..... Real worlds. You know, the kind with actual girls you can talk to and touch (if you're lucky). I guess for the typical EVE online players, they'll stick with virtual women because it's the closest they can get.
Yes, because the only thing in the world that is enjoyable or that matters is women.
Apparently Good design == dumbing down The existing map is extremely hard to read. Maps should not be hard to read, they should be functional. I do not wish to use my limited consciousness deciphering a map when I could be doing something more useful with it.
The concept of apprenticeship has been around for centuries and nobody ever said it was immoral until you just did.
Apprenticeships have generally always been paid placements, to allow people to, y'know, eat. Unpaid internships are a direct blocker to social mobility because only those who can be supported through them can take them.
Yeah, true. But since pretty much every mobile website I've come across has been inferior to the most thrown together app, I still favour apps. While designers and hipsters favour iPhones, the first cut of most apps is probably going to go that way.
Well, they are, moving all the new functionality announced at Google IO as services provided by Google Play, which will be rolled out to all devices post-2.1.
Ultimately the restricted platform will lose in mobile in the same way as it did in desktop computing. People have different needs, and one vision cannot provide for them.
And yet the article notes that the same application developers seem to have done a pretty bang-up job on iOS.
At what point do you begin to admit to yourself that maybe your platform *is* part of the reason "certain application developers" are having trouble delivering the same quality they've already delivered on another platform?
Er... *of course* it's easier to support iOS than Android? I'm a big fan of Android, and a devloper for the last 3 years, but the idea that you can support 1000+ phones vs about 5 for exactly the same cost is ludicrous. However, the overhead is small, the OS is designed to scale well. Every team I've worked in have had roughly the same speed as the iOS teams doing the same thing.
It's a bit stupid to compare 2 platforms based on one app, where the Android has only just been released & is basically still beta, and the iOS has been out for months. Chances are they didn't start development at the same time.
Nonsense. Just because your contemporaries tend to avoid a word is no reason to abstain from it:
Err... *yes it it*. It's *communication*. Ie it's a passing of information from one person to another, so both people need to understand and agree on the meaning of the words used! (ok, so this particular case the words who and whom are similar enough to be guessed, but if they were very different and the other person didn't understand the obscure & pointless word you used, it's your fault for using it)
I think he was saying that most people don't use PCs to play music therefore it doesn't matter, but then that just feels like he thinks it's not a big deal because it won't affect *him* personally. The argument that "it doesn't affect me so you shouldn't care either" is sadly the source of many corporate apologists.
I wouldn't doubt that CDs are probably a declining minority now, but a pretty big minority still.
I mean really most people do not buy CD's anymore or use PC's to listen to music, Rootkits are no longer an issue for the vast majority of multimedia content users. No need to get your knickers in a twist.
[citation needed]
Do you have any figures to back that statement up or are you just pulling opinions out of your arse?
That you would show such a disregard to people's privacy and computer safety is pretty astonishing, really.
That's BT for you, instead of investing in the network, they flog the life out of the old crap they have to avoid investing in the network, and give more money to shareholders.
That's an insane attitude, what better investment is there than making the existing infrastructure 100 times more efficient? Why would you dig up the roads for no reason?
That the Snooper's Charter will reduce the threat of Terrorism is an untested hypothesis. Prove it will achieve such goals, THEN we'll talk about having it be a law.
Not that I want it, but this argument is commonly heard, and naive.
You cannot run everything based on 'provable hypothesis', some things just have to be decided by a logical argument. How do you prove that all actions are going to have the desired effect before they are carried out? The Snooper's Charter may or may not have a positive effect on national security, but until it's there and can be enacted, we're not going to know are we? It would be impossible to prove that Hitler planned to invade Britain in the 1930's, but a decision had to be made well before he got the change to carry it out.
Many things we have to decide based on what we can logically predict.
I don't really disagree, I just think that the grandparent doesn't get to have an opinion if he can't even be bothered to work out that this isn't a US-based discussion.
Then let me invest, rather than prebuy. Let me buy a tiny part of the profits. But I'm not going to pay to pre-purchase an item that doesn't exist yet from a company with little to no track record. That puts all the risk on me, the consumer, rather than the entrepeneur. That's ass backwards.
Fair enough, you choice. There are lots of people though who will be willing to fund something *just for the joy of seeing it happen*. Not everything in life has to be an 'investment' to get a return. Sometimes, you take a punt on an unknown on the gamble that they are not going to scam you. Recently I got a Radian time-lapse motion photography thing delivered from a Kickstarter. It's a product that didn't exist and now does, and I'm pleased to have helped it happen. I believed in the people who wanted to create it and they didn't let me down.
If it had failed I'd have been annoyed, of course, but that's the risk. My reward is a (pretty good) product cheaper and earlier than anyone else can get.
And for those of you who think this is partisan-minded, the "other" guys (hah! what a joke) would have done exactly the same.
So your point is 'we' are to blame because we voted them into office when we had a choice to vote for someone else... who you also admit would have done the same thing...
Whereas I see your point about 'right' can't be absolute, this isn't exactly a discussion that's new. There are many other countries in the world (eg Canada, most European) that have already had this discussion and set a national service that actually helps people, while excluding artificial extension of life or cosmetic surgery that goes beyond the norm. (eg in the NHS, plastic surgery isn't carried out for vanity reasons, but it is provided for health reasons, eg injury)
So have the discussion, because the existing system is callous, ruled by profit seeking insurance companies, and leaves many people suffering.
Slashdot Mirror
..... Real worlds. You know, the kind with actual girls you can talk to and touch (if you're lucky). I guess for the typical EVE online players, they'll stick with virtual women because it's the closest they can get.
Yes, because the only thing in the world that is enjoyable or that matters is women.
Apparently Good design == dumbing down
The existing map is extremely hard to read. Maps should not be hard to read, they should be functional. I do not wish to use my limited consciousness deciphering a map when I could be doing something more useful with it.
It's a figure of speech you pedantic arse. What a waste of a post.
Same argument I believe goes for MS Office. It may be 'bloated' software, but that 5% functionality that people use, is a different 5% in each user...
The concept of apprenticeship has been around for centuries and nobody ever said it was immoral until you just did.
Apprenticeships have generally always been paid placements, to allow people to, y'know, eat.
Unpaid internships are a direct blocker to social mobility because only those who can be supported through them can take them.
Multi-tasking and multi-window are two separate things. I don't think the current version of Metro lets you multi-window either.
It does in a limited way, you can do a 80/20% split of the screen.
Yeah, true. But since pretty much every mobile website I've come across has been inferior to the most thrown together app, I still favour apps. While designers and hipsters favour iPhones, the first cut of most apps is probably going to go that way.
Well, they are, moving all the new functionality announced at Google IO as services provided by Google Play, which will be rolled out to all devices post-2.1.
Ultimately the restricted platform will lose in mobile in the same way as it did in desktop computing. People have different needs, and one vision cannot provide for them.
And yet the article notes that the same application developers seem to have done a pretty bang-up job on iOS.
At what point do you begin to admit to yourself that maybe your platform *is* part of the reason "certain application developers" are having trouble delivering the same quality they've already delivered on another platform?
Er... *of course* it's easier to support iOS than Android? I'm a big fan of Android, and a devloper for the last 3 years, but the idea that you can support 1000+ phones vs about 5 for exactly the same cost is ludicrous. However, the overhead is small, the OS is designed to scale well. Every team I've worked in have had roughly the same speed as the iOS teams doing the same thing.
It's a bit stupid to compare 2 platforms based on one app, where the Android has only just been released & is basically still beta, and the iOS has been out for months. Chances are they didn't start development at the same time.
Nonsense. Just because your contemporaries tend to avoid a word is no reason to abstain from it:
Err... *yes it it*. It's *communication*. Ie it's a passing of information from one person to another, so both people need to understand and agree on the meaning of the words used! (ok, so this particular case the words who and whom are similar enough to be guessed, but if they were very different and the other person didn't understand the obscure & pointless word you used, it's your fault for using it)
Who says this is the only report there will be? This is a human interest story that could quite easily be picked up wider than just /.
I think he was saying that most people don't use PCs to play music therefore it doesn't matter, but then that just feels like he thinks it's not a big deal because it won't affect *him* personally. The argument that "it doesn't affect me so you shouldn't care either" is sadly the source of many corporate apologists.
I wouldn't doubt that CDs are probably a declining minority now, but a pretty big minority still.
I mean really most people do not buy CD's anymore or use PC's to listen to music, Rootkits are no longer an issue for the vast majority of multimedia content users. No need to get your knickers in a twist.
[citation needed]
Do you have any figures to back that statement up or are you just pulling opinions out of your arse?
That you would show such a disregard to people's privacy and computer safety is pretty astonishing, really.
That's BT for you, instead of investing in the network, they flog the life out of the old crap they have to avoid investing in the network, and give more money to shareholders.
That's an insane attitude, what better investment is there than making the existing infrastructure 100 times more efficient? Why would you dig up the roads for no reason?
What do you mean, it'll never fit and it's too slow? Learn to trim your software first, stop increasing the required hardware.
*cough*entitled*cough*!
Why don't *you* trim the software, oh lazy one...
That the Snooper's Charter will reduce the threat of Terrorism is an untested hypothesis. Prove it will achieve such goals, THEN we'll talk about having it be a law.
Not that I want it, but this argument is commonly heard, and naive.
You cannot run everything based on 'provable hypothesis', some things just have to be decided by a logical argument. How do you prove that all actions are going to have the desired effect before they are carried out? The Snooper's Charter may or may not have a positive effect on national security, but until it's there and can be enacted, we're not going to know are we? It would be impossible to prove that Hitler planned to invade Britain in the 1930's, but a decision had to be made well before he got the change to carry it out.
Many things we have to decide based on what we can logically predict.
I don't really disagree, I just think that the grandparent doesn't get to have an opinion if he can't even be bothered to work out that this isn't a US-based discussion.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
We are talking about the UK, which has a 3/4-party system, none of which are called Republicans or Democrats.
Then let me invest, rather than prebuy. Let me buy a tiny part of the profits. But I'm not going to pay to pre-purchase an item that doesn't exist yet from a company with little to no track record. That puts all the risk on me, the consumer, rather than the entrepeneur. That's ass backwards.
Fair enough, you choice. There are lots of people though who will be willing to fund something *just for the joy of seeing it happen*. Not everything in life has to be an 'investment' to get a return. Sometimes, you take a punt on an unknown on the gamble that they are not going to scam you. Recently I got a Radian time-lapse motion photography thing delivered from a Kickstarter. It's a product that didn't exist and now does, and I'm pleased to have helped it happen. I believed in the people who wanted to create it and they didn't let me down.
If it had failed I'd have been annoyed, of course, but that's the risk. My reward is a (pretty good) product cheaper and earlier than anyone else can get.
Not everything is about making money.
And for those of you who think this is partisan-minded, the "other" guys (hah! what a joke) would have done exactly the same.
So your point is 'we' are to blame because we voted them into office when we had a choice to vote for someone else... who you also admit would have done the same thing...
Nice logic there.
Whereas I see your point about 'right' can't be absolute, this isn't exactly a discussion that's new. There are many other countries in the world (eg Canada, most European) that have already had this discussion and set a national service that actually helps people, while excluding artificial extension of life or cosmetic surgery that goes beyond the norm. (eg in the NHS, plastic surgery isn't carried out for vanity reasons, but it is provided for health reasons, eg injury)
So have the discussion, because the existing system is callous, ruled by profit seeking insurance companies, and leaves many people suffering.
Complaining about other people's privacy in a post that's anonymous? Nice...
You're right. "I don't have Facebook" has taken over from the "I don't even have a TV" as the cry of the superior elitist.
Because http://xkcd.com/1200/
Don't you care about your personal security?