Im eagerly watching the development of Chandler, which will be a step further in the concept of PIM. It's modelled after Lotus Agenda, whose designer works in this new project. The promised benefits of its first version are these:
1. Strong information management capabilities. Internally, OSAF refers to this as the "soul of Lotus Agenda". We will provide an extensible framework for users to categorize, organize and retrieve all types of useful information such as URLs, attachments, notes, RSS feeds, etc. in addition to basic PIM data types such as messages, events, contacts and tasks. This generic information type (or Information Item as we call it) will have many built-in and extensible behaviors. For example, any Information Item can have arbitrary ad-hoc attributes added to it. Users can also relate information items to each other in user-defined schemas.
2. Flexible and Extensible Presentation and Interaction Framework. This is a framework to allow the creation of task-centric documents personalized to a user's work habits. It includes a UI widget that is capable of querying for the relevant set of information items and displaying the related attributes and relationships of this set of items so as to provide the right context for the current task at hand. For example, the user can view a project view that displays all the messages (threaded topically), events, tasks and documents related to a certain project.
3. Power email features. These are features to help the user process and organize messages faster while shielding the user from unwanted or irrelevant information (e.g. spam). For example, we will add capabilities to have one-click disposition of email messages under a variety of circumstances. This is not a kitchen-sink approach. We will not add all possible email features or even all features common to popular existing email clients (e.g. support for return receipts and possibly even signature templates for emails). We will focus on features dealing with high-volume email.
4. Continue refinement of basic calendar and contacts functionality, focusing on how calendar and contacts inter-relate with each other and with other information items. This will further drive and validate our information management features
5. Provide sharing and collaboration features around information items (this needs to be further designed and elaborated)
6. Robustness and reasonable performance. Canoga will be our first release that should be safe for real data. We will have assurances about data integrity and recoverability. We will also ensure that future versions of Chandler will seamlessly accept Canoga repository data. We also need to ensure reasonable performance since we are targeting info-centric users who will process and store much more information than the regular user. Our goal is allow users to store and interact with a few million Information Items.
Does Intel need to show in their end product what brand chairs the engineers at intel sit in? Does GM need to put stickers all over there cars saying what brand steel was used for the fenders?
Note that displaying GPL (copyright license) advices is not branding of the original software product (GNU/Linux). It's showing end users required information of their legal rights.
If GM used a steel which required in its license to show some security warnings for end users to manipulate it without risk, GM should not remove those warnings in the final product. That's a better analogy of what GPL does.
But you should judge for yourself whether any of this is enough proof of false affirmations in the Bible. The point of skepticism is that there is nothing "uncontestable" in human knowledge. Undeniable beliefs are, and always will be, the realm of religion. Of course, if you start with an all-powerful God (so powerful that can even make logical contradictions become true) as an axiom, the outcomes can be wide indeed. But I wouldn't call them rigorous.
I wouldn't say that those points you bring to differentiate Christianism are really too distinctive. In first place, you should note that some of your assertions about Christianity don't seem too accurate to me.
Lots of other religions have a concept of actions or works that lead one closer to god or to some higher plane of existance (Mormonism, for instance). This is boldly incompatible with Christianity
No, it isn't. Indeed, Catholicism states precisely that view. It is only the "rogue" Christian splittings of Protestantism who says that. The precise meaning of Salvation is one of the most disputed through Christianity, so it's not even near to an "axiom".
Furthermore, the standard of behavior described in the bible is purposefully not acheivable by any human.
Also not true. From Wikipedia: Most Christians believe that humanity was created sinless, but after the Fall, needed a Savior to restore us into a right relationship with God. Note that the Fall was provoked by the Devil; not being for it, there would be no sin.
Christianity has a built-in concept of understanding that some people will choose to not be christians, and that a humans ability to decide for themselves is core to how god made humans.
Every religion has to deal with people not choosing their own teachings, although maybe this concept is not "built-in". Hinduism is not worried about other religions. I think that Even Islam is tolerant with non-believers given that they obey law.
The point I try to make is, if you don't happen to already believe in the axioms of a give religion, there is no compelling urge to accept them over all the others. This is true to Christianism as well as any other faith.
Maybe you could be interested in Scientific Pantheism. It's a religion mainly for non theists, but skeptical theists like you could also benefit from their teachings. The main point of this religion is to admire all that can be perceived; and if you perceive something that you can call 'soul', well, maybe SP can have an explanation for this.
According to the articles, MS 4 and 5 are the worse of all the series (not because playability but for the replay value). I've played 1 and X (which is like a 2.5 version) and they are great, funny games.
I suppose that 4 and 5 will play similarly the first times, but when you finish them they will be not that great. If I cuould choose, I would buy MSX and MS3, which look as the best two games in the series.
Re:Swings and Roundabouts - Next Chapter?
on
The Mellow Baboon
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
But whether there would be a universal call for a rational, less violent baboon culture all over the world, and all tribes accepted it, then the overall violence of the whole baboonity would descend.
Society is not just the phenotype of a given species genetic inheritance - is a dynamic, evolving system.
Nice try. But then the superiority does not belong to CLI, but to textual scripting languages. You are mixing things here - the CLI is just an INTERFACE to invoke and combine programs, something which can also be done from two-dimensional interfaces.
So Graphical + Scripting is better than Lineal + Scripting.
So, in the near future (or indeed, far past) when GUIs will allow users to click-and-combine functions to automatize their own task in an user-friendly way, will you recognice the superiority of GUIs over one-entry-point CLIs?
I'd say the difference is that with UI design there's more of a question as to what "works" means...
Bingo. And that question is actually what makes UI design difficult: it is not a well-known domain. On the contrary, software development is usually designed after well known logic theories, several centuries old (like, say, particles systems, electric circuits, mathematical equations)...
I don't think Ronco has an attitude of "ui design is some sort of mystic, unlearnable talent". The message is that User Interaction is a learnable but difficult problem, and there is a (emerging) science behind it, a science that is not publicized enough.
The next step in this trend is merging bookmarks and history in a single interface. I've never seen the point in having separate panels for bookmarks and history when they are clearly related to the same task: bringing back pages that I know I've already visited.
A hierarchical (and usually enormous) tree of bookmarks is a broken, broken, broken concept. I spend more time searching a bookmark I know I have, that looking for it in Google. That means something: Google is a better tool than bookmarks.
What I'd like to have is a powerful, a-la-Google context search of my history: I don't want to save "bookmarks", I want to drag predefined "keywords" onto TrailBlazer's history thumbnails; so that when I later select a keyword, all pages that I've marked are retrieved in their full browsing context.
I never get to understand that capitalistic reasoning. Why is goverment bought equipment so different than corporative bought equipment, to consider the first one harmful and the other beneficial? Why a-dolar-is-a-vote is better than a-person-is-a-vote? Someone want to enlight me?
Basically, yes, because the motivations and effects of the licenses are different. X86Free license clause is meant to get attribution for the developers. GPL is designed to avoid a non-free version of the soft to become dominant and replace the free one. The second one is beneficial to me, Turingtest, as a user; the first one is not.
I don't say that there would be a quantity of objects different than two. I say that aliens wouldn't have a common set of rules with us, and so they wouldnt percieve the same fenomenom as "two objects".
Think of a race of intelligent dogs, guided mainly by their olfactory system. They surely would have the notions of 'intensity', 'equal' and 'different' but probably wouldnt have the notion of 'quantity'.
Slashdot Mirror
Im eagerly watching the development of Chandler, which will be a step further in the concept of PIM. It's modelled after Lotus Agenda, whose designer works in this new project. The promised benefits of its first version are these:
1. Strong information management capabilities. Internally, OSAF refers to this as the "soul of Lotus Agenda". We will provide an extensible framework for users to categorize, organize and retrieve all types of useful information such as URLs, attachments, notes, RSS feeds, etc. in addition to basic PIM data types such as messages, events, contacts and tasks. This generic information type (or Information Item as we call it) will have many built-in and extensible behaviors. For example, any Information Item can have arbitrary ad-hoc attributes added to it. Users can also relate information items to each other in user-defined schemas.
2. Flexible and Extensible Presentation and Interaction Framework. This is a framework to allow the creation of task-centric documents personalized to a user's work habits. It includes a UI widget that is capable of querying for the relevant set of information items and displaying the related attributes and relationships of this set of items so as to provide the right context for the current task at hand. For example, the user can view a project view that displays all the messages (threaded topically), events, tasks and documents related to a certain project.
3. Power email features. These are features to help the user process and organize messages faster while shielding the user from unwanted or irrelevant information (e.g. spam). For example, we will add capabilities to have one-click disposition of email messages under a variety of circumstances. This is not a kitchen-sink approach. We will not add all possible email features or even all features common to popular existing email clients (e.g. support for return receipts and possibly even signature templates for emails). We will focus on features dealing with high-volume email.
4. Continue refinement of basic calendar and contacts functionality, focusing on how calendar and contacts inter-relate with each other and with other information items. This will further drive and validate our information management features
5. Provide sharing and collaboration features around information items (this needs to be further designed and elaborated)
6. Robustness and reasonable performance. Canoga will be our first release that should be safe for real data. We will have assurances about data integrity and recoverability. We will also ensure that future versions of Chandler will seamlessly accept Canoga repository data. We also need to ensure reasonable performance since we are targeting info-centric users who will process and store much more information than the regular user. Our goal is allow users to store and interact with a few million Information Items.
What version of Eliza is this "Joanne Pransky" fork?
Note that displaying GPL (copyright license) advices is not branding of the original software product (GNU/Linux). It's showing end users required information of their legal rights.
If GM used a steel which required in its license to show some security warnings for end users to manipulate it without risk, GM should not remove those warnings in the final product. That's a better analogy of what GPL does.
But you should judge for yourself whether any of this is enough proof of false affirmations in the Bible. The point of skepticism is that there is nothing "uncontestable" in human knowledge. Undeniable beliefs are, and always will be, the realm of religion. Of course, if you start with an all-powerful God (so powerful that can even make logical contradictions become true) as an axiom, the outcomes can be wide indeed. But I wouldn't call them rigorous.
Lots of other religions have a concept of actions or works that lead one closer to god or to some higher plane of existance (Mormonism, for instance). This is boldly incompatible with Christianity
No, it isn't. Indeed, Catholicism states precisely that view. It is only the "rogue" Christian splittings of Protestantism who says that. The precise meaning of Salvation is one of the most disputed through Christianity, so it's not even near to an "axiom".
Furthermore, the standard of behavior described in the bible is purposefully not acheivable by any human.
Also not true. From Wikipedia: Most Christians believe that humanity was created sinless, but after the Fall, needed a Savior to restore us into a right relationship with God. Note that the Fall was provoked by the Devil; not being for it, there would be no sin.
Christianity has a built-in concept of understanding that some people will choose to not be christians, and that a humans ability to decide for themselves is core to how god made humans.
Every religion has to deal with people not choosing their own teachings, although maybe this concept is not "built-in". Hinduism is not worried about other religions. I think that Even Islam is tolerant with non-believers given that they obey law.
The point I try to make is, if you don't happen to already believe in the axioms of a give religion, there is no compelling urge to accept them over all the others. This is true to Christianism as well as any other faith.
Maybe you could be interested in Scientific Pantheism. It's a religion mainly for non theists, but skeptical theists like you could also benefit from their teachings. The main point of this religion is to admire all that can be perceived; and if you perceive something that you can call 'soul', well, maybe SP can have an explanation for this.
If you answer the second... does it mean that people who are no longer useful to other, should not live?
you insensitive idiot!
According to the articles, MS 4 and 5 are the worse of all the series (not because playability but for the replay value). I've played 1 and X (which is like a 2.5 version) and they are great, funny games.
I suppose that 4 and 5 will play similarly the first times, but when you finish them they will be not that great. If I cuould choose, I would buy MSX and MS3, which look as the best two games in the series.
you insensitive clod!
Society is not just the phenotype of a given species genetic inheritance - is a dynamic, evolving system.
Bash is a scripting language. The Command-Line-Interface is the interactive interface to its interpreter.
My point is, you can keep the interpreter and change the interactive interface without loosing power.
Nice try. But then the superiority does not belong to CLI, but to textual scripting languages. You are mixing things here - the CLI is just an INTERFACE to invoke and combine programs, something which can also be done from two-dimensional interfaces.
So Graphical + Scripting is better than Lineal + Scripting.
So, in the near future (or indeed, far past) when GUIs will allow users to click-and-combine functions to automatize their own task in an user-friendly way, will you recognice the superiority of GUIs over one-entry-point CLIs?
Bingo. And that question is actually what makes UI design difficult: it is not a well-known domain. On the contrary, software development is usually designed after well known logic theories, several centuries old (like, say, particles systems, electric circuits, mathematical equations)...
I don't think Ronco has an attitude of "ui design is some sort of mystic, unlearnable talent". The message is that User Interaction is a learnable but difficult problem, and there is a (emerging) science behind it, a science that is not publicized enough.
The cooling effect has been scientifically studied. Here is this article describing it (Google-translated from Spanish).
(n/t) stands for no text.
A hierarchical (and usually enormous) tree of bookmarks is a broken, broken, broken concept. I spend more time searching a bookmark I know I have, that looking for it in Google. That means something: Google is a better tool than bookmarks.
What I'd like to have is a powerful, a-la-Google context search of my history: I don't want to save "bookmarks", I want to drag predefined "keywords" onto TrailBlazer's history thumbnails; so that when I later select a keyword, all pages that I've marked are retrieved in their full browsing context.
Thanks AC, that might be the better explanation of the subject I've ever read. Truly.
I never get to understand that capitalistic reasoning. Why is goverment bought equipment so different than corporative bought equipment, to consider the first one harmful and the other beneficial? Why a-dolar-is-a-vote is better than a-person-is-a-vote? Someone want to enlight me?
Basically, yes, because the motivations and effects of the licenses are different. X86Free license clause is meant to get attribution for the developers. GPL is designed to avoid a non-free version of the soft to become dominant and replace the free one. The second one is beneficial to me, Turingtest, as a user; the first one is not.
Here is the Google cache for the site revised in the article. It even works! ;-)
Aaahhh, but is that mathematics or magic? (from their perspective, of course).
I don't say that there would be a quantity of objects different than two. I say that aliens wouldn't have a common set of rules with us, and so they wouldnt percieve the same fenomenom as "two objects".
Think of a race of intelligent dogs, guided mainly by their olfactory system. They surely would have the notions of 'intensity', 'equal' and 'different' but probably wouldnt have the notion of 'quantity'.