Who elected you to the board of directors and gave you the right to dictate how and whether they can make money off the business they created in order to make money?
If I can already send message to most people I'm not connected to, as long as they dont have their profile set super secret mode....this does almost nothing. So I can only assume then that the main point of this "feature" is that it WILL go to those super secret ultra private profiles, thus invalidating the settings and desires of said person.
I agree. the article is well written, to me anyway. and addresses most of the things i dislike. on a pc im not migrating to 8 until it get hacked with a real classic desktop. 7 is fine for now. just recently bought my wife a surface, and on the tablet platform 8 is ok, but then she isnt looking for a full classic pc style machine in that case. (I still prefer android OS but she wanted the Surface, and she does give me the sex...)
but i also agree with an earlier post that much of the wailing and gnashing of teeth on here has crossing from reasonable discussion to witchburning, and anyone who doesnt rush to light his own torch is a "shill" (some are...but some just have their own opinion).
there is something to be said however for RTFM. I know when 95 came out originally many of of the geek crowd lambasted it until they RTFM and got used to it. It may have been a smaller departre from 3.1 than 8 is from 7, but my point is the same: sometimes you just have to RTFM.
I like the classic desktop cause its neat and organized. I can easily alt tab from app to app, and decide for myself what needs to be full screen. Productivity really really needs multiple windows, either side by side or overlayed. With 8 its like every app is screaming LOOK AT ME USE ME IGNORE ALL THE REST USE ME NOW cause every app thinks it needs to be the full screen center of attention.
That's my biggest gripe with 8...that and the ribbon menus for --everything--.
I disagree entirely. Can not stand the ribbon and I dont think its intuitive at all. The ribbon essentailly is a menu. Just one thats laid out strangely. File has operations pertaining to files. Edit is for editing. Tools are tools. Neatly laid out in easily read lists. With most ribbon menus I have to hunt for what I want. They are too noisy, too complex. Too much going on in a little tiny space.
It's like someone said "Some people are making really big toolbars. They love toolbars. They're taking everything out of the menu and putting in ont he toolbars...So lets do it for them. Lets take the entire menu, and cram it into a really big toolbar".
that's what the ribbon is. Me? I say there's too much going on there for it to be productive. The common stuff I use all the time, like font changes, that goes on toolbar. Quick Print button? Toolbar. Most fo the rest though? Leave that crap in the real menu where I can quickly and easily find it when I need it, and its out of sight the rest of the time when I dont.
So someone posts an opinion you dont like, and he's a shill? I dont care for 8, I prefer the classic layout and use 7 in such a way. But 8 aint that bad. Its not nearly as bad as people all make out on here. Its not the end times and youre nto forced to use it. Its made for a specific market, and that market is not the classic home pc. Dont like it? Dont use it.
On the desktop scene 8 isnt and wasnt a must have developement step. But MS does just care about the classic desktop anymore. Theres this huge new market if you havent noticed that's absolutely exploded in the last couple years, and everyone is trying to get a piece.
the main reason its even on the home pc and not just on tablets and phones should be obvious to any engineer: platform commonality. Instead of Windows CE, and Windows Mobile, and Windows CE mobile, and Windows 7 and Windows Cause We Can....its just Windows 8. (though admittedly RT musses that a bit).
So I say it again. 8 isnt the greatest and I dont care for it, but its not the end times like commonly presented around here. And if you have problems with a reasonably stated dissenting opinion (and all he really said was "the hate is getting old"...and it is, you all sound like my dad talking about the "damn vietnamese coming here after we kicked their asses"), and think he's automatically a shill you're just falling into a True Scotsman fallacy ("no REAL/. would ever not-hate windows 8"). and if you then feel so inclined to abuse the mod system and label him troll, well, go bugger yourself you insecure little peon.
Not brainwashing. Sure a kid has no preconditioning and so no bias. But its not brainwashing. Its not some propoganda or lie being foisted on an unsuspecting victim. Its an operating system about which you have an opinion. Your post is not insightful and his is not a troll.
If you get open bleeding knuckles you're doing it wrong. Doesnt take long to develop the calluses and shrunken knuckles that deliver a more powerful impact. And if predecessors did knuckle walk, they would have naturally developed both features. And something tells me, if your mating rights a million ago depended on being able to hit, you would probably spend more time "learning" than martial artists today do, and learn it quicker.
40 ton humpback whales leap out of the water and body slam each either in competition over females, sometimes causing fatal internal injuries. Hippos fight each other mating rights, sometimes fatally slicing each others necks open with their tusks.
So yeah. There is nothing to suggest that reproductive fitness has anything to do with punching out competitors. Not a thing. Nope. Females never select only the agressive winner to breed with.
its not about the number of bullets they can take. we replaced animal when we started getting these things called "horseless carriages". yet if you know your history there were times we still used animals, primarily donkeys, in remote inaccessible places, even into WW2 and Korea, and a couple tiems in vietnam too. but even that has fallen by the wayside because now we have helicopters to get to really remote rough places.
also we lightened much of the load a soldier is required to carry; or looked at another way, a soldier can carry the same weight, but carry more stuff cause the indivudal items are lighter now. either way, reduced need for a supplemental carrier for most missions where a vehicle is impractical.
Oh look, another troll fishing for an insightful mod.
Seriously. If we're so damn superstition and ill educated, why does everyone still come to our schools from around the world, particularly china and india? Why are we the country that gave the world computers, space flight, airplace, nuclear physics,.... you know what, theres too many things to list.
Lets cut to the chase: You are a moron and a troll who has engaged his "must bash USA" autopilot and not worthy of any more of my time.
is one of those obvious legalities that you would think you shouldnt have to have.
It's like the family that sued Cessna after their father, with insufficient training, crashed and died. (I guess its not his fault he didnt know how to fly) Or the people who sue the bar for the drunk who rams their car. (i guess its not his fault he was too drunk to drive) Or the guy who cut off his finger on a table saw, and sued Sears for not including the tech that automagically stops the saw. (I guess its not his fault he put hs finger on a frigging saw blade)
The MFR simply makes the product. The owner still carries full weight and responsibility for proper use and misuse. Shouldnt have to have a law to state that.
We used to put such people, who pose an threat to themselves and others, in institutions. Now that's too politically sensitive to suggest. And then we blame the guns and video games when they do go over the edge.
you underestimate the effects of fundamentally different cultures and societal mores. furthermore, many of those coutnries still allow firearm ownership. assault weapons are not some magical category of weapon that turns you into a killer. in fact the only catergoy of gun used less in crime is probably "musket".
but we've already established earlier that you dont know what you're talking about.
Agree with the overreaction comments. Been saying that since it happened. Its human nature. And the relative causes of death. Cars kill many hundreds of times more people. And schools are relatively safe.
but here's where I ake my own comment: Why do we keep being shocked when someone shoots up a school? Sure its a rare occurence. But think about your typical school or college. They are totally "soft targets" to use tactical jargon. There is little or no security of any kind. I dont think our schools need to be prisons, I dont think thats healthy for the kids.
But that doesnt change the fact that by and large the entire school is that the mercy of the crazy guy with a gun because they have absolutely no defense whatsoever.
Repeatedly, every study, has shown that one person standing up to an attacker, even an unarmed and inexperienced one, saves lives. Even if they die in the process, they force the shooter to focus on them. the shooter has to "waste" his two resources (time and bullets) to defend himself, giving other first responders (police or otherwise) more time to get there.
Why are our schools still such soft targets? These occurences are rare yes. But so are bank robberies. And when bank robberies were common, they solved it chiefly by putting armed guards in the major banks. I'm not saying arm all the teachers (though I would have no problem with it, with the caveat that they have to take a certified firearm safety/concealed carry course just like anyone else does).
I know it costs money (fire a useless adminstrator or two.., though this is one thing I could support my taxes going up to pay for). But even just stationing one police officer (making it a rotating duty, like "Bob" has it this week, Joe next week, etc) in a school would stop these incidents in their tracks. In your typical town you usually have two or three schools right near each other (high school and elementary next door for example), and its reasonable to even have one cop covering two schools in such situations.
But damnit. As long as our schools remain such soft targets, stop being surprised when this crap happens. One armed citizen or cop, or even one unarmed person who confronts the shooter (like the professor at VTech did) will save lives in these incidents.
Exactly. And thats one reasont eh NRA waited to say anything. The first thing people do in these situations tends be an emotional overreaction. Just like the PAtriot Act right after 9/11. In this case, people again talk like there are no gun control laws in the country (there are). you get geniuses up on tv saying things like "we dont eevn do background checks" (we do). they call for more gun control (and what they mean, since we already have control, is "ban"), whent he simple fact is no amount of gun control would have stopped him frm shooting up that school.
the weapons were legally owned, legally bought, etc etc. they belonged to his mother. even an outright gun ban is iffy. as a crazy person determined to do harm to a school full of kids he could simply have stolen the guns from someone else, he could make a bomb ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster ), or hell, he could just wait til school lets out and drive his car through the bus loading zone (which has happened before too).
People make emotional knee jerk reactions, and they forget that the gun wasnt the problem. The problem is the crazy person, and in this politically correct world of ours we ont he one hand demand equal rights and treatment be given to all mentally ill/disadvantaged people, and then we act shocked when one of them shoots up a school full of kids, and in some logical disconnect blame the gun instead of the crazy person that we allowed to roam free.
1) they are banned idiot. unless you pay the ATF its 200$ extortion tax. 2) he didnt use an assualt rifle (no he didnt. no, shutup, you dont know what you are talking about.) 3) Those crazy people just use knives, cars and explosives instead. Like the lady who drove though a crowded shopping mall, the guy who knifed the kids outside their school (the same day as the shooting!).
The gun didnt make him do it. The gun isnt the one responsible. The gun isnt the problem. The crazy person is. Fix/solve the crazy person problem. Making the guns go away wont solve the crazy person problem.
Google may be your friend, but the assumption is that the random official actually knows what he is talking about. In this case, "Assualt rifle" means "scary looking gun".
The actual weapon used is an AR-15, which is not an assault rifle, no matter how many people try to say otherwise.
And assault rfle is specifically a military or tactical weapon that has selctive fire modes. This used to include a fully automatic function, but even the M16 (which the AR-15 is a derivitive of) has not included that option since the 70's when the M16A1 was replaced with the M16A2. Reason being is soldier with full auto rifles tend to waste bullets; the M16A2 restricted its alternate fire mode to a 3-round burst, and even then troops are trained to use to the semi-auto (ie single shot) mode to ensure better accuracy and effectiveness.
The AR15, being the civilian market derivative, only functions in semi-automatic. One trigger squeeze. One bullet. It is the same as any other civilian rifle. Iit merely looks different. It is not an assualt rifle.
Slashdot Mirror
Amen. Preach it son.
Ladies and gentleman, the textbook example of the Entitlement Mentality.
Who elected you to the board of directors and gave you the right to dictate how and whether they can make money off the business they created in order to make money?
If I can already send message to most people I'm not connected to, as long as they dont have their profile set super secret mode....this does almost nothing. So I can only assume then that the main point of this "feature" is that it WILL go to those super secret ultra private profiles, thus invalidating the settings and desires of said person.
So ya. Spammer paradise.
I agree. the article is well written, to me anyway. and addresses most of the things i dislike. on a pc im not migrating to 8 until it get hacked with a real classic desktop. 7 is fine for now. just recently bought my wife a surface, and on the tablet platform 8 is ok, but then she isnt looking for a full classic pc style machine in that case. (I still prefer android OS but she wanted the Surface, and she does give me the sex...)
but i also agree with an earlier post that much of the wailing and gnashing of teeth on here has crossing from reasonable discussion to witchburning, and anyone who doesnt rush to light his own torch is a "shill" (some are...but some just have their own opinion).
there is something to be said however for RTFM. I know when 95 came out originally many of of the geek crowd lambasted it until they RTFM and got used to it. It may have been a smaller departre from 3.1 than 8 is from 7, but my point is the same: sometimes you just have to RTFM.
I like the classic desktop cause its neat and organized. I can easily alt tab from app to app, and decide for myself what needs to be full screen. Productivity really really needs multiple windows, either side by side or overlayed. With 8 its like every app is screaming LOOK AT ME USE ME IGNORE ALL THE REST USE ME NOW cause every app thinks it needs to be the full screen center of attention.
That's my biggest gripe with 8...that and the ribbon menus for --everything--.
I disagree entirely. Can not stand the ribbon and I dont think its intuitive at all. The ribbon essentailly is a menu. Just one thats laid out strangely.
File has operations pertaining to files. Edit is for editing. Tools are tools. Neatly laid out in easily read lists. With most ribbon menus I have to hunt for what I want. They are too noisy, too complex. Too much going on in a little tiny space.
It's like someone said "Some people are making really big toolbars. They love toolbars. They're taking everything out of the menu and putting in ont he toolbars...So lets do it for them. Lets take the entire menu, and cram it into a really big toolbar".
that's what the ribbon is. Me? I say there's too much going on there for it to be productive. The common stuff I use all the time, like font changes, that goes on toolbar. Quick Print button? Toolbar. Most fo the rest though? Leave that crap in the real menu where I can quickly and easily find it when I need it, and its out of sight the rest of the time when I dont.
So someone posts an opinion you dont like, and he's a shill? I dont care for 8, I prefer the classic layout and use 7 in such a way. But 8 aint that bad. Its not nearly as bad as people all make out on here. Its not the end times and youre nto forced to use it. Its made for a specific market, and that market is not the classic home pc. Dont like it? Dont use it.
On the desktop scene 8 isnt and wasnt a must have developement step. But MS does just care about the classic desktop anymore. Theres this huge new market if you havent noticed that's absolutely exploded in the last couple years, and everyone is trying to get a piece.
the main reason its even on the home pc and not just on tablets and phones should be obvious to any engineer: platform commonality. Instead of Windows CE, and Windows Mobile, and Windows CE mobile, and Windows 7 and Windows Cause We Can....its just Windows 8. (though admittedly RT musses that a bit).
So I say it again. 8 isnt the greatest and I dont care for it, but its not the end times like commonly presented around here. And if you have problems with a reasonably stated dissenting opinion (and all he really said was "the hate is getting old"...and it is, you all sound like my dad talking about the "damn vietnamese coming here after we kicked their asses"), and think he's automatically a shill you're just falling into a True Scotsman fallacy ("no REAL /. would ever not-hate windows 8"). and if you then feel so inclined to abuse the mod system and label him troll, well, go bugger yourself you insecure little peon.
not a troll. someone abusing mod points.
Not brainwashing. Sure a kid has no preconditioning and so no bias. But its not brainwashing. Its not some propoganda or lie being foisted on an unsuspecting victim. Its an operating system about which you have an opinion. Your post is not insightful and his is not a troll.
If you get open bleeding knuckles you're doing it wrong. Doesnt take long to develop the calluses and shrunken knuckles that deliver a more powerful impact. And if predecessors did knuckle walk, they would have naturally developed both features. And something tells me, if your mating rights a million ago depended on being able to hit, you would probably spend more time "learning" than martial artists today do, and learn it quicker.
40 ton humpback whales leap out of the water and body slam each either in competition over females, sometimes causing fatal internal injuries.
Hippos fight each other mating rights, sometimes fatally slicing each others necks open with their tusks.
So yeah. There is nothing to suggest that reproductive fitness has anything to do with punching out competitors. Not a thing. Nope. Females never select only the agressive winner to breed with.
its not about the number of bullets they can take.
we replaced animal when we started getting these things called "horseless carriages". yet if you know your history there were times we still used animals, primarily donkeys, in remote inaccessible places, even into WW2 and Korea, and a couple tiems in vietnam too. but even that has fallen by the wayside because now we have helicopters to get to really remote rough places.
also we lightened much of the load a soldier is required to carry; or looked at another way, a soldier can carry the same weight, but carry more stuff cause the indivudal items are lighter now. either way, reduced need for a supplemental carrier for most missions where a vehicle is impractical.
Not bullets. The real reason is two fold:
-animals get tired
-animals get scared
robots do neither.
Oh look, another troll fishing for an insightful mod.
Seriously. If we're so damn superstition and ill educated, why does everyone still come to our schools from around the world, particularly china and india? Why are we the country that gave the world computers, space flight, airplace, nuclear physics, .... you know what, theres too many things to list.
Lets cut to the chase: You are a moron and a troll who has engaged his "must bash USA" autopilot and not worthy of any more of my time.
Not new news anyway. This is like 6 months old.
is one of those obvious legalities that you would think you shouldnt have to have.
It's like the family that sued Cessna after their father, with insufficient training, crashed and died. (I guess its not his fault he didnt know how to fly)
Or the people who sue the bar for the drunk who rams their car. (i guess its not his fault he was too drunk to drive)
Or the guy who cut off his finger on a table saw, and sued Sears for not including the tech that automagically stops the saw. (I guess its not his fault he put hs finger on a frigging saw blade)
The MFR simply makes the product.
The owner still carries full weight and responsibility for proper use and misuse.
Shouldnt have to have a law to state that.
We used to put such people, who pose an threat to themselves and others, in institutions.
Now that's too politically sensitive to suggest.
And then we blame the guns and video games when they do go over the edge.
you underestimate the effects of fundamentally different cultures and societal mores.
furthermore, many of those coutnries still allow firearm ownership.
assault weapons are not some magical category of weapon that turns you into a killer.
in fact the only catergoy of gun used less in crime is probably "musket".
but we've already established earlier that you dont know what you're talking about.
Agree with the overreaction comments. Been saying that since it happened. Its human nature.
And the relative causes of death. Cars kill many hundreds of times more people.
And schools are relatively safe.
but here's where I ake my own comment:
Why do we keep being shocked when someone shoots up a school? Sure its a rare occurence.
But think about your typical school or college. They are totally "soft targets" to use tactical jargon. There is little or no security of any kind. I dont think our schools need to be prisons, I dont think thats healthy for the kids.
But that doesnt change the fact that by and large the entire school is that the mercy of the crazy guy with a gun because they have absolutely no defense whatsoever.
Repeatedly, every study, has shown that one person standing up to an attacker, even an unarmed and inexperienced one, saves lives. Even if they die in the process, they force the shooter to focus on them. the shooter has to "waste" his two resources (time and bullets) to defend himself, giving other first responders (police or otherwise) more time to get there.
Why are our schools still such soft targets? These occurences are rare yes. But so are bank robberies. And when bank robberies were common, they solved it chiefly by putting armed guards in the major banks. I'm not saying arm all the teachers (though I would have no problem with it, with the caveat that they have to take a certified firearm safety/concealed carry course just like anyone else does).
I know it costs money (fire a useless adminstrator or two.., though this is one thing I could support my taxes going up to pay for). But even just stationing one police officer (making it a rotating duty, like "Bob" has it this week, Joe next week, etc) in a school would stop these incidents in their tracks. In your typical town you usually have two or three schools right near each other (high school and elementary next door for example), and its reasonable to even have one cop covering two schools in such situations.
But damnit. As long as our schools remain such soft targets, stop being surprised when this crap happens.
One armed citizen or cop, or even one unarmed person who confronts the shooter (like the professor at VTech did) will save lives in these incidents.
Dont be pedantic. You know damn well that his statement is a relative one made in relation to the right/left wing political spectrum of the country.
Exactly. And thats one reasont eh NRA waited to say anything.
The first thing people do in these situations tends be an emotional overreaction. Just like the PAtriot Act right after 9/11.
In this case, people again talk like there are no gun control laws in the country (there are). you get geniuses up on tv saying things like "we dont eevn do background checks" (we do). they call for more gun control (and what they mean, since we already have control, is "ban"), whent he simple fact is no amount of gun control would have stopped him frm shooting up that school.
the weapons were legally owned, legally bought, etc etc. they belonged to his mother. even an outright gun ban is iffy. as a crazy person determined to do harm to a school full of kids he could simply have stolen the guns from someone else, he could make a bomb ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster ), or hell, he could just wait til school lets out and drive his car through the bus loading zone (which has happened before too).
People make emotional knee jerk reactions, and they forget that the gun wasnt the problem.
The problem is the crazy person, and in this politically correct world of ours we ont he one hand demand equal rights and treatment be given to all mentally ill/disadvantaged people, and then we act shocked when one of them shoots up a school full of kids, and in some logical disconnect blame the gun instead of the crazy person that we allowed to roam free.
1) they are banned idiot. unless you pay the ATF its 200$ extortion tax.
2) he didnt use an assualt rifle (no he didnt. no, shutup, you dont know what you are talking about.)
3) Those crazy people just use knives, cars and explosives instead. Like the lady who drove though a crowded shopping mall, the guy who knifed the kids outside their school (the same day as the shooting!).
The gun didnt make him do it.
The gun isnt the one responsible.
The gun isnt the problem.
The crazy person is.
Fix/solve the crazy person problem.
Making the guns go away wont solve the crazy person problem.
Google may be your friend, but the assumption is that the random official actually knows what he is talking about.
In this case, "Assualt rifle" means "scary looking gun".
The actual weapon used is an AR-15, which is not an assault rifle, no matter how many people try to say otherwise.
And assault rfle is specifically a military or tactical weapon that has selctive fire modes. This used to include a fully automatic function, but even the M16 (which the AR-15 is a derivitive of) has not included that option since the 70's when the M16A1 was replaced with the M16A2. Reason being is soldier with full auto rifles tend to waste bullets; the M16A2 restricted its alternate fire mode to a 3-round burst, and even then troops are trained to use to the semi-auto (ie single shot) mode to ensure better accuracy and effectiveness.
The AR15, being the civilian market derivative, only functions in semi-automatic. One trigger squeeze. One bullet.
It is the same as any other civilian rifle.
Iit merely looks different.
It is not an assualt rifle.