An outright banning cell phone from the workplace is extreme and should be met with a quick move to another company.
I'll have to mention that to my employer, who bans cell phones (and any personal electronics) in areas where classified information is discussed and processed.
The Kronos Chronicle is a project of the Klingon Language Institute, intended for Klingon speakers. Here you can read interesting opinons and articles, but only if you can understand Klingon. Each month we will have a new issue for you to read and practice your skill.
I think you'll find that, over the past 200 or so years, this guy has led to more bloodshed than anyone else. Your guy just doesn't even hit the top 100.
In this interview, Spector comes right out and tells us that posting complaints in the various forums is important!
[W]e had people scouring the forums and then we collected the big issues people were raising. I mean, some guy complaining about something or some girl complaining about one thing, whatever. But we tracked the trends and put them up on a big whiteboard and said, "Which of these should we address, which of these can we address, which of these must we address?" And we culled it down to the things that we thought we should do. That's how we created our feature list for the patches.
So keep posting. Keep complaining when things like DX:IW suck. You have more power than you think you do. They listen!
I'm sorry, sir. I'm going to have to ask you to hand over your slashdot ID for violation of slashdot civil code 739395, "using the word 'loose' in its correct grammatical context."
While some people abhor choice, the vast majority want it.
Go into MacDonalds and find twenty different kinds of hamburgers, plus chicken and fish sandwiches. Odds are they'll have a specialty sandwich for the month. A far far cry from the John Belushi "cheeseburger cheeseburger pespi" world. Restaurants have dozens of selections. Even those that cater to the non-geek.
Interesting that you would choose McDonald's as an example. I don't have the reference right now, but McDonald's actually found that people were getting confused by all their selections. Once they started making "prepackaged" meals (combo meal #1, #2, etc.), their sales went up 20%.
People like choice, in theory. They like the idea that they could do anything they want. But when it comes right down to brass tacks, 99% of people just want to get work done and really don't want to tweak lots of settings. In the usability world, it's a mantra that a very large proportion of people never change the defaults of any application.
If we're going to have a reasoned discussion/debate about this, it would be good if all participants read the original Y Window System document, which goes into all of this in a fair amount of detail. Arguing against the bullet points is a waste of time.
However, I'll demonstrate by answering them.
> X is too slow On the contrary, I fnd it's quite fast with a good accelerated AGP card. The network transparency is a very nice feature that I use regularly.
The original document outlining Y specifically says that X is fast. Locally. But you try running a very interactive X11 application across a many-hop internet connection with lots of latency and then you'll see just how slow it is.
This is one of the problems with X, that the protocol is very sensitve to latency and is very verbose. Unnecessarily so, IMHO.
Does that mean the speed issues are such that you shouldn't use it on a desktop? Certainly not, as testified by the thousands of people who use it for such every day.
That's why we have things like GTK.
Again, this is addressed directly by the PDF:
In 1984, before GUIs were common-place, not providing a standard toolkit was the best way to achieve enough flexibility to create all the applications that had not yet been conceived. However, these days, with the benefit of the last two decades of experience [16, 25], it is much better to provide a complete set of standard user interface components that look and behave consistently.
Aside from the user interface inconsistency, the lack of standard components also makes internationalisation difficult, particularly for languages which require a complex input method.
> Xfree86 is over 10 years old So am I. So is UNIX. So are most of the theories in Computer Science. Shound we throw them away?
Of course not. But age can certainly bring problems. Again quoting the PDF:
Over the years it has been extended and modified many times, to the point where it is an incoherent mess.
Although the X protocol supports extensions very well, some of the latest extensions have begun to interfere with each other. For example, when Xinerama (the extension which allows X desktops to span multiple monitors) was first released, it broke XVideo (the extension which allows X to use hardware accelerated overlays for video play back). The fix for this was to allow XVideo to only work on the primary display. The latest extension, XRandR (Rotate and Resize), is also known to break many older applications which assume that the screen size will never change.
Further, the internal design of X itself is outdated. Even adding a simple feature, such as translucent windows, requires large changes to the server [17]. Because of the requirement to be backwardly compatible, these features must be implemented for everything that X works on, including two-colour displays.
In summary, X is just fine.
For many purposes, yes. But it's starting to show signs of not being able to cope with what window systems are being asked to do in the last 5 or so years. It's worth revisiting now and again.
One of the first sections in the original "Y Window System" paper listed the problems with X. It started off with "X is slow." However, it made a very specific allegation. It was not that X is slow per-se, but that it is highly sensitive to latency. Yeah, we all run X11 applications on our local desktop, and they're lightning fast. We can even run X11 applications from machines close by on the LAN. But very few people ever try to run X11 applications across 20 hops of the internet. Unless you have somehow ensured very low latency connections, you're gonna have lag city.
The X Protocol is very verbose. It's one of the reasons that there have been projects to try to compress or otherwise remove redundancy from the protocol. But, at some level, it's the protocol itself which needs rethinking when it comes to speed.
Yikes. I would have hoped that the medium-level undergraduate courses would weed out the people who really don't care to do more than the bare minimum.
But if, like you said, there are only a few professors who actively try to change the students' behavior, then this is merely wishful thinking on my part.
Please tell me more. I've had one summer student from NAU who royally sucked. And another one years later who was very impressive. Two data points which don't corellate at all. Hard to extrapolate from there.
I don't have time to find the exact section right now, but...
Since when does the GPL require you to distribute anything?
If you distribute binaries of GPLed code, you are required to furnish all source code when asked. That's a distribution requirement, based on other actions.
Not that it's related to distribution, but it also says that all derived works must also be GPLed. So if you distribute a commercial work (necessarily not GPLed), then you can't use the GPLed Qt.
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but someone once said that "belaborment is good".:-)
But in other cases they may be glad to hand over the source, in which case they owe nothing to Trolltech.
Close, but let's be precise here. If they release their software under any license other than the GPL (or compatible license), they will require a commercial license from Trolltech. The availability of the source doesn't actually have a lot to do with it. It's technically a question of license. See Trolltech's FAQ on the free version for more information.
Specifically, this is interesting:
Q: Using the Free Edition, can I make software for internal use in my company/organization?
A: The Qt Free Edition is not intended for such use; it is our policy that when you are using Qt for free, you should in return contribute to the free software community. If you cannot do that, you must get Professional/Enterprise Edition licenses instead.
Note that software developed with Qt Free Edition must be distributed as free/Open Source software; i.e. the receivers must be free to give it to whomever they like. In-house distribution is no exception to this rule, of course.
No, polygraphs are not effective, to use your definition.
They only scare those people who know little about polygraphs. Those who have something to hide are generally not scared by them. In fact, there is a lot of literature out there about how to "beat" a lie detector test. Even Aldrich Ames passed his test.
In short, the application of polygraphs gives a sense of security that is not only unwarranted, but downright dangerous to national security.
Um, yes. I have heard about this. NASA has supposedly sent at least one husband/wife team up in the shuttle and asked them to explore exactly this. Apparently, the scientific rationale was to determine if humans can have sex, conceive, and bear children while on space flights. I can see that having a bearing on very long-term space exploration. Obviously, the "having sex" part is a pre-requisite to the rest.
Anyway, I heard that the couple found that sex was very difficult in microgravity. They would just bounce away from each other. They found the best success using a large "rubber band" that looped around both partners to help keep them together.
Don't ask me for a link - I have no idea where I read/heard this.
Yeah? Well I got to work 30 minutes late today because there was an accident. It had been moved well off the road so there wasn't any reason for a slowdown in traffic. Except, of course, the fact that every little shithead had to gawk at other people's misery. *That* is what really bugs me.
I know it's a joke...
But you should tell Sally about Traffic Waves. It's not about gawking, mostly.
He wants the option of paying for not having to do the legwork. Being able to pay money to keep the same number was not an option before. You had no choice but to track down everyone you have ever given your number to, and tell them the new number.
With the new system, at least there are options. He can choose to keep the same number.
Choice in this is not a "whining" or a "arrogant" thing.
Slashdot Mirror
An outright banning cell phone from the workplace is extreme and should be met with a quick move to another company.
I'll have to mention that to my employer, who bans cell phones (and any personal electronics) in areas where classified information is discussed and processed.
That bug is listed as having been fixed in this update.
There is absolutely no correlation.
Strictly speaking, your stories would argue for "negative" correlation, not "no" correlation.
However, I'm sure plenty of people could tell the opposite story.
I think you'll find that, over the past 200 or so years, this guy has led to more bloodshed than anyone else. Your guy just doesn't even hit the top 100.
get away with such loose journalism
BRREEEEEEET!
I'm sorry, sir. I'm going to have to ask you to hand over your slashdot ID for violation of slashdot civil code 739395, "using the word 'loose' in its correct grammatical context."
Think they are really getting an e-mail with each failed attempt? Poor bastards.
Especially if it's hooked up to their pagers...
Bravo! Very nice cover! I laughed many times reading (singing) it to myself.
While some people abhor choice, the vast majority want it.
Go into MacDonalds and find twenty different kinds of hamburgers, plus chicken and fish sandwiches. Odds are they'll have a specialty sandwich for the month. A far far cry from the John Belushi "cheeseburger cheeseburger pespi" world. Restaurants have dozens of selections. Even those that cater to the non-geek.
Interesting that you would choose McDonald's as an example. I don't have the reference right now, but McDonald's actually found that people were getting confused by all their selections. Once they started making "prepackaged" meals (combo meal #1, #2, etc.), their sales went up 20%.
People like choice, in theory. They like the idea that they could do anything they want. But when it comes right down to brass tacks, 99% of people just want to get work done and really don't want to tweak lots of settings. In the usability world, it's a mantra that a very large proportion of people never change the defaults of any application.
Choice, indeed.
However, I'll demonstrate by answering them.
> X is too slow
On the contrary, I fnd it's quite fast with a good accelerated AGP card. The network transparency is a very nice feature that I use regularly.
The original document outlining Y specifically says that X is fast. Locally. But you try running a very interactive X11 application across a many-hop internet connection with lots of latency and then you'll see just how slow it is.
This is one of the problems with X, that the protocol is very sensitve to latency and is very verbose. Unnecessarily so, IMHO.
Does that mean the speed issues are such that you shouldn't use it on a desktop? Certainly not, as testified by the thousands of people who use it for such every day.
That's why we have things like GTK.
Again, this is addressed directly by the PDF:
> Xfree86 is over 10 years old
So am I. So is UNIX. So are most of the theories in Computer Science. Shound we throw them away?
Of course not. But age can certainly bring problems. Again quoting the PDF:
In summary, X is just fine.
For many purposes, yes. But it's starting to show signs of not being able to cope with what window systems are being asked to do in the last 5 or so years. It's worth revisiting now and again.
I read the posts that say X is slow.
One of the first sections in the original "Y Window System" paper listed the problems with X. It started off with "X is slow." However, it made a very specific allegation. It was not that X is slow per-se, but that it is highly sensitive to latency. Yeah, we all run X11 applications on our local desktop, and they're lightning fast. We can even run X11 applications from machines close by on the LAN. But very few people ever try to run X11 applications across 20 hops of the internet. Unless you have somehow ensured very low latency connections, you're gonna have lag city.
The X Protocol is very verbose. It's one of the reasons that there have been projects to try to compress or otherwise remove redundancy from the protocol. But, at some level, it's the protocol itself which needs rethinking when it comes to speed.
My two cents...
Yikes. I would have hoped that the medium-level undergraduate courses would weed out the people who really don't care to do more than the bare minimum.
But if, like you said, there are only a few professors who actively try to change the students' behavior, then this is merely wishful thinking on my part.
In any case, thanks for the info.
Please tell me more. I've had one summer student from NAU who royally sucked. And another one years later who was very impressive. Two data points which don't corellate at all. Hard to extrapolate from there.
Just doing a quick search over that page, the word "Linux" doesn't even appear until #5, where they get into their IP crap. Hm...
I don't have time to find the exact section right now, but...
:-)
Since when does the GPL require you to distribute anything?
If you distribute binaries of GPLed code, you are required to furnish all source code when asked. That's a distribution requirement, based on other actions.
Not that it's related to distribution, but it also says that all derived works must also be GPLed. So if you distribute a commercial work (necessarily not GPLed), then you can't use the GPLed Qt.
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but someone once said that "belaborment is good".
Close, but let's be precise here. If they release their software under any license other than the GPL (or compatible license), they will require a commercial license from Trolltech. The availability of the source doesn't actually have a lot to do with it. It's technically a question of license. See Trolltech's FAQ on the free version for more information.
Specifically, this is interesting:
The Hollywood filmmaking industry. They used it on Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo, Stuart Little, etc.
You get my nomination for word of the day. "Givashitness" is exactly the word I've needed on any number of occasions.
No, polygraphs are not effective, to use your definition.
They only scare those people who know little about polygraphs. Those who have something to hide are generally not scared by them. In fact, there is a lot of literature out there about how to "beat" a lie detector test. Even Aldrich Ames passed his test.
In short, the application of polygraphs gives a sense of security that is not only unwarranted, but downright dangerous to national security.
Um, yes. I have heard about this. NASA has supposedly sent at least one husband/wife team up in the shuttle and asked them to explore exactly this. Apparently, the scientific rationale was to determine if humans can have sex, conceive, and bear children while on space flights. I can see that having a bearing on very long-term space exploration. Obviously, the "having sex" part is a pre-requisite to the rest.
Anyway, I heard that the couple found that sex was very difficult in microgravity. They would just bounce away from each other. They found the best success using a large "rubber band" that looped around both partners to help keep them together.
Don't ask me for a link - I have no idea where I read/heard this.
Someone once said that the point of higher education was so that you could understand more jokes.
Yeah? Well I got to work 30 minutes late today because there was an accident. It had been moved well off the road so there wasn't any reason for a slowdown in traffic. Except, of course, the fact that every little shithead had to gawk at other people's misery. *That* is what really bugs me.
I know it's a joke...
But you should tell Sally about Traffic Waves. It's not about gawking, mostly.
He wants the option of paying for not having to do the legwork. Being able to pay money to keep the same number was not an option before. You had no choice but to track down everyone you have ever given your number to, and tell them the new number.
With the new system, at least there are options. He can choose to keep the same number.
Choice in this is not a "whining" or a "arrogant" thing.
(No, I don't own a cell phone.)