It's very courageous of you to keep her colleagues in danger. Not many people would have the guts to make that kind of call.
Perhaps you should take a look at your own role in the space mission before you start bitching at me. I guess you're in a much better position to make life and death decisions on behalf of NASA? To top it off you began the speculation with your assertion that this woman is dangerous because she made a single mistake. Pot. Kettle. Black. Your ability for self-dillusion is truly epic.
Have you ever considered getting your hand off it for long enough to stop trolling and do something useful with your life.
Nonsense! Two atoms walk into a bar. The first says "I think I've lost an electron", and the second replies "Are you sure?", and the first one says "I'm positive"
The other took a closer look, but the wave function collapsed and the electron reappeared.
Do you remember when it took real skill to be a plumber? To attach a faucet to a pipe, you had to be able to melt solder and shape it with tools while using a kerosene-fueled blowtorch. Get it wrong and you melted the lead pipe.
Given the effects of lead poisoning, I'd be surprised if any plumbers from that time remember their own names...
Serious question: if she can't tether a bag properly (follow the YouTube links to where she admits to not tethering it), what else is she forgetting, and who will make the "sacrifice" for her mistakes?
Yep if she makes a more serious mistake people could die. However if you build a system on the basis that a small error will get you killed, people will die anyway. NO ONE is 100% mistake free!
Should she be reprimanded? Perhaps. I don't know the circumstances well enough. Should she be ridiculed and lose her job. No.
And the other side of the coin is that IT is not a producing industry.
If you argue that an application produced by IT is just an enabling product, you can do the same for the car manufacturing industry and argue that they produce nothing (just enable people and goods to move, but produce nothing in themselves). Clearly this is a flawed argument. The only difference is that the physical footprint of the former (some bytes on a hard drive) is smaller than the later (a car) and can therefore be copied with almost no effort (compared to copying/producing another car).
Seriously though, I feel sorry for this woman. One minor slip up and because the media latched onto it this is all she'll ever be remembered for. NASA astronauts risk life and limb and while the humour's good we shouldn't forget the effort and sacrifice they make should not be dismissed lightly.
Seriously, I can't remember things that happened the same day at times.
Code I wrote weeks or months ago....well give me a while to read it. (I write clean code, but anything longer than 2 months and I need to refamiliarize myself).
Forgetting people's names is really bad. I use to be a consultant so I really had to work hard to remember a name. Once I've been working with someone for a week it's not so bad. If I'm not introduced to a bunch of people all at once it's not so bad. But introduce me to 10 people and expect me to remember their names and I'll laugh at you. I may remember two or 3.
So how do I cope? Concentrate. Make sure my problem solving skills are good. Look things up and make sure they're available to look up!
No see, you are name calling and making statements that aren't true because you really, really hate DRM.
OH I hate DRM alright, but that isn't why I'm calling you names. I'm calling you names because you waste my time by asking for input which you instantly dismiss, not just for yourself but implicitly on behalf of everyone. If you'd just said "I choose to live with DRM, despite the drawbacks" I could live with that. Instead you deny they exist. I also call you names because you're incapable of being honest in your discussions - you constantly change the target when I hit it, rely on sophistry and twisting semantics that doesn't stand up to logical rigor.
Your options now are to deauthorize one of your five. Since you can't physically do that, you go to Choose Store > View My Account > Deauthorize All. It takes all of 25 seconds to do something that probably less than 5% of the populace will ever do
FINALLY. Some actual information. Too bad it actually proves my point and not yours. You RELY on Apple each time you authorise or de-authorise a device. They can easily choose not to support "de-authorise all" for their own reasons at any time. Heck they could choose to remove their authorisation servers at any time (and other companies have done exactly that).
In a real world, we'd continue a conversation about the pros and cons and the tradeoffs that this model introduces and debate what is worth what. But you'll probably just call me a troll, and insinuate that I don't know anything because I have money to burn, or some other nonsense. Thanks for playing.
In the real world I'd have walked away long ago and you'd continue to buy and re-buy your music when you get bitten while justifying it to yourself, while I'd continue to stick with CDs.
For the last time...you can play DRM songs purchased from iTunes on ANY NUMBER OF iPODs
For the last time: FUCK OFF TROLL.
I've gone through 10 computers since the DRM has been around.
In the short time Fairplay's been around you've gone through 10 computers??? No wonder you don't care about DRM. You've got money to burn.
. You are limited to 5 computers. The error you are making is you are assuming that you can only PUT songs on 5 computers when that's not true. You can only PLAY songs on 5 computers, but you can put them on any number of computers you wish.
You're saying you can copy the file to any number of computers. However to play OR TRANSFER them to iPod (or burn them), you have to have them authorised. Otherwise the entire scheme wouldn't prevent file sharing between users. People would just copy them to a friend's computer and never authorise the song on the computer, but the friend would transfer the file to their iPod and the whole scheme would only work to lock people to playing the file on an iPod.
What the fuck is the point of having the file sitting on your computer if you're neither authorised to play or transfer it??? It just takes up space until it's authorised.
Either YOU don't understand how this system works, or more likely, you're being dishonest in your representation of it.
You deauthorize your old computers and authorize the new one.
What happens if your old computer no longer boots? Or is stolen? Or you can't hook it up to the net to deauthorize anymore? I guess if you're ditching your old computer every 6-12 months as you've implied you are, you don't see many failures.
You just plain refuse to acknowledge that there's a problem with DRM. Repeatedly and against all logic. You've twisted the semantics and logic of the argument for the last fucking time. If you want to have dishonest asinine debates, I suggest you run for office.
You either don't own an iPod and don't use iTunes, or you just misunderstand the Apple Fairplay DRM
What's so hard to understand? You're allowed to put the music on so many computers. Once they die you have no way of transfering that music to a new iPod. It may take you 10 years or more to go through 5 computers, but you will do so. In other words you are renting the music (unless you circumvent the protection, which is illegal and some methods result in degraded quality). You're fine with paying for music again and again. Others aren't.
Well you are finally listening! You are right. What you failed to note is that I am openly soliciting feedback from people who most certainly DO have a problem with it, because I want to know what is so bad about it.
I was always listening. What you're actively doing is soliciting feedback (as vaguely as possible), and being dismissive of the concerns that are raised in the response because you don't care. That makes you a troll, and a douche.
Have a nice life. I'm done arguing with you. I simply don't believe you are looking for a fair and honest discussion. You're just looking to misinterpret people's responses in a way that validates and justifies your pre-conceived ideas. That's sad. Sadder still would be to continue to argue with that since you can't win a logical argument with someone who refuses to be logical.
My point with the iPods is that there is no restriction on what songs can play on any number of iPods. The DRM restriction is limited to the number of personal computers (and now I know, TYPE of MP3 player, as well), not iPods. The correct counter-point for you should be, "but if it isn't an iPod, then the song doesn't work", which is a great answer. I don't own anything other than a few iPods and two iPhones, so I've never even thought about that shortcoming.
Restricting the number of computers effectively restricts the number of iPods too. Unless you have magical computers that never require a total reinstall, or never break down. Also what happens when Apple goes out of business?
What you are actually saying is that you DON'T CARE about the restrictions that Apple Fairplay DRM places on you. That's fine. You can choose to buy it. Your choice. However that does not mean that there are no restrictions. It does not mean others do not care about them. It does not mean others shouldn't care about them. This is the equivalent of posting a bug and getting a response from the developer of "meh, works on my machine".
I didn't type cast you. You type cast yourself. You only care about your own limited situation. Well I have a different situation and so do many others, so suggesting that because you don't care about DRM, it's not a big deal for anyone is childish and stupid.
If what was being said were true, only us techies would be affected....and if that were true no one would care (including us techies) because we know how to protect ourselves.
You were closer when you considered it a "possible sincere question".
No I wasn't. You clearly only wanted to hear my concerns so you could dismiss them in an off hand manner.
DRM didn't exist on video games 10 years ago, yet I always had problems with games properly installing
What are you talking about? I have 5.25" floppy disks in Apple II format that have copy protection on them.
I'm just inferring that this guy might be chalking up everyday common computer issues as DRM issues
Yet I've given you plenty of examples of DRM getting in my way for software I've legitimately bought and you've dismissed them as "just the way it is".
His examples aren't all 100% proof-positive they were caused by DRM.
Regardless, there have been others giving examples of DRM causing problems that can't be put down to other things.
One guy responded to my post saying that he couldn't transfer his music to his phone (which plays mp3s) when his iPod broke. Therefore he had to go buy an iPod to get his fairplay music working (or circumvent the protection).
You simply refuse to accept that DRM is causing problems.
I also meant to say DRM is irrelevant in video games as they relate to ME personally. I don't play them anymore and was asking the question framed around iTunes/iPods. I just didn't word the question well and apologized for my lack of communication....and I don't buy DRM laden music so I don't have examples where that's bitten me. Others have given examples. You've also refused to even acknowledge let alone respond to what I've said regarding DRM being a slippery slope and that just because computer game DRM doesn't affect you today, it doesn't mean we should accept it, otherwise DRM will appear in some form that affects you.
Well "practically RUINED PC gaming" is a bit of a leap in logic, since I only offered to accept that flawed logic for the sake of discussion.
Make up your fucking mind you dishonest troll. Either you concede a point in an argument or you don't. Taking it back is bullshit, and shows that clearly you don't want an honest argument.
I used the subjunctive "were" instead of "was" to make it clear that I don't believe it to be true.
I've met your kind before on/. - couldn't have an honest logical discussion if your life depended on it. Moving goal posts (as AC says). Conceding a point then taking it back with some pedantic pretext that your grammar should have told me you weren't conceding the point. Refusing to acknowledge or respond to my strongest arguments and instead focusing on continual misdirection.
In anycase, my point is that DRM doesn't affect my ability to buy music from iTunes and put it on any number of iPods I want, because iPods don't use the DRM. It exists to prevent the track from playing on more than five personal computers.
Now that's just plain BULLSHIT.
- Fairplay encoded files only work on Apple portable music players (iPods) and PCs running Apple software. - Apple doesn't license Fairplay to 3rd parties so other music players won't work.
A decent photoshop would at least use a real picture of a flag with similar lighting to the original photo, so the contrast between the subject and background is so jarring it's obviously been altered.
I have a picture of my wife standing in front of a waterfall in New Zealand on our honeymoon. I used flash, since where we were standing was too dark, but the waterfall is sunlit. Everyone who sees the original picture think it's a bad photoshop cut and paste job because the light is so different on my wife vs the waterfall. Just because it looks fake doesn't always mean it is.
Where I do anticipate (and look forward to) seeing it is for interactive public displays. It would be a very cool interface to have for a 3d map and directory in a mall or an informative display at a museum or aquarium.
Ain't going to happen for some decades. Too many people have enough trouble with public touch screen interfaces. Adding another dimension, and guestures people need to learn in advance, will only serve to confuse and put people off. Speech recognition that works without training just isn't going to happen soon.
ARE YOU ALL RETARDED? I don't mean "you" specifically, I mean the american society.
I didn't realize I'd migrated to America. I'm in Sydney, Australia.
Why the fuck not? It's MY company, why can't I hire anyone I want for whatever reason I want, or for no reason whatsoever?
A small matter called the law. We all have to comply with agreed on laws, otherwise someone less friendly than you might come to your company, kill you, and take it.
"Discriminate" means "to distinguish" and there's nothing wrong with it, except it's often [ab]used as a synonim of "unfairly discriminate". I understand government offices needing a "fair" hiring policy, but why private companies?
I understand why the government can't kill you and take your company but why can't anyone else? See how stupid that sounds?
It's like all the bullshit with a black James Bond. It's not discriminating, it's just that James Bond the character is not fucking black! Why don't they make a movie where Malcolm X is played by Paul Bettany, while we're at it?
Essentially because being a white British man is part of the character, and a black man playing Bond alters that. Now as far as I'm concerned if that's the way the franchise wants to take things, they're welcome to create a black Bond, but I'd have similar reservations. That is NOT the same thing as discriminating against someone for their age if both people have the same skills.
Not everyone thought the mouse was a good input at first. This type of UI may have speed advantages as well as visualization advantages we may not completely see yet. CAD comes to mind here. But I suppose ASCII art CAD is enough for some people:)
Show me speed advantages (without significant disadvantages in other areas) and I'll be pleased to accept change. In the meantime my office is enough of a nightmare without people gesticulating and yelling at their computers like Italian villagers.
I think speed advantages in CAD are more likely to come from more intuitive tools in the software. Right now doing anything in a CAD/CAM package or 3D Modeller requires specialized training. Whereas I could teach someone to edit (ie. touch up) a photo, or teach them to to use a word processor for something basic.in minutes.
The problem I have with it is that there are thousands of bugs opened against Firefox, Seamonkey, Thunderbird, etc that have been open for years that don't get addressed because there aren't enough developers....and yet they have enough developers to keep shovling in new features, even if many (or most) users don't want them
It has NOTHING to do with a lack of developers and everything to do with open source politics and project management
Slashdot Mirror
It's very courageous of you to keep her colleagues in danger. Not many people would have the guts to make that kind of call.
Perhaps you should take a look at your own role in the space mission before you start bitching at me. I guess you're in a much better position to make life and death decisions on behalf of NASA? To top it off you began the speculation with your assertion that this woman is dangerous because she made a single mistake. Pot. Kettle. Black. Your ability for self-dillusion is truly epic.
Have you ever considered getting your hand off it for long enough to stop trolling and do something useful with your life.
What an asshole!
I'd love to call up a harrier and go head to head with another harrier. Rocket packs would be good too.
Nonsense! Two atoms walk into a bar. The first says "I think I've lost an electron", and the second replies "Are you sure?", and the first one says "I'm positive"
The other took a closer look, but the wave function collapsed and the electron reappeared.
Do you remember when it took real skill to be a plumber? To attach a faucet to a pipe, you had to be able to melt solder and shape it with tools while using a kerosene-fueled blowtorch. Get it wrong and you melted the lead pipe.
Given the effects of lead poisoning, I'd be surprised if any plumbers from that time remember their own names...
Serious question: if she can't tether a bag properly (follow the YouTube links to where she admits to not tethering it), what else is she forgetting, and who will make the "sacrifice" for her mistakes?
Yep if she makes a more serious mistake people could die. However if you build a system on the basis that a small error will get you killed, people will die anyway. NO ONE is 100% mistake free!
Should she be reprimanded? Perhaps. I don't know the circumstances well enough. Should she be ridiculed and lose her job. No.
Those people got sick of waiting and started using OS X?
Is that a Ubuntu based distro?
And the other side of the coin is that IT is not a producing industry.
If you argue that an application produced by IT is just an enabling product, you can do the same for the car manufacturing industry and argue that they produce nothing (just enable people and goods to move, but produce nothing in themselves). Clearly this is a flawed argument. The only difference is that the physical footprint of the former (some bytes on a hard drive) is smaller than the later (a car) and can therefore be copied with almost no effort (compared to copying/producing another car).
Keeping food on a metaphorical table always causes me trouble. I can't even recall the number of times I've had to mop the floor.
Engineer's solution 1: Eat off the metaphorical floor.
Engineer's solution 2: Enclose head in plastic bag when eating. (Be sure to put holes in top of bag where food can't fall on them.
> ...a backup in case the grid fails.
It comes with a hand crank?
Mod -1:Troll - Water grid != Power grid
NASA funniest home videos?
Seriously though, I feel sorry for this woman. One minor slip up and because the media latched onto it this is all she'll ever be remembered for. NASA astronauts risk life and limb and while the humour's good we shouldn't forget the effort and sacrifice they make should not be dismissed lightly.
Seriously, I can't remember things that happened the same day at times.
Code I wrote weeks or months ago....well give me a while to read it. (I write clean code, but anything longer than 2 months and I need to refamiliarize myself).
Forgetting people's names is really bad. I use to be a consultant so I really had to work hard to remember a name. Once I've been working with someone for a week it's not so bad. If I'm not introduced to a bunch of people all at once it's not so bad. But introduce me to 10 people and expect me to remember their names and I'll laugh at you. I may remember two or 3.
So how do I cope? Concentrate. Make sure my problem solving skills are good. Look things up and make sure they're available to look up!
No see, you are name calling and making statements that aren't true because you really, really hate DRM.
OH I hate DRM alright, but that isn't why I'm calling you names. I'm calling you names because you waste my time by asking for input which you instantly dismiss, not just for yourself but implicitly on behalf of everyone. If you'd just said "I choose to live with DRM, despite the drawbacks" I could live with that. Instead you deny they exist. I also call you names because you're incapable of being honest in your discussions - you constantly change the target when I hit it, rely on sophistry and twisting semantics that doesn't stand up to logical rigor.
Your options now are to deauthorize one of your five. Since you can't physically do that, you go to Choose Store > View My Account > Deauthorize All. It takes all of 25 seconds to do something that probably less than 5% of the populace will ever do
FINALLY. Some actual information. Too bad it actually proves my point and not yours. You RELY on Apple each time you authorise or de-authorise a device. They can easily choose not to support "de-authorise all" for their own reasons at any time. Heck they could choose to remove their authorisation servers at any time (and other companies have done exactly that).
In a real world, we'd continue a conversation about the pros and cons and the tradeoffs that this model introduces and debate what is worth what. But you'll probably just call me a troll, and insinuate that I don't know anything because I have money to burn, or some other nonsense. Thanks for playing.
In the real world I'd have walked away long ago and you'd continue to buy and re-buy your music when you get bitten while justifying it to yourself, while I'd continue to stick with CDs.
For the last time...you can play DRM songs purchased from iTunes on ANY NUMBER OF iPODs
For the last time: FUCK OFF TROLL.
I've gone through 10 computers since the DRM has been around.
In the short time Fairplay's been around you've gone through 10 computers??? No wonder you don't care about DRM. You've got money to burn.
. You are limited to 5 computers. The error you are making is you are assuming that you can only PUT songs on 5 computers when that's not true. You can only PLAY songs on 5 computers, but you can put them on any number of computers you wish.
You're saying you can copy the file to any number of computers. However to play OR TRANSFER them to iPod (or burn them), you have to have them authorised. Otherwise the entire scheme wouldn't prevent file sharing between users. People would just copy them to a friend's computer and never authorise the song on the computer, but the friend would transfer the file to their iPod and the whole scheme would only work to lock people to playing the file on an iPod.
What the fuck is the point of having the file sitting on your computer if you're neither authorised to play or transfer it??? It just takes up space until it's authorised.
Either YOU don't understand how this system works, or more likely, you're being dishonest in your representation of it.
You deauthorize your old computers and authorize the new one.
What happens if your old computer no longer boots? Or is stolen? Or you can't hook it up to the net to deauthorize anymore? I guess if you're ditching your old computer every 6-12 months as you've implied you are, you don't see many failures.
You just plain refuse to acknowledge that there's a problem with DRM. Repeatedly and against all logic. You've twisted the semantics and logic of the argument for the last fucking time. If you want to have dishonest asinine debates, I suggest you run for office.
How so? I fail to follow your logic.
Quelle suprise. I simply don't believe you.
You either don't own an iPod and don't use iTunes, or you just misunderstand the Apple Fairplay DRM
What's so hard to understand? You're allowed to put the music on so many computers. Once they die you have no way of transfering that music to a new iPod. It may take you 10 years or more to go through 5 computers, but you will do so. In other words you are renting the music (unless you circumvent the protection, which is illegal and some methods result in degraded quality). You're fine with paying for music again and again. Others aren't.
Well you are finally listening! You are right. What you failed to note is that I am openly soliciting feedback from people who most certainly DO have a problem with it, because I want to know what is so bad about it.
I was always listening. What you're actively doing is soliciting feedback (as vaguely as possible), and being dismissive of the concerns that are raised in the response because you don't care. That makes you a troll, and a douche.
Have a nice life. I'm done arguing with you. I simply don't believe you are looking for a fair and honest discussion. You're just looking to misinterpret people's responses in a way that validates and justifies your pre-conceived ideas. That's sad. Sadder still would be to continue to argue with that since you can't win a logical argument with someone who refuses to be logical.
My point with the iPods is that there is no restriction on what songs can play on any number of iPods. The DRM restriction is limited to the number of personal computers (and now I know, TYPE of MP3 player, as well), not iPods. The correct counter-point for you should be, "but if it isn't an iPod, then the song doesn't work", which is a great answer. I don't own anything other than a few iPods and two iPhones, so I've never even thought about that shortcoming.
Restricting the number of computers effectively restricts the number of iPods too. Unless you have magical computers that never require a total reinstall, or never break down. Also what happens when Apple goes out of business?
What you are actually saying is that you DON'T CARE about the restrictions that Apple Fairplay DRM places on you. That's fine. You can choose to buy it. Your choice. However that does not mean that there are no restrictions. It does not mean others do not care about them. It does not mean others shouldn't care about them. This is the equivalent of posting a bug and getting a response from the developer of "meh, works on my machine".
I didn't type cast you. You type cast yourself. You only care about your own limited situation. Well I have a different situation and so do many others, so suggesting that because you don't care about DRM, it's not a big deal for anyone is childish and stupid.
Many non-power-users don't use addons at all.
If what was being said were true, only us techies would be affected. ...and if that were true no one would care (including us techies) because we know how to protect ourselves.
You were closer when you considered it a "possible sincere question".
No I wasn't. You clearly only wanted to hear my concerns so you could dismiss them in an off hand manner.
DRM didn't exist on video games 10 years ago, yet I always had problems with games properly installing
What are you talking about? I have 5.25" floppy disks in Apple II format that have copy protection on them.
I'm just inferring that this guy might be chalking up everyday common computer issues as DRM issues
Yet I've given you plenty of examples of DRM getting in my way for software I've legitimately bought and you've dismissed them as "just the way it is".
His examples aren't all 100% proof-positive they were caused by DRM.
Regardless, there have been others giving examples of DRM causing problems that can't be put down to other things.
One guy responded to my post saying that he couldn't transfer his music to his phone (which plays mp3s) when his iPod broke. Therefore he had to go buy an iPod to get his fairplay music working (or circumvent the protection).
You simply refuse to accept that DRM is causing problems.
I also meant to say DRM is irrelevant in video games as they relate to ME personally. I don't play them anymore and was asking the question framed around iTunes/iPods. I just didn't word the question well and apologized for my lack of communication. ...and I don't buy DRM laden music so I don't have examples where that's bitten me. Others have given examples. You've also refused to even acknowledge let alone respond to what I've said regarding DRM being a slippery slope and that just because computer game DRM doesn't affect you today, it doesn't mean we should accept it, otherwise DRM will appear in some form that affects you.
Well "practically RUINED PC gaming" is a bit of a leap in logic, since I only offered to accept that flawed logic for the sake of discussion.
Make up your fucking mind you dishonest troll. Either you concede a point in an argument or you don't. Taking it back is bullshit, and shows that clearly you don't want an honest argument.
I used the subjunctive "were" instead of "was" to make it clear that I don't believe it to be true.
I've met your kind before on /. - couldn't have an honest logical discussion if your life depended on it. Moving goal posts (as AC says). Conceding a point then taking it back with some pedantic pretext that your grammar should have told me you weren't conceding the point. Refusing to acknowledge or respond to my strongest arguments and instead focusing on continual misdirection.
In anycase, my point is that DRM doesn't affect my ability to buy music from iTunes and put it on any number of iPods I want, because iPods don't use the DRM. It exists to prevent the track from playing on more than five personal computers.
Now that's just plain BULLSHIT.
- Fairplay encoded files only work on Apple portable music players (iPods) and PCs running Apple software.
- Apple doesn't license Fairplay to 3rd parties so other music players won't work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay
"iPods don't use the DRM" my arse! What do you think the files just magically unencrypt themselves on an iPod.
You're talking out of your backside.
As soon as your time is the only time that counts, your attitude will be something other than shitty. Until that time, welcome to the list.
What the FUCK are you rambling about? Am I really suppose to be looking forward to technology that slows me down and wastes my time?
Idiot.
A decent photoshop would at least use a real picture of a flag with similar lighting to the original photo, so the contrast between the subject and background is so jarring it's obviously been altered.
I have a picture of my wife standing in front of a waterfall in New Zealand on our honeymoon. I used flash, since where we were standing was too dark, but the waterfall is sunlit. Everyone who sees the original picture think it's a bad photoshop cut and paste job because the light is so different on my wife vs the waterfall. Just because it looks fake doesn't always mean it is.
Suddenly, his number was getting passed all over the company, and many employees (mostly young girls) actually called the number to talk to him.
New plan for meeting girls: "Hey everyone Val Kilmer's new number is *insert your number here*".
Where I do anticipate (and look forward to) seeing it is for interactive public displays. It would be a very cool interface to have for a 3d map and directory in a mall or an informative display at a museum or aquarium.
Ain't going to happen for some decades. Too many people have enough trouble with public touch screen interfaces. Adding another dimension, and guestures people need to learn in advance, will only serve to confuse and put people off. Speech recognition that works without training just isn't going to happen soon.
In other words: "I learned all this once, stop all further development here please."
No, in other words "If I'm going to spend time learning something, make it worth my while or don't waste my time".
But please don't let me stop you trolling.
ARE YOU ALL RETARDED? I don't mean "you" specifically, I mean the american society.
I didn't realize I'd migrated to America. I'm in Sydney, Australia.
Why the fuck not? It's MY company, why can't I hire anyone I want for whatever reason I want, or for no reason whatsoever?
A small matter called the law. We all have to comply with agreed on laws, otherwise someone less friendly than you might come to your company, kill you, and take it.
"Discriminate" means "to distinguish" and there's nothing wrong with it, except it's often [ab]used as a synonim of "unfairly discriminate". I understand government offices needing a "fair" hiring policy, but why private companies?
I understand why the government can't kill you and take your company but why can't anyone else? See how stupid that sounds?
It's like all the bullshit with a black James Bond. It's not discriminating, it's just that James Bond the character is not fucking black! Why don't they make a movie where Malcolm X is played by Paul Bettany, while we're at it?
Essentially because being a white British man is part of the character, and a black man playing Bond alters that. Now as far as I'm concerned if that's the way the franchise wants to take things, they're welcome to create a black Bond, but I'd have similar reservations. That is NOT the same thing as discriminating against someone for their age if both people have the same skills.
Not everyone thought the mouse was a good input at first. This type of UI may have speed advantages as well as visualization advantages we may not completely see yet. CAD comes to mind here. But I suppose ASCII art CAD is enough for some people :)
Show me speed advantages (without significant disadvantages in other areas) and I'll be pleased to accept change. In the meantime my office is enough of a nightmare without people gesticulating and yelling at their computers like Italian villagers.
I think speed advantages in CAD are more likely to come from more intuitive tools in the software. Right now doing anything in a CAD/CAM package or 3D Modeller requires specialized training. Whereas I could teach someone to edit (ie. touch up) a photo, or teach them to to use a word processor for something basic.in minutes.
The problem I have with it is that there are thousands of bugs opened against Firefox, Seamonkey, Thunderbird, etc that have been open for years that don't get addressed because there aren't enough developers. ...and yet they have enough developers to keep shovling in new features, even if many (or most) users don't want them
It has NOTHING to do with a lack of developers and everything to do with open source politics and project management