Remember Douglas Engelbart? Apart from the famous "mother of all demos" there was his philosophy which loosely says that technology should help boost IQ not subvert or replace it, as has largely happened.
We have the technology for every individual to keep personalised local time, just like we used to with sundials and local time for every village - midday is when the sun is at its highest for me. And we have the technology to make that work and do all the coordination stuff. It just involves some good hard analysis to work it all out to make it work. All of your undoubted objections are just a list of things to analyse and work out. It ca be done!
And imagine the continuous wave of new year's eve fireworks around the globe.
Whatever the abstraction ...
on
The Zen of SOA
·
· Score: 1
Whatever abstraction you use... the marketing guys' next project will break it.
Roger Penrose: The Road to Reality Shows you how lots of that maths, even the abstract stuff, applies to trying to describe the universe. And ponders right from the start on why you are doing it.
The company I work for has an extensive set of systems. As a systems architect I like to know that for any new project I can go to the developers in that area and get advice on how to design and implement the project solution, whether it affects them and how they woudl design their part.
I rely on knowledge growing in each area. And it takes years to get to know the code in each system really well, and the business rules which the business has forgotten about which are mastered there. Yes, people write it down. But it has to be learned so that realtime dialogue and decision making can occur!
In our case, I agree that it's the system knowledge which should be seen as the biggest asset. Not transferability across teams.
These systems concentrate on the ability to conduct a ballot.
But the secrecy of the ballot is equally important. It is not just a side-issue. Even postal voting defies the right to secret ballot. How do you ensure the right to secrecy from your family or peer group, or undue pressure therefrom, if the place of voting is not controlled?
I may be a Luddite but such fundamentals are best left un-technoligised. Go back to paper ballots.
Democracy is the right to a secret ballot to elect a leader at regular intervals.
There is little more to it!
So why mess with the only thing it gives us? Paper is the only way to do this. It separates the vote from the voter so it can never be tracked.
Even postal votes negate this simple principle. The UK has always used screened poll booths with one person allowed in at a time. That way not only the government but also your family, friends or anyone else cannot force you to vote for a particular candidate, or tell who you've voted for (or if you have intentionally "spoiled" your paper - these votes are no longer counted in the UK but might themselves affect turnout if they were!).
Inter-stellar distances are great in light-years, people's height in feet and inches, horse races in miles or furlongs. Same goes for all those special units for weight - pecks, etc (yes, sadly I've forgotten them already).
the worst thing that happened in the UK for children's mental agility was getting rid of our old currency of 12 pence to the shilling, 20 shillings to the pound.
In my work I see all sorts of errors with the wrong number of zeroes on a number, where using old units would have avoided having a large number in the first place.
Metric is great for calculations in science and engineering... terrible for representing the real world.
For me it all started with the original "OS2" project between IBM and MS. MS split and produced Win95, while IBM marketed OS2. This was the first time you saw MS do the tricks: OS2 ran windows faster than windows, needed only 4MB memory and did not need a hardware upgrade. MS started their marketing dirty tricks: claimed W95 would also run in 4MB of RAM - it didn't and everyone got into the first cycle of buying new PCs. It was also unstable so setting the scene for everyone to buy the upgrade to W98, needing new PCs again, and so on! Constant stress and dissatisfaction - wtth no where else to turn until Linux came along - Macs and Unix based systems were still much more expensive and MS had the programs being written for it (much like Linux does now). There are also rumours of foul deeds at PC shows where MS and IBM were showing their competing products. I would suggest tracking down some old IBMers from that time.
Just because you CAN change something, why turn it into a fashion thing and cause all those IT novices to have to relearn a GUI? Most novices I train don't want to learn new programs let alone new window GUIs - it's the single most popular reason for not switching to Linux for a novice used to Windows.
Cars do not have a new pedal layout every few years... the controls on a JCB digger do not change every few years in order to sell more JCBs. Hi Fi systems went into complexity in the 70's with people wanting more knobs and buttons to show how sophisticated they were. Most people's Hi Fi gear now consists of an ipod and speakers with just a couple of knobs and switches.
Seriously... what is important is LONGTERM stability in an interface so that everyone can learn it and trust it and trust themselves to be able to use it and continue gaining skill in using it. This is NOT a competition to get the most usable GUI or easiest to train on... that development cycle may never end.
Meanwhile if you want to be able to TALK to the PC controlled house of the future isn't that more like the command line? Talking is the future. And talking takes place on a 1-dimensional time line not a 2d or 3d GUI screen.
It seems very unfashionable to say this, but one of Douglas Engelbart's prophetic warnings back around 1968 (the time of his famous demo of the ARPA prototype, use of a mouse, hyperlinked graphics, etc) was that the user should always remain more intelligent than the machine. The contrary would be a disaster for civilisation and human evolution. "Ease of use" seems to translate for most current design needs into: "don't need to understand". And this is allowed to run riot by the duty of software companies to make profits for their shareholders. Dangerous stuff!
What's their hassle? Superstring theory allows for the idea that universes could get created instantly, "ready-made" from collisions of existing ones in the stormy multi-dimensional universe soup (ours could have been created a few seconds ago). Each universe would contain a consistent history. The big-bang would be a theoretical anomaly. Fundamentalists would argue over whether THEIR god had caused the last splash. Science would still search for the universal laws in the past and present which help us understand the present and control the future.
1. I thought microwaves were only used for the links from basestation masts to controller station where a leased landline was not available. 2. The actual transmitter-to-phone signal drop-off is rapid from the center and directional too, so that the energy in the signal is a tiny fraction of the mast output by the time it gets to the ground some 50-100 yards away (every tried getting a signal directly under a mast?) 3. And what about all that cosmic radiation - not to mention WLAN and TV and radio?
Orange UK have had an optional service for mobile phone voicemail which is entirely voice activated. Not just the "menu" - no more 1,2,3,#, etc but real commands. And it even tries to recognise the voice of you and your regular callers and talks to them by name after they leave a voice message for you (asking extra options).
Trouble is the time when you most need "hands-free" is when driving, but the background noise makes it difficult to use (unless your in some fancy limo).
Now a HAL style lip reader... that would be something!
Slashdot Mirror
Remember Douglas Engelbart? Apart from the famous "mother of all demos" there was his philosophy which loosely says that technology should help boost IQ not subvert or replace it, as has largely happened.
We have the technology for every individual to keep personalised local time, just like we used to with sundials and local time for every village - midday is when the sun is at its highest for me. And we have the technology to make that work and do all the coordination stuff. It just involves some good hard analysis to work it all out to make it work. All of your undoubted objections are just a list of things to analyse and work out. It ca be done!
And imagine the continuous wave of new year's eve fireworks around the globe.
Whatever abstraction you use ... the marketing guys' next project will break it.
Roger Penrose: The Road to Reality
Shows you how lots of that maths, even the abstract stuff, applies to trying to describe the universe. And ponders right from the start on why you are doing it.
The company I work for has an extensive set of systems. As a systems architect I like to know that for any new project I can go to the developers in that area and get advice on how to design and implement the project solution, whether it affects them and how they woudl design their part.
I rely on knowledge growing in each area. And it takes years to get to know the code in each system really well, and the business rules which the business has forgotten about which are mastered there. Yes, people write it down. But it has to be learned so that realtime dialogue and decision making can occur!
In our case, I agree that it's the system knowledge which should be seen as the biggest asset. Not transferability across teams.
These systems concentrate on the ability to conduct a ballot.
But the secrecy of the ballot is equally important. It is not just a side-issue. Even postal voting defies the right to secret ballot. How do you ensure the right to secrecy from your family or peer group, or undue pressure therefrom, if the place of voting is not controlled?
I may be a Luddite but such fundamentals are best left un-technoligised. Go back to paper ballots.
Democracy is the right to a secret ballot to elect a leader at regular intervals.
There is little more to it!
So why mess with the only thing it gives us? Paper is the only way to do this. It separates the vote from the voter so it can never be tracked.
Even postal votes negate this simple principle. The UK has always used screened poll booths with one person allowed in at a time. That way not only the government but also your family, friends or anyone else cannot force you to vote for a particular candidate, or tell who you've voted for (or if you have intentionally "spoiled" your paper - these votes are no longer counted in the UK but might themselves affect turnout if they were!).
Units are more than measures
... terrible for representing the real world.
They imply the SCALE
Inter-stellar distances are great in light-years, people's height in feet and inches, horse races in miles or furlongs. Same goes for all those special units for weight - pecks, etc (yes, sadly I've forgotten them already).
the worst thing that happened in the UK for children's mental agility was getting rid of our old currency of 12 pence to the shilling, 20 shillings to the pound.
In my work I see all sorts of errors with the wrong number of zeroes on a number, where using old units would have avoided having a large number in the first place.
Metric is great for calculations in science and engineering
For me it all started with the original "OS2" project between IBM and MS. MS split and produced Win95, while IBM marketed OS2. This was the first time you saw MS do the tricks: OS2 ran windows faster than windows, needed only 4MB memory and did not need a hardware upgrade. MS started their marketing dirty tricks: claimed W95 would also run in 4MB of RAM - it didn't and everyone got into the first cycle of buying new PCs. It was also unstable so setting the scene for everyone to buy the upgrade to W98, needing new PCs again, and so on! Constant stress and dissatisfaction - wtth no where else to turn until Linux came along - Macs and Unix based systems were still much more expensive and MS had the programs being written for it (much like Linux does now).
There are also rumours of foul deeds at PC shows where MS and IBM were showing their competing products. I would suggest tracking down some old IBMers from that time.
Just because you CAN change something, why turn it into a fashion thing and cause all those IT novices to have to relearn a GUI? Most novices I train don't want to learn new programs let alone new window GUIs - it's the single most popular reason for not switching to Linux for a novice used to Windows.
... the controls on a JCB digger do not change every few years in order to sell more JCBs. Hi Fi systems went into complexity in the 70's with people wanting more knobs and buttons to show how sophisticated they were. Most people's Hi Fi gear now consists of an ipod and speakers with just a couple of knobs and switches.
... what is important is LONGTERM stability in an interface so that everyone can learn it and trust it and trust themselves to be able to use it and continue gaining skill in using it. This is NOT a competition to get the most usable GUI or easiest to train on ... that development cycle may never end.
Cars do not have a new pedal layout every few years
Seriously
Meanwhile if you want to be able to TALK to the PC controlled house of the future isn't that more like the command line? Talking is the future. And talking takes place on a 1-dimensional time line not a 2d or 3d GUI screen.
It seems very unfashionable to say this, but one of Douglas Engelbart's prophetic warnings back around 1968 (the time of his famous demo of the ARPA prototype, use of a mouse, hyperlinked graphics, etc) was that the user should always remain more intelligent than the machine. The contrary would be a disaster for civilisation and human evolution.
"Ease of use" seems to translate for most current design needs into: "don't need to understand". And this is allowed to run riot by the duty of software companies to make profits for their shareholders.
Dangerous stuff!
What's their hassle? Superstring theory allows for the idea that universes could get created instantly, "ready-made" from collisions of existing ones in the stormy multi-dimensional universe soup (ours could have been created a few seconds ago). Each universe would contain a consistent history. The big-bang would be a theoretical anomaly. Fundamentalists would argue over whether THEIR god had caused the last splash. Science would still search for the universal laws in the past and present which help us understand the present and control the future.
The Apricot Xi had an LCD panel on the keyboard which labelled the 5 function keys dynamically - and doubled up as a calculator. That was in 1983!
1. I thought microwaves were only used for the links from basestation masts to controller station where a leased landline was not available.
2. The actual transmitter-to-phone signal drop-off is rapid from the center and directional too, so that the energy in the signal is a tiny fraction of the mast output by the time it gets to the ground some 50-100 yards away (every tried getting a signal directly under a mast?)
3. And what about all that cosmic radiation - not to mention WLAN and TV and radio?
Orange UK have had an optional service for mobile phone voicemail which is entirely voice activated. Not just the "menu" - no more 1,2,3,#, etc but real commands. And it even tries to recognise the voice of you and your regular callers and talks to them by name after they leave a voice message for you (asking extra options).
... that would be something!
Trouble is the time when you most need "hands-free" is when driving, but the background noise makes it difficult to use (unless your in some fancy limo).
Now a HAL style lip reader