Open source software clones other software constantly. You even have the classic taskbar, start menu, "File Edit View Window Help" menus, and more. Why is it wrong for Zynga to do this?
Slashdot doesn't care about privacy anymore. After all, they swing from Google's nuts at every opportunity even though Google's CEO has spoken out against privacy, they've scanned and archived people's private networks, and they index everything.
Remember when Slashdot was pro-anonymity, pro-cryptography, pro-privacy, etc.? How easy it was to flip Slashdot into a corporate shill for an internet giant.
Slashdot is full of biased, tribalist attitudes. Look at the other article about Google claiming Microsoft is behind their antitrust review, as if Google is always right and trustworthy or that Google shouldn't be reviewed for antitrust concerns, regardless of who initiates it.
I find it interesting that Colbert's humor is referred to as "truth" even though he only parodies one side. Same with the Daily Show--they'll mock conservatives for their policies but only mock liberals for their looks, voices, or gaffes. Seeing people completely ignore bias is odd to me.
I'm surprised at the angry rhetoric in the submission. Why is the rally something that needs to be "countered?" What "absurdity" is there in citizens holding a rally? Are some Democrats really that intolerant of opposing viewpoints that they can't accept the existence of a grassroots effort that they disagree with, especially when they used grassroots efforts of their own to get Obama elected?
As time goes on, I'm beginning to think Glenn Beck is a purposeful tool to distract Democrats into going crazy over him while the Republicans stay on message and sweep the midterms. I've never seen such a harmless blowhard get so much attention for no reason. Getting a bunch of hipster-douchebag Colbert fans out to counter Glenn Beck would just draw even more attention to Glenn Beck. Why not just disregard him if you don't like him?
I had this same reaction once when reading opinions from liberal acquaintances who hated Rush Limbaugh and told me how "dangerous" he was. Then I'd turn on his show during the day and just hear a radio guy ranting in favor smaller government and lower taxes. That's the dangerous guy they're going crazy over? It's as if there's this nutty urge by liberals to completely eradicate any opposition to their viewpoints.
iTunes is like the internet in many ways, clogged with unnecessary code, features nobody really needs (or can understand how to use) and straying from its core focus.
What are you even talking about? An application isn't a physical object like a pipe. It doesn't "clog" just because there are features you don't use. If you never use Ping, it's never going to affect you. In fact, this version of iTunes is faster than 9, contradicting your claim!
iTunes' focus is a media player and sync app for iPods and iPhones. What in iTunes 10 is straying from that? It's still a media player and sync app. Slashdotters today are just doing the usual cliche of claiming the past is better than the present and that having more features automatically means things are slower and "bloated," even when there's no basis for the claim.
What a non-story this is.
For fuck's sake, you have to manually enable Ping. If you don't want to use it, it's never going to affect you. It's just a way to see what friends and celebrities are recommending. Apple was already doing this with celebrity playlists in the music store.
How does changing the interface make it "shoehorned?" How is having features you don't use "cruft?" You don't even explain what's horrible about it.
Slashdotters have turned things like bloat and cruft into vague descriptions that refer to features they don't use. Just having features in the app doesn't magically make it slower and doesn't mean it's cruft. iTunes is still just a media player for music and videos, as it's been for years. Just because they add a completely optional social networking element that you have to manually enable doesn't change that.
Give me a break. You turn a bug bounty into a statement on American values. Your gameshow references are completely baseless and random. What a load of crap!
Only to people who disagree with their politics and can't tolerate the existence of opposing viewpoints.
There have actually been plants exposed at Tea Party rallies, placed there to intentionally espouse racist views in front of cameras. A Soros-funded commercial used footage of one of these plants and didn't show the footage of the rally members subsequently expelling the guy and saying his views don't represent them.
I've never gotten the crazy bitterness that liberals have over the Tea Party. It's just a bunch of anti-tax, anti-government people. It's like the fact that conservatives have a grassroots movement equivalent to Obama's grassroots movement in 2008 really bothers liberals and drives them nuts. Well, part of living in a democracy is accepting that other people think differently than you.
You're saying a guy who refers to children as "garbage" and places squirrels above humans (read his manifesto) has a point.
Who thinks it's responsible to have 19 children? Everybody mocked that couple. And who cares if they do have 19 children? It's called free will. If the government can restrict how many children you can have, then it can also do things like restrict who you marry--bye bye, gay marriage. See how easy it is to have unintended consequences that negatively affect your side's beliefs? You may think think climate change is something to be "deeply worried" about, but it's actually a controversial and debatable topic with contradictory evidence.
Your entire post was like a justification of shitty, fascist mindsets. "He's an insane fuckwad, BUT...China may be run by dictatorial fuckwads, BUT..." No, he had no good points. Ranting about how you hate humans and consider them garbage is not a good point.
I'm sure the Right will be just as understanding about the fact that this man does not represent liberal environmentalism as the Left was over the fact that Michael Enright's drunken attack on an Arab driver didn't represent conservative opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque.
Don't worry, I'm sure that giving the government the power to filter and regulate internet traffic through "net neutrality" will work out a-okay. I love being told the government just wants to protect our freedom of speech while they try to slip in a kill switch. I'm sure governments are always trustworthy with that kind of power and that a glance at history would support that claim.
One of my biggest issues with Ruby on Rails at the beginning was how difficult it was to find real documentation. Everything was a tutorial or "screencast" about scaffolding. They were so obsessed with doing CRUD in 5 minutes that it was hard to find out how to go outside the bounds and write anything real. There was a ton of hype over the framework until everyone found out how slow it was and how rigid things were if you didn't follow its conventions. But the community was just so into the very idea of Ruby on Rails that you couldn't communicate this to them.
In the era of the internet, nobody is going to wait 40 years for something to take off. Email took that long because the internet mostly existed in the military and academic world until the 90s.
Wave failed because it was looking for a problem to solve. People are already happy with today's email and IM chatting.
Want to know why Wave failed? Google, an advertising company, never advertised it enough. They never gave it enough time either.
It failed because it wasn't needed and was difficult to use. Fans need to stop making these kinds of excuses, claiming it was "too innovative" or wasn't advertised enough (Are you kidding? Every tech site trumpeted it as the next step in history after email, actually beginning every article with a summary of the history of email as if Wave was guaranteed to be the next new world-changing technology).
It wasn't an issue with UI, yes, it was awful, but it worked. People use bloody Facebook and Microsoft Project every day and they have to have the worst UI annoyances in existence.
If the UI is awful, then there is an issue with the UI!
It was an engineering pet project that nobody else really wanted, but the wildly pro-Google media is working hard to spin this as just "too innovative" for the public, which is both misleading and condescending. Look, this isn't Google's first failure or the last. It failed because it just wasn't that good or useful.
It's your hypothetical conclusion that people will "flock" to something just because there's not an installer. In truth, people will use what is fastest, most stable, and more importantly, most familiar. You claimed that people prefer contradictory interfaces, which proves that your argument is really on shaky foundations. To think that we should drop standard APIs in favor of the anything-goes web just because there isn't an installer--never mind that Macs and.NET support drag-and-drop installs anyway--is pretty ridiculous.
People have to install apps on the iPhone, yet apps have taken off compared to web solutions running in Mobile Safari. Native APIs have the usability advantage that people prefer.
Slashdot Mirror
Open source software clones other software constantly. You even have the classic taskbar, start menu, "File Edit View Window Help" menus, and more. Why is it wrong for Zynga to do this?
Slashdot doesn't care about privacy anymore. After all, they swing from Google's nuts at every opportunity even though Google's CEO has spoken out against privacy, they've scanned and archived people's private networks, and they index everything.
Remember when Slashdot was pro-anonymity, pro-cryptography, pro-privacy, etc.? How easy it was to flip Slashdot into a corporate shill for an internet giant.
Yes, passing ACID3 is the most important thing for browsing HTML4 Slashdot properly.
Slashdot is full of biased, tribalist attitudes. Look at the other article about Google claiming Microsoft is behind their antitrust review, as if Google is always right and trustworthy or that Google shouldn't be reviewed for antitrust concerns, regardless of who initiates it.
I find it interesting that Colbert's humor is referred to as "truth" even though he only parodies one side. Same with the Daily Show--they'll mock conservatives for their policies but only mock liberals for their looks, voices, or gaffes. Seeing people completely ignore bias is odd to me.
Al Sharpton's rally was in response to Beck's, and now Colbert fans are wanting a rally in response to Beck's, so yeah, people are mimicking Beck.
I'm surprised at the angry rhetoric in the submission. Why is the rally something that needs to be "countered?" What "absurdity" is there in citizens holding a rally? Are some Democrats really that intolerant of opposing viewpoints that they can't accept the existence of a grassroots effort that they disagree with, especially when they used grassroots efforts of their own to get Obama elected?
As time goes on, I'm beginning to think Glenn Beck is a purposeful tool to distract Democrats into going crazy over him while the Republicans stay on message and sweep the midterms. I've never seen such a harmless blowhard get so much attention for no reason. Getting a bunch of hipster-douchebag Colbert fans out to counter Glenn Beck would just draw even more attention to Glenn Beck. Why not just disregard him if you don't like him?
I had this same reaction once when reading opinions from liberal acquaintances who hated Rush Limbaugh and told me how "dangerous" he was. Then I'd turn on his show during the day and just hear a radio guy ranting in favor smaller government and lower taxes. That's the dangerous guy they're going crazy over? It's as if there's this nutty urge by liberals to completely eradicate any opposition to their viewpoints.
What are you even talking about? An application isn't a physical object like a pipe. It doesn't "clog" just because there are features you don't use. If you never use Ping, it's never going to affect you. In fact, this version of iTunes is faster than 9, contradicting your claim!
iTunes' focus is a media player and sync app for iPods and iPhones. What in iTunes 10 is straying from that? It's still a media player and sync app. Slashdotters today are just doing the usual cliche of claiming the past is better than the present and that having more features automatically means things are slower and "bloated," even when there's no basis for the claim.
What a non-story this is.
For fuck's sake, you have to manually enable Ping. If you don't want to use it, it's never going to affect you. It's just a way to see what friends and celebrities are recommending. Apple was already doing this with celebrity playlists in the music store.
How does changing the interface make it "shoehorned?" How is having features you don't use "cruft?" You don't even explain what's horrible about it.
Slashdotters have turned things like bloat and cruft into vague descriptions that refer to features they don't use. Just having features in the app doesn't magically make it slower and doesn't mean it's cruft. iTunes is still just a media player for music and videos, as it's been for years. Just because they add a completely optional social networking element that you have to manually enable doesn't change that.
Give me a break. You turn a bug bounty into a statement on American values. Your gameshow references are completely baseless and random. What a load of crap!
Only to people who disagree with their politics and can't tolerate the existence of opposing viewpoints.
There have actually been plants exposed at Tea Party rallies, placed there to intentionally espouse racist views in front of cameras. A Soros-funded commercial used footage of one of these plants and didn't show the footage of the rally members subsequently expelling the guy and saying his views don't represent them.
I've never gotten the crazy bitterness that liberals have over the Tea Party. It's just a bunch of anti-tax, anti-government people. It's like the fact that conservatives have a grassroots movement equivalent to Obama's grassroots movement in 2008 really bothers liberals and drives them nuts. Well, part of living in a democracy is accepting that other people think differently than you.
Welcome to how conservatives have felt since a drunken Michael Enright attacked an Arab cab driver.
You're saying a guy who refers to children as "garbage" and places squirrels above humans (read his manifesto) has a point.
Who thinks it's responsible to have 19 children? Everybody mocked that couple. And who cares if they do have 19 children? It's called free will. If the government can restrict how many children you can have, then it can also do things like restrict who you marry--bye bye, gay marriage. See how easy it is to have unintended consequences that negatively affect your side's beliefs? You may think think climate change is something to be "deeply worried" about, but it's actually a controversial and debatable topic with contradictory evidence.
Your entire post was like a justification of shitty, fascist mindsets. "He's an insane fuckwad, BUT...China may be run by dictatorial fuckwads, BUT..." No, he had no good points. Ranting about how you hate humans and consider them garbage is not a good point.
That would explain MSNBC's and CNN's coverage of Michael Enright.
I'm sure the Right will be just as understanding about the fact that this man does not represent liberal environmentalism as the Left was over the fact that Michael Enright's drunken attack on an Arab driver didn't represent conservative opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque.
Karma's a bitch.
Don't worry, I'm sure that giving the government the power to filter and regulate internet traffic through "net neutrality" will work out a-okay. I love being told the government just wants to protect our freedom of speech while they try to slip in a kill switch. I'm sure governments are always trustworthy with that kind of power and that a glance at history would support that claim.
Please hurry up, November...
Why?
One of my biggest issues with Ruby on Rails at the beginning was how difficult it was to find real documentation. Everything was a tutorial or "screencast" about scaffolding. They were so obsessed with doing CRUD in 5 minutes that it was hard to find out how to go outside the bounds and write anything real. There was a ton of hype over the framework until everyone found out how slow it was and how rigid things were if you didn't follow its conventions. But the community was just so into the very idea of Ruby on Rails that you couldn't communicate this to them.
The story submissions have really been shitty today.
Don't worry. Since Slashdot is okay with Google tracking everything you do, surely they must be okay with the government doing it too.
In the era of the internet, nobody is going to wait 40 years for something to take off. Email took that long because the internet mostly existed in the military and academic world until the 90s.
Wave failed because it was looking for a problem to solve. People are already happy with today's email and IM chatting.
It failed because it wasn't needed and was difficult to use. Fans need to stop making these kinds of excuses, claiming it was "too innovative" or wasn't advertised enough (Are you kidding? Every tech site trumpeted it as the next step in history after email, actually beginning every article with a summary of the history of email as if Wave was guaranteed to be the next new world-changing technology).
If the UI is awful, then there is an issue with the UI!
It was an engineering pet project that nobody else really wanted, but the wildly pro-Google media is working hard to spin this as just "too innovative" for the public, which is both misleading and condescending. Look, this isn't Google's first failure or the last. It failed because it just wasn't that good or useful.
It's your hypothetical conclusion that people will "flock" to something just because there's not an installer. In truth, people will use what is fastest, most stable, and more importantly, most familiar. You claimed that people prefer contradictory interfaces, which proves that your argument is really on shaky foundations. To think that we should drop standard APIs in favor of the anything-goes web just because there isn't an installer--never mind that Macs and .NET support drag-and-drop installs anyway--is pretty ridiculous.
People have to install apps on the iPhone, yet apps have taken off compared to web solutions running in Mobile Safari. Native APIs have the usability advantage that people prefer.
No. What's your point?