I have the same problem as the original poster, and I don't think practice will do much. 12 years of practice through primary and secondary education did nothing for me. This was way before PCs, for twelve years I was writing reams of papers in longhand. My handwriting did evolve, but it was never quite intelligible, and became much worse in my late teens, exactly at the time I was writing long essays, tests, exam papers and what-not. Although it's certainly become even worse since I started using the computer.
My Palm can read me though:) Weird thing is, I noticed that now when I write on paper, I'm drawing Palm-shaped letters, such as the sideways loop for 'k'.
Poor example. First, the time it takes to start the process means extremely little compared to the time lame will take to do its work.
Second, if you're performing a command like this, especially one involving 'rm', you want to make damn sure there is no mistake. With GUI it's easier to have such a certainty.
Third, I can do all this easily in a GUI. In Total Commander for example, I can hit one keyboard shortcut to sort files by extension, then easily select them with keyboard or mouse - or I can hit a different shortcut that will filter the display to *wav files only, which makes selecting them much easier (one keypress). I can then start a GUI front-end to lame and drag-drop the selected files onto it. When done, I can re-select the files (one keypress) and delete them (one keypress, with optional confirmation dialog). The least efficient part of the process is starting a front-end for lame (if I have to burrow into the Start menu), but I can use TC's commandline to start a program and feed the selected files to it if I want to.
Throughout the whole operation I have full visual feedback (e.g. what if the current directory is not the one I thought it was?) and most importantly, every beginner can gradually figure out how to perform this operation.
A well-designed GUI can be operated *fast*. I'll grant that some operations are easier with a CLI, but they are getting fewer and fewer.
That much is true, but even if the program asks you before installing, you often don't have sufficient data to make an informed decision. Windows Update asks me every time, but how do I know if I want a particular patch or not? The only solution is to keep declining for a week or so, then check Google to see if anyone's reporting problems. I.e., a disappointingly low-tech, unreliable solution.
Which is to say - asking for permission is nice and should IMO be required, but it's not nearly enough. the manufacturer should provide reliable, conspicuous and clear information about what it is installing, what it does, how it was tested, what known issues exist and how it can be uninstalled. Otherwise they'll just keep you guessing as they do now. And using the phrase "enhances your Internet experience" in any such document should carry an exceedingly harsh penalty, too.
Ah, but now all of those commands you memorized in WordPerfect (no matter how simple at the time) are useless. However, had you used the Mac, the basic GUI concepts would have been usable to this day as the GUI is pretty much the same. Similar menu structure, windowing, etc. A lot prettier, but the usability is the same.
I don't know a general answer to your qauestion, but here's an anecdote. The first time I used a computer was in 1990, in a computer lab at a university in the US where I studied for some time. I needed to type up an essay, and I had never before so much as touched a computer keyboard.
I entered the lab. To my right, a bank of smaller, friendly-looking Mac Classics (but I didn't know what they were). Menus, icons, mice. To my left, a bank of foreboding but somehow more powerful looking IBM ATs. Green screens with text-mode commands, one of which would launch WordPerfect 5.0. I had to make a choice, and a completely uninformed choice, mind. In really had no idea what was what there.
I picked an IBM. Someone instructed me to press F3 for help and F7 to exit. I took it from there, and loved it. By the time I left, I must have known much of WordPerfect's help system by heart. I did try the Macs once or twice while there, but I went back to the IBMs every time. I wish I knew why, but I don't. Maybe theys looked more serious, more powerful. Maybe they adhered better to my uninformed mental image of what a computer was supposed to be like. Today I can list all sorts of reasons why I prefer one to the other, but it's mere rationalizing after the choice was made. I guess Macs looked too much like toys to me, while those text-mode DOS screens looked inscrutable, and hence they looked fascinating.
I wish people would stop with the "you've got nothing to hide" argument. There are legal things which are immoral and there are moral things which are illegal. Then you must also ask "legal - where?" and "moral - where, when and to whom?"
Things once legal tend to become otherwise. If you feel you've got nothing to hide because you've never done anything illegal, you better pray that none of the things you've done ever becomes illegal. Or even immoral, especially if you might one day run for public office or be involved in a lawsuit.
Me having sex with my SO is legal. That doesn't mean I want information about it out in the open.
Me buying large numbers of left-wing books from Amazon is also perfectly legal, but could put me on a no-fly list if I ever travel to the US.
But above all - YOU will not decide what I should or should not hide, nor will any company or any government. That choice is mine.
They take your fingerprint and make you take off your shoes and your pants. (Salon's premium article, but the choice bit is in the segment they allow you to read. I recommend the whole piece though.)
I totally agree, except at this date it may already be too late for the US government to simply start doing nothing for a while and wait til it passes. Of course every day of pursuing the current policies causes even more aggravation, so yeah, a Halt instruction would make a good start. But you'll still have to deal with two or three generations of people who bear a heavy grudge.
While walking through the airport in Dayton, Ohio recently, going through
the standard, ineffective TSA drill, I heard a security announcement over
the PA that was new to me. It said something to the effect of:
"Inappropriate or humorous comments concerning explosives or airport
security are prohibited and are punishable by..."
So? There are more thieves than terrorists, and even more shoplifters. That doesn't mean the police have (or should have) the right to inspect everybody's bag as they walk home from the store.
Arguments like yours are exactly the kind that worry me most, because take it a little further and you *will* be arguing for a 1984-style cctv camera in everybody's bedroom. Because there ARE bad people out there and how else is the government going to know who they are?
The point is that while technology now has potential to make the law enforcement's job much easier than it used to be, there are good reasons their job should not be too easy. If a cop could arrest you just on his say-so, there would certainly be less crime on the streets, and you'd have a totalitarian police state. We are not there yet of course, but every time we make it easier for the law enforcement to control *masses* of people, we get a little closer.
Are they really storing the full print, or is the article possibly inaccurate? I was under the impression that biometric systems only store a hash of the original data, password-file style.
It is a bad thing because capitalism is, at best, a means to an end. If you're only out to protect capitalism, you're blindly protecting both what's good and what's bad about it. How about making the world safe and economically viable for, you know, people?
You can't say no to some people. How about this totally unfounded speculation: Maybe some people lent him money, then he got laid off and can't repay. Lots of ways to make someone an offer that's hard to refuse.
When I was on a metered dial-up, I would (a) connect, get email, download usenet news, (b) disconnect, read and respond to email and news, gather URLs for some sites I wanted to browse, (c) reconnect, send email and usenter f-ups, download and save web pages, (d) disconnect...
How long was I "online"? Does the time reading and responding to email counts? Or was it just the relatively short time I was physically online?
Now that I have cable, I am physically online as long as I'm awake. But I spend more or less the same amount of time reading and typing up email and news, or reading web stuff.
Am I "online" while wget is spidering a website for me, does that count? Or does the time I spend reading some of the already-downloaded stuff count as me being "online"?
Other than that... what's this "television" thing? I wish articles explained terms that might be new to people.
It means a lot to them. They have narrowed down the source. Now instead of placing bugs on ten thousand communication lines, they only have to place one.
Parent post is not a troll. The doom3 site just crashed my Mozilla 1.4. It's the first time I've had this build crash by just navigating to a website. (In fact, I don't think I've ever seen it crash.)
So you think GPL-licensed works are not copyrighted? Have you ever *seen* GPL? Hint: your parent AC has about as much clue about GPL as Darl "GPL is anti-American" McBride.
Problem is, the voting system provides no way of voting "against" someone. You can only vote "for". If all the candidates spam, all you can do is not vote, which sends them no message at all.
Okay, what if someone does care? What if *I* want to install a video camera in your bedroom? No mistake, you *are* boring, but I still want that camera there. I guess I have your permission?
Slashdot Mirror
I have the same problem as the original poster, and I don't think practice will do much. 12 years of practice through primary and secondary education did nothing for me. This was way before PCs, for twelve years I was writing reams of papers in longhand. My handwriting did evolve, but it was never quite intelligible, and became much worse in my late teens, exactly at the time I was writing long essays, tests, exam papers and what-not. Although it's certainly become even worse since I started using the computer.
:) Weird thing is, I noticed that now when I write on paper, I'm drawing Palm-shaped letters, such as the sideways loop for 'k'.
My Palm can read me though
Poor example. First, the time it takes to start the process means extremely little compared to the time lame will take to do its work.
Second, if you're performing a command like this, especially one involving 'rm', you want to make damn sure there is no mistake. With GUI it's easier to have such a certainty.
Third, I can do all this easily in a GUI. In Total Commander for example, I can hit one keyboard shortcut to sort files by extension, then easily select them with keyboard or mouse - or I can hit a different shortcut that will filter the display to *wav files only, which makes selecting them much easier (one keypress). I can then start a GUI front-end to lame and drag-drop the selected files onto it. When done, I can re-select the files (one keypress) and delete them (one keypress, with optional confirmation dialog). The least efficient part of the process is starting a front-end for lame (if I have to burrow into the Start menu), but I can use TC's commandline to start a program and feed the selected files to it if I want to.
Throughout the whole operation I have full visual feedback (e.g. what if the current directory is not the one I thought it was?) and most importantly, every beginner can gradually figure out how to perform this operation.
A well-designed GUI can be operated *fast*. I'll grant that some operations are easier with a CLI, but they are getting fewer and fewer.
That much is true, but even if the program asks you before installing, you often don't have sufficient data to make an informed decision. Windows Update asks me every time, but how do I know if I want a particular patch or not? The only solution is to keep declining for a week or so, then check Google to see if anyone's reporting problems. I.e., a disappointingly low-tech, unreliable solution.
Which is to say - asking for permission is nice and should IMO be required, but it's not nearly enough. the manufacturer should provide reliable, conspicuous and clear information about what it is installing, what it does, how it was tested, what known issues exist and how it can be uninstalled. Otherwise they'll just keep you guessing as they do now. And using the phrase "enhances your Internet experience" in any such document should carry an exceedingly harsh penalty, too.
This is very true, excellent point.
I don't know a general answer to your qauestion, but here's an anecdote. The first time I used a computer was in 1990, in a computer lab at a university in the US where I studied for some time. I needed to type up an essay, and I had never before so much as touched a computer keyboard.
I entered the lab. To my right, a bank of smaller, friendly-looking Mac Classics (but I didn't know what they were). Menus, icons, mice. To my left, a bank of foreboding but somehow more powerful looking IBM ATs. Green screens with text-mode commands, one of which would launch WordPerfect 5.0. I had to make a choice, and a completely uninformed choice, mind. In really had no idea what was what there.
I picked an IBM. Someone instructed me to press F3 for help and F7 to exit. I took it from there, and loved it. By the time I left, I must have known much of WordPerfect's help system by heart. I did try the Macs once or twice while there, but I went back to the IBMs every time. I wish I knew why, but I don't. Maybe theys looked more serious, more powerful. Maybe they adhered better to my uninformed mental image of what a computer was supposed to be like. Today I can list all sorts of reasons why I prefer one to the other, but it's mere rationalizing after the choice was made. I guess Macs looked too much like toys to me, while those text-mode DOS screens looked inscrutable, and hence they looked fascinating.
If I want to see fanaticism, it's enough to see Democrats accused of being communists at a Republican party function.
I wish people would stop with the "you've got nothing to hide" argument. There are legal things which are immoral and there are moral things which are illegal. Then you must also ask "legal - where?" and "moral - where, when and to whom?"
Things once legal tend to become otherwise. If you feel you've got nothing to hide because you've never done anything illegal, you better pray that none of the things you've done ever becomes illegal. Or even immoral, especially if you might one day run for public office or be involved in a lawsuit.
Me having sex with my SO is legal. That doesn't mean I want information about it out in the open.
Me buying large numbers of left-wing books from Amazon is also perfectly legal, but could put me on a no-fly list if I ever travel to the US.
But above all - YOU will not decide what I should or should not hide, nor will any company or any government. That choice is mine.
They take your fingerprint and make you take off your shoes and your pants. (Salon's premium article, but the choice bit is in the segment they allow you to read. I recommend the whole piece though.)
I totally agree, except at this date it may already be too late for the US government to simply start doing nothing for a while and wait til it passes. Of course every day of pursuing the current policies causes even more aggravation, so yeah, a Halt instruction would make a good start. But you'll still have to deal with two or three generations of people who bear a heavy grudge.
Not so harsh at all. Not harsher than this:
While walking through the airport in Dayton, Ohio recently, going through the standard, ineffective TSA drill, I heard a security announcement over the PA that was new to me. It said something to the effect of: "Inappropriate or humorous comments concerning explosives or airport security are prohibited and are punishable by..."
Bingo. And of course European airlines have already agreed to share passenger profiles with the US. (Google cache, original URL no longer works)
" there *are* a lot of bad people out there"
So? There are more thieves than terrorists, and even more shoplifters. That doesn't mean the police have (or should have) the right to inspect everybody's bag as they walk home from the store.
Arguments like yours are exactly the kind that worry me most, because take it a little further and you *will* be arguing for a 1984-style cctv camera in everybody's bedroom. Because there ARE bad people out there and how else is the government going to know who they are?
The point is that while technology now has potential to make the law enforcement's job much easier than it used to be, there are good reasons their job should not be too easy. If a cop could arrest you just on his say-so, there would certainly be less crime on the streets, and you'd have a totalitarian police state. We are not there yet of course, but every time we make it easier for the law enforcement to control *masses* of people, we get a little closer.
Are they really storing the full print, or is the article possibly inaccurate? I was under the impression that biometric systems only store a hash of the original data, password-file style.
Fuuny, yes, but strike out 'free' and replace with taxpayer-sponsored.
It is a bad thing because capitalism is, at best, a means to an end. If you're only out to protect capitalism, you're blindly protecting both what's good and what's bad about it. How about making the world safe and economically viable for, you know, people?
Except the US government is only making the world safer for corporatism instead.
Capitalism GOOD. Corporatism BAD.
Nice catch. I didn't see it for what it was, and I bet most people won't, context makes up for the odd-one-out word.
"That's bullshit. He can always say no."
You can't say no to some people. How about this totally unfounded speculation: Maybe some people lent him money, then he got laid off and can't repay. Lots of ways to make someone an offer that's hard to refuse.
When I was on a metered dial-up, I would (a) connect, get email, download usenet news, (b) disconnect, read and respond to email and news, gather URLs for some sites I wanted to browse, (c) reconnect, send email and usenter f-ups, download and save web pages, (d) disconnect...
How long was I "online"? Does the time reading and responding to email counts? Or was it just the relatively short time I was physically online?
Now that I have cable, I am physically online as long as I'm awake. But I spend more or less the same amount of time reading and typing up email and news, or reading web stuff.
Am I "online" while wget is spidering a website for me, does that count? Or does the time I spend reading some of the already-downloaded stuff count as me being "online"?
Other than that... what's this "television" thing? I wish articles explained terms that might be new to people.
It means a lot to them. They have narrowed down the source. Now instead of placing bugs on ten thousand communication lines, they only have to place one.
Parent post is not a troll. The doom3 site just crashed my Mozilla 1.4. It's the first time I've had this build crash by just navigating to a website. (In fact, I don't think I've ever seen it crash.)
Viruses can infect cell phones.
And an onboard car computer can crash and lock the passengers inside. (Windows CE, no less).
Short on memory, short on imagination.
So you think GPL-licensed works are not copyrighted? Have you ever *seen* GPL? Hint: your parent AC has about as much clue about GPL as Darl "GPL is anti-American" McBride.
Problem is, the voting system provides no way of voting "against" someone. You can only vote "for". If all the candidates spam, all you can do is not vote, which sends them no message at all.
Okay, what if someone does care? What if *I* want to install a video camera in your bedroom? No mistake, you *are* boring, but I still want that camera there. I guess I have your permission?