-facto judicially
And the Constition doesn't care HOW a president was elected for terms of eligibility. If Bush & Cheney had been killed on 9/11, Collen Powell would only be able to be elected once more, not twice. (You can't run if you would wind up serving over a total of 10 years.)
I think a Warp Drive might be more useful.
Not for leaving the planet. Even exotic-energy bubbles of collapsing and expaning space won't help with that; they're space-only, like Ion drives.
Or maybe transporters.
The only theoretical mechanism for "transporters" requires a significant infrastructure at both ends.
Just as feasible too.
Not really. We have materials that are theoretically usable for a space elevator. It doesn't break any extant laws of physics.
And it was thought up by engineers, not TV scriptwriters.
Trey and Matt lampooned Star Wars
No, they were lampooning the O.J. Simpson Trial. Chewbacca could have just as easily been Star Trek slime.
Forget the books. They're a red herring. This is a criticism of the movies. So let's see...
No one--and I mean, NO ONE--felt any great strength in the force from Leia, probably because she never used it.
Or, to put it another way: Leia wasn't unusually strong for the iron-willed daughter of a former famous Senator.
A couple of examples: Obi Wan stashes Luke on the same planet where Anakin grew up. Oh yeah, DarthAnakin would never think to look there...
You mean Couruscant? Oh, no, you mean the place where his mother was killed and he lived a wretched existance.
Remember: it isn't that Darth didn't look for the kids. It's that he didn't know they lived for awhile.
And Leia is supposed to be Plan B should Luke fail but Darth can't sense that the Force is strong in her, even when he's personally overseeing her torture?
Nope. The force wasn't strong in Leia--never was, even in the books.
Remember, Lucas invented the Chewbacca defense.
that was South Park, doofus.
It had a decent plotline and was fun to watch, which is a lot more than you can say about star wars 1,2, and 6, and probably 3.
:)
The plot has hardly been Lucas's problem -- it's the dialogue, script, & directing. Plot-wise, he's fine.
It has acting and writing at a level that George Lucas can only dream about.
It [The last starfighter] is a "kid goes into video game" story, with a corney super-maguffin that would never fly in a real video game and makes Lucas's plot twists seem genius.
OTOH, it [still TLS] doesn't try and be more than it is, and no one holds it up as more than it is.
We must be talking about different Iron Mountains. (Ah, you must mean www.ironmountain.com, a MA based company)
There's a significant chance of water seepage at Iron Mountain, MI. It was the site of a significant iron mine (duh) in Michigain's UP. However, if you can tolerate the cold and find the bandwidth, there isn't a safter place in the country.
Well, maybe somewhere in the Rockies--but even come a nuclear exhcange, Iron Mountain would probably just still be sitting there.
Actually, yes. Iron Mountain, MI would be a great place to be a data center. Same as Upstate NY, but more centralized.
A space elevator will be a cheap-to-operate lifter once it's in place, and it'll have the nice advantage of being able to take items FROM space as well.
Maybe the problem is with people like YOU who think the way the current government/administration thinks things should be done is the ONLY way things should be done.
Excellent way to argue in-kind.
I'll only respond to the gun restriction point. John Kerry's campaign is the first in years to have a Democratic platform that explicity supports gun rights. By saying that both Kerry and Bush are "against gun rights", he's setting himself quite a bit outside of the political discussion.
Further slaming them for supporting a legislative action done in haste to stop an eminent threat and supporting a war that is at least indirectly related to the "war on terrorism" just settles the question for me.
Hmm, neither is the constitution. What's your point?
Wrong. Or are you not able to parse the phrase "well-regulated militia"?
Iraq: Yes, Saddam and Osama didn't get along at all. Yes, the USA made horrible mistakes. Yes, there are other places we could strike.
But we were embroiled in Iraq since 1991, Saddam DID support terrorism by training his own anti-Iraeli terrorist army & donating dollars to terrorist widows, and plenty of folk have already called out on the problems in fighting the war.
PATRIOT act: Yes, it's too much. Yes, it needs to be re-worked. But the tangle of our justice system was exploited by terrorists, and some of the new authority from the act has apparantly helped catch terrorists.
The fact is that they both support the war in Iraq. They both oppose gun rights. They both supported the PATRIOT Act.
So the guy doesn't think we should continue the war against terrorism, he's not for any gun restriction, and he thinks we can just ignore that, yes, terrorist cells are/were operating in this country.
Third parties aren't marginalized because of some collusion by the major parties. They're marginalized because they're radicals out of touch with the American will. (Well, that and the major parties to a great job of co-opting any legitimate issue the smaller party might have, which is really how democracy works.)
Is it wrong to think we shoulda withheld medical technology from people incapable of using it properly so it would still work for us?
No. It would be wrong to refuse to TREAT those people, and wrong of us not to teach them the proper way to use the tech, but not wrong to think "man, we shouldn't give that kid a gun without teaching him how to shoot."