No, not always. Read the post near the very top for an example.
Oooh, good one! You got me there! I have no idea what you're talking about, since you didn't include a link to the post in question, or even copy an' paste the example. I think you mean that when the back button is clicked more than once, then a link is clicked, further behavior of the back button is contrary to what some would expect. That's not the same as the feature being broken, or counterintuitive. Of course, who knows what you mean, because you just threw out a lame "Read the Fucking Article", and leaned back in your chair, hands clasped. By the way, hardly anyone reads the entire article before they post. In this case, they'd probably still be reading, since there are several papers and articles availible from any of the several links in the text of the submission. The point is, my post did not indicate lack of knowlege on the subject, so STFU.
Or the person who is listening to them has their head so far up their ass, that they think they are an expert at everything, and can't beleive that someone could have an good understanding in a field they don't have a clue in.
Big words from someone who's not even a programmer, but a graphic designer. I wish I had known that from the beginning, so I didn't have to waste my time replying. Your level of intimacy with software is as a user, which gives you the same level of authority to comment as the average 11-year-old girl. If you're not going to acknowlege those that actually make the software you use (read:me, programmer for over six years), please at least have the respect not to question their competence.
I didn't read the entire article, but I skimmed it. Does clicking "Back" not take you to the page you were looking at previously? Seems to work as advertised to me. Also, my own research indicates that anything my mom understands in the way of computing, it is safe to say, is universally understood. Thanks for your "RTFA", though. You just don't get that enough on Slashdot.
Also, anyone who would claim "The traditional back button suffers from the distance and targeting issues that govern Fitts' Law" probably has their egg-shaped head so far up their ass that making something less complicated, and more intuitive would be impossible.
The average web browser's "back" feature is almost the only software feature in existence that is universally understood, and works as advertised. If it aint broke...
I think it's not a bad idea to take it to the next level. Create a virus that sends erroneous user data, generated randomly, to the largest anti-privacy culprits. Work hard to make sure the formatting is exactly how they expect it. Let it spread naturally. Just have it pop up a EULA the first time it runs. It will serve as a DOS on those companies' systems, and make their data worthless. Alternatively, write a "Privacy Desk" application, that shows what data you're just about to send, and allows you to either stop it, or modify it before it's sent out.
You programmed (for) it. It locks up. Now we're blaming the hardware. How does that make sense?
Sure does. I wrote some utilities to play Powerpoint slides on my DVD player. That's no reason for it to refuse to read about 20% of the discs I try to play. Audio CDs, MP3 CDs, DVDs, you name it.
I don't have the burden of proof, however.
You provided anecdotal evidence in opposition to mine, then asked me if I had any facts or figures to support my stories. Then I asked you to do the same. The point is, neither of us are trying to "prove" anything. We're just telling stories. Only a child or a lawyer would have a problem understanding that. My Samsung DVD player is not working properly, and neither is my brother's. Out of the three people I know personally that own Samsung DVD players, two of them are not working well. That's all the evidence I need to think that Samsung products are not reliable, and post that opinion in response to an article on Slashdot. Welcome to the internet, would you like a mint?
To do a real comparison, one would need return/warranty/repair rates.
I suppose, but then this article would not have had a question mark at the end of the headline. Unless you work for Samsung, lighten up a little bit. My post wasn't the only one attached to the article. If anyone takes the word of a single stranger on the internet, they should get their head examined.
And a company that makes stuff that lasts a decade will go out of business because after their first round is sold, they won't get any return buyers for another 10 years.:-)
Everyone keeps saying that, but then how come Sony stayed in business for all those years? Was it the invention of CD, VCR, DVD, etc? Or did (gasp) consumers recognize quality products?
Please do provide some evidence before bad-mouthing a manufacturer.
Is that a joke? What evidence did you provide to support the assertion that your products did not fail? I can provide only anecdotal evidence: that the performance of my DVD player has degraded over time. And, yes, I know Samsung didn't program the firmware inside my DVD player. In fact, I did. Via an SDK I downloaded from VMLabs. My player is the N-701 (I think, I'm at work and the player's at home), and I have a couple of games and a controller for it, and a couple of small utilities I wrote myself that run on it as well.
I would say that overall, Sony equipment is made to last. It's not the most feature-rich for the dollar, but it tends to work for a long time. I had a Sony boombox during the entire 80s. Never missed a note. Their car audio is ugly and underpowered, but also works forever. Samsung is on the opposite end of the spectrum. Sure I can play Nuon games on my DVD player, but what good is that if it freezes right before the $$$-shot in my favorite pr0n?
Re:Start with the easy stuff first
on
Open Source Housing
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Insightful. Good call. If you think about it, though, there were no bathroom fans at all in the 40s. Maybe in 2134 there'll be ones that work.
According to this, the only way to contribute is to either take classes at MIT or a related school, or give money. As a footnote, there's an "everyone else" category, but it doesn't look all that interactive.
I was getting all set to rant about how Open Source doesn't apply to housebuilding, until I realized that Open Source doesn't apply to this article, either.
I'm a DJ, and I've been using a laptop to suppliment vinyl for doing weddings, requests, etc. Is there a linux app for graphically mixing mp3s together? This would be the killer app for me to switch off of Windows for personal use. A tablet would look much more professional mounted into a mixer case with no display sticking up. So, to summarize- is there an mp3 mixer (a la Atomix) for Linux?
if I don't like the CD format used by my favorite artists' record labels, I should change my taste in music?
You should probably change your taste in music anyway, just because most major label acts are pretty terrible. Besides, what's the point in buying music you can hear 10X daily on the radio anyway? There are other reasons to like indie bands:
The artists are more accessible. That means they answer emails, say "hi" at shows, take requests on stage, and are generally better connected to their audience.
The shows, merch, and albums are cheaper. Full-length CDs often sell for $10 or less. T-shirts are $12. Tickets are $10 at the door.
Now you've just made my curious - you *imply* that you don't agree that CD's are the end all for music reproduction - what is?
Not that you asked me, but vinyl is. Sure, it's not portable, and not permanent, but it's still the best-sounding format availible. Not everyone can find words for the difference, but almost anyone can hear it. Most people say CDs sound "flat" next to vinyl records. I've also found that vinyl has better low-end response. Plus, when you buy an album, you're really buying something real, not just a container for data. Not to mention the "cool factor". Oh, and records tend to be about %20-%50 less than a comparable CD.
Yeah? Hm. Well, maybe there's somewhere you've driven 1 million times, but I haven't. What do you do when you go somewhere for the first time? Write a shell script before you get in your car? And what about the windshield? Do you have a text-based system in mind to replace that?
If I were wrong, there would be more than enough people to explain why I'm mistaken and stupid
(raises hand) Ooh! Ooh! Can I be first?
It's an entire heirarchy built around the practice of duping people into coughing up cash for rewards in a future life.
The Church is a hierarchy indeed, just like any other organization. I'm pretty sure that's part of what makes an organization an organization. However, coughing up cash doesn't garauntee any sort of salvation. In fact, it was until only recently by papal decree that Works were considered as important as Faith in detirmining your eternal destination. Works would include donations. Faith would include prayer.
And the cathedrals!
"And the Whitehouse!" People would have a lot less pictures of Europe if it weren't for these amazing structures. Every major religion has some sort of elaborate temple-like structure. This is because any church is made up of people who like to have a pretty building in which to worship. Makes them feel closer to God. Anyone with any common sense knows this.
Catholicism is the first multinational corporation dedicated to its self preservation and profit.
Even if that were true, don't you think the Roman Empire deserves mention? Just shows your ignorance.
It existed for how many centuries before the people even understood a single word of mass?
It also kept the written word in existence in many parts of the world. Much of modern mathematics and philosophy is derived from work done by Catholic monks. You are also wrong in other ways: the Mass wasn't said exclusively in Latin until centuries after it was said for the first time, and Latin isn't exactly a secret language. Many church-goers understood what they were saying. I read a little Latin myself, in fact.
There has never been any type of openness or disclosure about what the Catholic church is up to,[...]
Now you're not even making sense. Since when? Have all 1 billion of us been keeping secrets from the rest of the world? I lived in a monastery for over a year. I didn't find out anything I couldn't have learned from history books. Do you have any first-hand, intimate knowlege of the topics you're discussing? No, a few years of Catholic school don't count.
This certainly won't be the dawning of a new age of responsibility, accountability, righteous ethics, or social service in the Church.
Says who? You? Bah! For one, the Church is the single largest charitable organization in the world. Its track record for social service is plain.
Hey, Mr.! Read the original post! He was referring to claims that the poster could not only predict the future, but has evidence of documents that no one has ever seen! That's called "unsupported claims". He wasn't talking about the existence of God, so stop pushing your atheist agenda if it bothers you so much when others do the same thing to you with their belief systems. Thanks.
Pretty argumentative. Sure, you can name one, but can you name 100? 1000? Texts written by hand before the invention of the press have to be wildly popular to remain in print. Even modern books go out of print, and become hard to get ahold of.
I know you weren't asking me, but I couldn't resist. In a word: Christ.
In your opinion, should I expect to find the known-to-exist-but-tightly-guarded material regarding Hitler's final solution online? Should I expect to see everything the Vatican has about the Dead Sea Scrolls online?
Again, I know you weren't asking me, but...
It's tough to say whether documents noone has ever seen but "know to exist" will show up online. There's really not a whole lot of secrecy involved in the modern Vatican. It's possible that we'll see some suprising things turn up online, but chances are, nothing very scandelous, because, chances are, these documents don't actually exist. Either they never did, or they were so "earthshattering" that they have already been destroyed. The Pope and those near him with unrestricted daily access to the Library are pretty dedicated to the Church (obviously). Don't you think they'd be a little shaken in their faith if documents proving the fallacy of their belief systems were kept in their basement? Most of the great Chruch thinkers have had easy access, both chronologicallly (lived near the times in question), or physically (lived in/near the Vatican) to such works, and yet were very faithful men. Take that for what it's worth.
You're a moron. According to the dictionary, Christianity is defined as The Christian religion, founded on the life and teachings of Jesus. That definition could be (and has, in the distant past) interpreted to mean that only Catholics are Christians. No matter what, the Church is founded on both scripture and tradition, which itself is merely interpretation of scripture. Take your fundie slander elsewhere, please.
A great many of the Vatican's (and many other Church libraries') works are actually in other languages besides Latin. German, Greek and French works outnumber those in Latin at any theological library I've seen.
Slashdot Mirror
No, not always. Read the post near the very top for an example.
Oooh, good one! You got me there! I have no idea what you're talking about, since you didn't include a link to the post in question, or even copy an' paste the example. I think you mean that when the back button is clicked more than once, then a link is clicked, further behavior of the back button is contrary to what some would expect. That's not the same as the feature being broken, or counterintuitive. Of course, who knows what you mean, because you just threw out a lame "Read the Fucking Article", and leaned back in your chair, hands clasped. By the way, hardly anyone reads the entire article before they post. In this case, they'd probably still be reading, since there are several papers and articles availible from any of the several links in the text of the submission. The point is, my post did not indicate lack of knowlege on the subject, so STFU.
Or the person who is listening to them has their head so far up their ass, that they think they are an expert at everything, and can't beleive that someone could have an good understanding in a field they don't have a clue in.
Big words from someone who's not even a programmer, but a graphic designer. I wish I had known that from the beginning, so I didn't have to waste my time replying. Your level of intimacy with software is as a user, which gives you the same level of authority to comment as the average 11-year-old girl. If you're not going to acknowlege those that actually make the software you use (read:me, programmer for over six years), please at least have the respect not to question their competence.
I didn't read the entire article, but I skimmed it. Does clicking "Back" not take you to the page you were looking at previously? Seems to work as advertised to me. Also, my own research indicates that anything my mom understands in the way of computing, it is safe to say, is universally understood. Thanks for your "RTFA", though. You just don't get that enough on Slashdot.
Also, anyone who would claim "The traditional back button suffers from the distance and targeting issues that govern Fitts' Law" probably has their egg-shaped head so far up their ass that making something less complicated, and more intuitive would be impossible.
The average web browser's "back" feature is almost the only software feature in existence that is universally understood, and works as advertised. If it aint broke...
I think it's not a bad idea to take it to the next level. Create a virus that sends erroneous user data, generated randomly, to the largest anti-privacy culprits. Work hard to make sure the formatting is exactly how they expect it. Let it spread naturally. Just have it pop up a EULA the first time it runs. It will serve as a DOS on those companies' systems, and make their data worthless. Alternatively, write a "Privacy Desk" application, that shows what data you're just about to send, and allows you to either stop it, or modify it before it's sent out.
You programmed (for) it. It locks up.
Now we're blaming the hardware.
How does that make sense?
Sure does. I wrote some utilities to play Powerpoint slides on my DVD player. That's no reason for it to refuse to read about 20% of the discs I try to play. Audio CDs, MP3 CDs, DVDs, you name it.
I don't have the burden of proof, however.
You provided anecdotal evidence in opposition to mine, then asked me if I had any facts or figures to support my stories. Then I asked you to do the same. The point is, neither of us are trying to "prove" anything. We're just telling stories. Only a child or a lawyer would have a problem understanding that. My Samsung DVD player is not working properly, and neither is my brother's. Out of the three people I know personally that own Samsung DVD players, two of them are not working well. That's all the evidence I need to think that Samsung products are not reliable, and post that opinion in response to an article on Slashdot. Welcome to the internet, would you like a mint?
To do a real comparison, one would need return/warranty/repair rates.
I suppose, but then this article would not have had a question mark at the end of the headline. Unless you work for Samsung, lighten up a little bit. My post wasn't the only one attached to the article. If anyone takes the word of a single stranger on the internet, they should get their head examined.
And a company that makes stuff that lasts a decade will go out of business because after their first round is sold, they won't get any return buyers for another 10 years. :-)
Everyone keeps saying that, but then how come Sony stayed in business for all those years? Was it the invention of CD, VCR, DVD, etc? Or did (gasp) consumers recognize quality products?
Please do provide some evidence before bad-mouthing a manufacturer.
Is that a joke? What evidence did you provide to support the assertion that your products did not fail? I can provide only anecdotal evidence: that the performance of my DVD player has degraded over time. And, yes, I know Samsung didn't program the firmware inside my DVD player. In fact, I did. Via an SDK I downloaded from VMLabs. My player is the N-701 (I think, I'm at work and the player's at home), and I have a couple of games and a controller for it, and a couple of small utilities I wrote myself that run on it as well.
How was that?
I would say that overall, Sony equipment is made to last. It's not the most feature-rich for the dollar, but it tends to work for a long time. I had a Sony boombox during the entire 80s. Never missed a note. Their car audio is ugly and underpowered, but also works forever. Samsung is on the opposite end of the spectrum. Sure I can play Nuon games on my DVD player, but what good is that if it freezes right before the $$$-shot in my favorite pr0n?
Insightful. Good call. If you think about it, though, there were no bathroom fans at all in the 40s. Maybe in 2134 there'll be ones that work.
According to this, the only way to contribute is to either take classes at MIT or a related school, or give money. As a footnote, there's an "everyone else" category, but it doesn't look all that interactive.
I was getting all set to rant about how Open Source doesn't apply to housebuilding, until I realized that Open Source doesn't apply to this article, either.
I like the idea of the device working like a peice of DJ equipment, instead of a computer.
(in grandparent voice)
That's right, sonny boy!
Here's a question:
I'm a DJ, and I've been using a laptop to suppliment vinyl for doing weddings, requests, etc. Is there a linux app for graphically mixing mp3s together? This would be the killer app for me to switch off of Windows for personal use. A tablet would look much more professional mounted into a mixer case with no display sticking up. So, to summarize- is there an mp3 mixer (a la Atomix) for Linux?
You should probably change your taste in music anyway, just because most major label acts are pretty terrible. Besides, what's the point in buying music you can hear 10X daily on the radio anyway? There are other reasons to like indie bands:
Now you've just made my curious - you *imply* that you don't agree that CD's are the end all for music reproduction - what is?
Not that you asked me, but vinyl is. Sure, it's not portable, and not permanent, but it's still the best-sounding format availible. Not everyone can find words for the difference, but almost anyone can hear it. Most people say CDs sound "flat" next to vinyl records. I've also found that vinyl has better low-end response. Plus, when you buy an album, you're really buying something real, not just a container for data. Not to mention the "cool factor". Oh, and records tend to be about %20-%50 less than a comparable CD.
Yeah, I stole it from somewhere, and butchered it to fit into Slashdot's character limit.
Um, the Catholic Chuch if it were to liquidate it's assets, real (estate)or otherwise would surpass most countries on the Earth in wealth.
Um, so? And this proves what point? That the Church has a lot of "stuff"?
Yeah? Hm. Well, maybe there's somewhere you've driven 1 million times, but I haven't. What do you do when you go somewhere for the first time? Write a shell script before you get in your car? And what about the windshield? Do you have a text-based system in mind to replace that?
If I were wrong, there would be more than enough people to explain why I'm mistaken and stupid
(raises hand) Ooh! Ooh! Can I be first?
It's an entire heirarchy built around the practice of duping people into coughing up cash for rewards in a future life.
The Church is a hierarchy indeed, just like any other organization. I'm pretty sure that's part of what makes an organization an organization. However, coughing up cash doesn't garauntee any sort of salvation. In fact, it was until only recently by papal decree that Works were considered as important as Faith in detirmining your eternal destination. Works would include donations. Faith would include prayer.
And the cathedrals!
"And the Whitehouse!" People would have a lot less pictures of Europe if it weren't for these amazing structures. Every major religion has some sort of elaborate temple-like structure. This is because any church is made up of people who like to have a pretty building in which to worship. Makes them feel closer to God. Anyone with any common sense knows this.
Catholicism is the first multinational corporation dedicated to its self preservation and profit.
Even if that were true, don't you think the Roman Empire deserves mention? Just shows your ignorance.
It existed for how many centuries before the people even understood a single word of mass?
It also kept the written word in existence in many parts of the world. Much of modern mathematics and philosophy is derived from work done by Catholic monks. You are also wrong in other ways: the Mass wasn't said exclusively in Latin until centuries after it was said for the first time, and Latin isn't exactly a secret language. Many church-goers understood what they were saying. I read a little Latin myself, in fact.
There has never been any type of openness or disclosure about what the Catholic church is up to,[...]
Now you're not even making sense. Since when? Have all 1 billion of us been keeping secrets from the rest of the world? I lived in a monastery for over a year. I didn't find out anything I couldn't have learned from history books. Do you have any first-hand, intimate knowlege of the topics you're discussing? No, a few years of Catholic school don't count.
This certainly won't be the dawning of a new age of responsibility, accountability, righteous ethics, or social service in the Church.
Says who? You? Bah! For one, the Church is the single largest charitable organization in the world. Its track record for social service is plain.
Who's next?
Hey, Mr.! Read the original post! He was referring to claims that the poster could not only predict the future, but has evidence of documents that no one has ever seen! That's called "unsupported claims". He wasn't talking about the existence of God, so stop pushing your atheist agenda if it bothers you so much when others do the same thing to you with their belief systems. Thanks.
No. More /. posters should feel unrestrained to attack belief systems which:
1) are responsible for large amounts of documented hatred, intolerance, and violence, and
2) fail to prove the existence of a deity which their hatred, intolerance, and violence is committed in the name of.
Sure, but are you really in favor of wildly opinionated and unsupported attacks? That seems odd.
Pretty argumentative. Sure, you can name one, but can you name 100? 1000? Texts written by hand before the invention of the press have to be wildly popular to remain in print. Even modern books go out of print, and become hard to get ahold of.
What, then, is the Church about?
I know you weren't asking me, but I couldn't resist. In a word: Christ.
In your opinion, should I expect to find the known-to-exist-but-tightly-guarded material regarding Hitler's final solution online? Should I expect to see everything the Vatican has about the Dead Sea Scrolls online?
Again, I know you weren't asking me, but...
It's tough to say whether documents noone has ever seen but "know to exist" will show up online. There's really not a whole lot of secrecy involved in the modern Vatican. It's possible that we'll see some suprising things turn up online, but chances are, nothing very scandelous, because, chances are, these documents don't actually exist. Either they never did, or they were so "earthshattering" that they have already been destroyed. The Pope and those near him with unrestricted daily access to the Library are pretty dedicated to the Church (obviously). Don't you think they'd be a little shaken in their faith if documents proving the fallacy of their belief systems were kept in their basement? Most of the great Chruch thinkers have had easy access, both chronologicallly (lived near the times in question), or physically (lived in/near the Vatican) to such works, and yet were very faithful men. Take that for what it's worth.
Too bad the Catholic church isn't Christianity...
You're a moron. According to the dictionary, Christianity is defined as The Christian religion, founded on the life and teachings of Jesus. That definition could be (and has, in the distant past) interpreted to mean that only Catholics are Christians. No matter what, the Church is founded on both scripture and tradition, which itself is merely interpretation of scripture. Take your fundie slander elsewhere, please.
A great many of the Vatican's (and many other Church libraries') works are actually in other languages besides Latin. German, Greek and French works outnumber those in Latin at any theological library I've seen.