Governments do have an essential role in capitalism, as in free software, and it's the role you identify: to provide rules that enable the free exchange of goods and punish those who abuse the system and steal.
But as I (and many others) understand capitalism, the rules are already stablished and they revolve around private property. My point is that if you change the rules and make state support public commons, it shouldn't be still called capitalism (maybe open-sourceism?).
Excuse me, how does your rant about gayness differ from religion (except that same-sex attraction is NOT a choice, and I'm not that sure about religious beliefs)?
But why would you want to make a separate snapshot? When talkin about laws, maybe it would be better to have a "live" corpus used day by day than a x-years old snapshot.
I don't agree that Open Source is a form of capitalis, but then I also don't agree that capitalism and liberalism are synonims.
To me, capitalism allows big ammounts of wealth to be controlled by a single individual or small group; and the goverment protects that centralized control in the name of private property.
Open source (specially in it's GPL form) is designed to avoid that kind of control from a single source. Government only intervenes to avoid one player from taking away what is, essentially, a public property. So it's goal is freedom, but it doesn't allow freedom to accumulate capital with government protection.
# I want to be have a large virtual desktop which I can zoom out away from to show groups of screen objects (windows, icons, local backdrops, etc.), and zoom in on to show the objects close up. The objects should not all be in the same plane, so when I zoom in on one set of object I can still see ("far off") other tiny sets of objects. One effect of that would be to allow hiearchical groups of objects. # I want to take a group of objects and wrap them in a box, which I can label arbitrarily. The box should have variable opacity, perhaps password security, and should respond to signals (it should be a process). # I don't want to have to use a pointing device. If necessary, I'd rather use a subvocal microphone/sensor, keyboard mouse driver, eyeglasses, or a chin strap than a mouse, touch pad, trackball, or nipple.
Then, you should support the Archy project so that it achieves it's full potential.
You could also say that commands are modes, but it's simply not true.
A quasimode is not a mode. The mode is persistent, the quasimode requires a user action to exist and dissapears when the user is not maintaining it. That's a BIG difference with respect to users attention.
I don't think that Archy will totally replace GUIs (the same way that GUIs haven't totally replaced CLIs), but it will provide a model to follow for them. System-wide commands and non-blocking alerts are two benefits that are already implemented in Mac OS X.
Some hard core users, good typists but bad programmers (secretaries, doctors, lawyers, all those who just "don't get" the filesystem and "open and close" operations) will use an Archy-like system because it makes more sense to them (all my data is always accesible and it doesn't dissapear if I turn off the machine? Good!). The rest of GUIs will tend to be more Archy-fied, and mouse will be more used for navigation and less for command invocation.
I don't think that Archy will totally replace GUIs (the same way that GUIs haven't totally replaced CLIs), but it will provide a model to follow for them. System-wide commands and non-blocking alerts are two benefits that are already implemented in Mac OS X.
Some hard core typists but bad programmers (secretaries, doctors, lawyers, all those who just "don't get" the filesystem and "open and close" operations) will use an Archy-like system because it makes more sense to them (all my data is always accesible and it doesn't dissapear if I turn off the machine? Good!). The rest of GUIs will tend to be more Archy-fied.
forced automatic saving which takes word processing back to the BETTER MAKE SURE YOU WANT TO HIT THAT KEY days of the manual typewriter Ah, but did manual typewriters have an automatic undo? Archy does, for everything (except printers).
Universal Undo is regarded as one of the main advances that a system can provide for ease of use.
The fact is that as we try to sync computing to the real-world, we're creating false hopes that the "stuff" in the computer will work like stuff in the real world. That's where Archy is useful - it doesn't try to imitate nothing in the real world, it just looks like a computer. It allows to manage streams of data in a highly efficient way. Of course, you will have to learn it before you can use it (thankfully, the interface is very easy to learn).
The construction of analogies (desktop, files, etc) was good in the 90s to educate people, but now it's time to largely deprecate it.
I think the fact that you actually posted your response on the web proves your point wrong. With blogs and news sites like Fark, Technocrat and Slashdot, end-users can use the web.
Yes, and you have to learn a different interface for each site.
Remember when you had to use ftp, gopher, mail, BBS... to access the Internet? The web browser created a unified environment for accessing documents, but not for publishing. I see Archy as the unified interface for creating content.
The web is read-only (for end users, at least). Archy would enable them to Write and Edit the web, with the same interface used to write and edit their desktop data.
Actually the web is very text-centric, so the extended textual capabilities of Archy would be welcome.
Actually they've learned the lessons from the last 50 years, and they're trying to solve the problems. Mainly the big problems from the last 20 years' GUIs.
Slashdot Mirror
I had the same feelings with an underdog, Another world. It has a similar unexpected "Run for your life!" scene.
Governments do have an essential role in capitalism, as in free software, and it's the role you identify: to provide rules that enable the free exchange of goods and punish those who abuse the system and steal.
But as I (and many others) understand capitalism, the rules are already stablished and they revolve around private property. My point is that if you change the rules and make state support public commons, it shouldn't be still called capitalism (maybe open-sourceism?).
And I believe that oligarchy is possible inside (old-meaning) capitalism, since it's based on the defense of private property - even when this defense collides with market efficiency.
So you're saying that they also shouldn't have employee benefits for heterosexual domestic partners?
Excuse me, how does your rant about gayness differ from religion (except that same-sex attraction is NOT a choice, and I'm not that sure about religious beliefs)?
An Apple a day keeps the bigot away?
What, do you suggest this gay thingy has anything to do with Apple users?
It's an action to undermine morale of Apple users.
But why would you want to make a separate snapshot? When talkin about laws, maybe it would be better to have a "live" corpus used day by day than a x-years old snapshot.
I don't agree that Open Source is a form of capitalis, but then I also don't agree that capitalism and liberalism are synonims.
To me, capitalism allows big ammounts of wealth to be controlled by a single individual or small group; and the goverment protects that centralized control in the name of private property.
Open source (specially in it's GPL form) is designed to avoid that kind of control from a single source. Government only intervenes to avoid one player from taking away what is, essentially, a public property. So it's goal is freedom, but it doesn't allow freedom to accumulate capital with government protection.
So, you don't believe that finding the nth decimal of PI is science? Text encription? Finding topological properties of geometric objects?
If it isn't science, what is mathematics?
I guess that soon this feature will also interact with Google Desktop and provide a "recent documents" view organized by calendar.
This is what Microsoft promised for Longhorn with the name of Stuff I've Seen. Google will be able to bring it into XP. Interesting.
# I want to be have a large virtual desktop which I can zoom out away from to show groups of screen objects (windows, icons, local backdrops, etc.), and zoom in on to show the objects close up. The objects should not all be in the same plane, so when I zoom in on one set of object I can still see ("far off") other tiny sets of objects. One effect of that would be to allow hiearchical groups of objects.
# I want to take a group of objects and wrap them in a box, which I can label arbitrarily. The box should have variable opacity, perhaps password security, and should respond to signals (it should be a process).
# I don't want to have to use a pointing device. If necessary, I'd rather use a subvocal microphone/sensor, keyboard mouse driver, eyeglasses, or a chin strap than a mouse, touch pad, trackball, or nipple.
Then, you should support the Archy project so that it achieves it's full potential.
Hey, how did you know I have a Gmail account?
Check your facts - Firefox doesn't have gestures out of the box, it's a plugin.
Being unfunny doesn't make it offtopic. The article was about a metal body of Bender, right?
Not a good image for the product, if he needs hitchhiking.
You could also say that commands are modes, but it's simply not true.
A quasimode is not a mode. The mode is persistent, the quasimode requires a user action to exist and dissapears when the user is not maintaining it. That's a BIG difference with respect to users attention.
There's a "Tilde" command that introduces a tilde. It won't be needed with the special Archy keyboard, of course.
I don't think that Archy will totally replace GUIs (the same way that GUIs haven't totally replaced CLIs), but it will provide a model to follow for them. System-wide commands and non-blocking alerts are two benefits that are already implemented in Mac OS X.
Some hard core users, good typists but bad programmers (secretaries, doctors, lawyers, all those who just "don't get" the filesystem and "open and close" operations) will use an Archy-like system because it makes more sense to them (all my data is always accesible and it doesn't dissapear if I turn off the machine? Good!). The rest of GUIs will tend to be more Archy-fied, and mouse will be more used for navigation and less for command invocation.
I don't think that Archy will totally replace GUIs (the same way that GUIs haven't totally replaced CLIs), but it will provide a model to follow for them. System-wide commands and non-blocking alerts are two benefits that are already implemented in Mac OS X.
Some hard core typists but bad programmers (secretaries, doctors, lawyers, all those who just "don't get" the filesystem and "open and close" operations) will use an Archy-like system because it makes more sense to them (all my data is always accesible and it doesn't dissapear if I turn off the machine? Good!). The rest of GUIs will tend to be more Archy-fied.
Triple-tapping to repeat doesn't count as invocation of a mode?
No, that's called a Quasimode.
forced automatic saving which takes word processing back to the BETTER MAKE SURE YOU WANT TO HIT THAT KEY days of the manual typewriter
Ah, but did manual typewriters have an automatic undo? Archy does, for everything (except printers).
Universal Undo is regarded as one of the main advances that a system can provide for ease of use.
The fact is that as we try to sync computing to the real-world, we're creating false hopes that the "stuff" in the computer will work like stuff in the real world.
That's where Archy is useful - it doesn't try to imitate nothing in the real world, it just looks like a computer. It allows to manage streams of data in a highly efficient way. Of course, you will have to learn it before you can use it (thankfully, the interface is very easy to learn).
The construction of analogies (desktop, files, etc) was good in the 90s to educate people, but now it's time to largely deprecate it.
I think the fact that you actually posted your response on the web proves your point wrong. With blogs and news sites like Fark, Technocrat and Slashdot, end-users can use the web.
Yes, and you have to learn a different interface for each site.
Remember when you had to use ftp, gopher, mail, BBS... to access the Internet? The web browser created a unified environment for accessing documents, but not for publishing. I see Archy as the unified interface for creating content.
The web is read-only (for end users, at least). Archy would enable them to Write and Edit the web, with the same interface used to write and edit their desktop data.
Actually the web is very text-centric, so the extended textual capabilities of Archy would be welcome.
Actually they've learned the lessons from the last 50 years, and they're trying to solve the problems. Mainly the big problems from the last 20 years' GUIs.