So many sitcom stories involve the teenager sneaking a cigarette or two. The parent, trying to teach the kid a lesson, makes the kid smoke several packs, if not an entire carton. The teenager gets very, very ill. Soon the teenager wants nothing whatever to do with cigarettes.
So, why not the same thing with porn? Make him masturbate 40 times. Hire a bunch of women to press boobs into him at all hours of the day. Expose him some curable VDs.
He won't like porn much after that.
Now, as for the psychological damage, well, you can be held responsible for that I think.
Many college fraternities have lasted since the early 19th century. Would you read a book by some fraternity president talking about how kick-ass his frat is? Welllll, you have a point, but you might have read such a book if fraternities, as a concept, were relatively new and not yet known to the general public.
1. Hire programmers. 2. Open facility in place known for making good, strong coffee. 3. Dangle said coffee in front of programmers noses. 4. Move programmers to Kenya 5. ??? 6. Profit!
Where's the point about intellectual and emotional maturity?
I've always felt that, at least for some, rabid and rapid defense of something is a sign of personal need to justify one's choices. Perhaps I just spent a good chunk of money on a console or a laptop. Perhaps I think I'm okay financially for it, but, deep down, I'm a tad nervous as most large ticket purchases probably do to many folks. And I can't return it. Then I go online and see just how horribly ill-sighted my choice was, in the foaming, stated opinion of others.
Now, if I am intellectually and emotionally mature, I will probably not respond. But if I'm not, I'm going on the defense! How dare they say my $2100 MacBook is a "piece of dung that a Dung Beetle wouldn't even roll around." I must justify my purchase to complete strangers, dammit! (Nevermind the fact that the dung-poster probably is justifying her own choices.)
I appreciate someone trying to shine a light on this topic, but I hope the author doesn't expect any fanboys to slap themselves on the forward. "OH! That's what I'm doing! All this time! Silly me."
I kind of understand what Palm is going for here, but I sincerely doubt that people who already carry around laptops with EvDO/xG connections are going to carry around _another_ device to pair with their "smart" phone.
Having said that.. here are a couple of things that are interesting to me:
1. It could allow people to leave the laptop at the office. Not everyone has or can afford a really slender, light-weight laptop or, if they do, perhaps this could lighten the daily load.
2. Presume the O/S's pairing with a smart phone does something so supremely exciting, Palm could sell the O/S separately for a much smaller price. Tun it emulated and provide something you _can't_ getting carrying a laptop and a smartphone together. (I'm not sure what that would be.)
I hope I'm wrong here, but right now this looks suspiciously like those old NEC MobilePro systems. Instant-On with O.K. connectivity options for the time, but it ran Windows CE, was dreadfully slow, and the slow serial connection for synchronization didn't inspire confidence.
It's really about bait & switch tactics in their finance arm, attracting people with 0% offers then denying even those with good credit, making them pay 20% or more finance fees. Kudos to them and I hope they win.
But now let's go after other such practices like Rent-To-Own and Rent-A-Center.
I understand this guy's anger. I wanted to try to get away from LED lights, too. I have a ton of them here in my office. So, my wife and I decided we would go on vacation to a remote location where there couldn't possibly be any, camping out in rural Arizona. But I was shocked when my wife pulled me out of the tent to show me that dad-gum SKY was filled with LEDs blinking and pulsing. WTF is that? God's hard drive? His switches? Jesus Christ!
He said a long time ago we have to get rid of the keyboard. He STILL hasn't done it. Dammit, Bill, or billg, or whatever you want to be called, because you didn't get rid of the keyboard all these nice people are going to jail. Oooooh, I could pinch you!
Maybe you should've spent less time on the PowerPoint slides and more time thinking about how your idea was going to (figuratively) grab Billg around the throat and shake him until he said, "That's the best idea I've ever heard since I've been here at Microsoft."
I mean, shit, do you really think you're going to impress the CEO of Microsoft with a PowerPoint presentation, of all things?
I've worked with bosses like that. Presuming you could impress them, they'd never let you know it. They still tell you your idea sucks and that you suck and that they don't understand why they hired you in the first place. They wish you were dead, sock you in the gut, etc. They're bullies. That's the point of the article, I think.
In general, however, I don't know if this story is an example of 'billg' so much as it is an example of asshole bosses, of which there are legions.
$500,000 is a lot of money. But is a loss of $500,000 more significant for a diamond-retailer or a baseball-card retailer? Granted $500,000 is $500,000, but when I saw what type of business realized that drop -- a business in which a single sale can be $5000 and more -- it seemed to me it would be much more significant for a company where a single sale is more in the $500 range.
I wonder if the writer used the most extreme example they could find, but one that doesn't amount to very much?
But: this is Movielink, a service that is renting and selling movies over the internet. Yes, but the question was about "websites," which I took to mean all websites that still force IE, not just MovieLink. I agree with you that MovieLink is shooting themselves in the foot. They are, as you say, "artificially limiting" their "potential customer base." And, yes, there are other examples of this same situation.
My point was more about that there can be other reasons why a site may not support other browsers, that it was more than arrogance or cluelessness.
Wow. So many of the comments here just assume the worst about people. The users are lazy or stupid, the developers are "n00bs" or the people that run the websites are arrogant. And, yeah, I'm sure that's the case for some.
I propose a much simpler answer: Return-on-investment.
Here's an example: When the site was created, it was around the time that building for IE was considered a must-have and getting a presence on the Internet meant untold riches coming your way. Companies hired designers based on those premises. The designers delivered. The companies sunk a chunk of money into it.
A few years later, designing for _ALL_ browsers is a must-have, but... The company didn't make the untold riches they were promised (turns out people would rather buy tube bending by phone and email). They don't see the point in sinking money into a redesign for a website that doesn't amount to much in the company's overall income.
Yeah, it annoys me when Firefox doesn't work on a site, but I have alternatives and, for the most part, some of those sites are indeed being retooled little by little. All of my bank sites support Firefox without question. Something not true a couple of years ago.
The answer to almost all nostalgia-motivated questions like this is no, things were not better in the past. The human mind has an amazing capability to remember good things and forget bad things, so while there were many good games in the past, there were also many terrible games in the past and the percentage of good games is a constant. Right. Ultimately I think this is all very simple. For whatever reason, you've crafted sense of wonder when it comes to your past. Maybe you really had a sense of wonder. Maybe you've forgotten all the bad stuff from that time. Either way, you've got this memory of feeling great that you won't be able to recapture, no matter how hard you try. (Well, except if you take some drugs, I suppose.):-D
I am waiting for the corporate apologists to show up.
"Hey! Why don't you read the fine print." "Gimp! Research your damn options and pay the extra $60/month for a contract-free options." "GUH! I have no patience for stupid consumers."
But, seriously folks, why are these things okay?
Why is small, difficult-to-read fine print okay? Why can't features be in fine print gotchas be in large print? Why is it that a company can advertise something as true that others can show to be false? Why can a company call themselves "perfect" when it's not? Why is it okay that a company obfuscates things from their potential consumers?
But, I know, I'm stupid because I didn't understand the legalese. I'm an ass because I didn't pay the extra fee for the contract-free option. I'm stupid because I didn't pay the extra $60/month.
Of course, I'm stupid until one of these little things hits the one that accuses me. Then they're like, "HeeeeeY! WTF, yo?"
If you think this article is stupid and an insult to your technical prowess, go to the firehose and vote it down.
Not everyone on Slashdot is at the same level as everyone else. While I've known all the stuff in the article for 10-12 years, I'm certain there's a significant number of people here that have no idea about process forking, or what the init process is. Thank you.
I primarily work on Windows-based systems having only touched on *nix-based systems here and there and even though I run a Linux laptop, I still only have a basic understanding of how it all works.
Based upon so many of the comments here, though, it's apparent that one simply must KNOW this information before coming to this site. Stuff that matters, indeed, but that stuff better be for l33ts.
Oh, and good luck with the E911 crap... In the course of a minute, you've gone from the east end of a major city to the west end according to the cells. Tee hee. Imagine the hilarity when, upon hearing a loud noise upon take off or some such, a bunch of passengers call 9-1-1 to get the police to come out. If people are calling because they can't control their pre-teens, I can imaging them calling for this reason, too.
Hmmm.. maybe it's best to just disable E911 while in-flight.
Slashdot Mirror
So many sitcom stories involve the teenager sneaking a cigarette or two. The parent, trying to teach the kid a lesson, makes the kid smoke several packs, if not an entire carton. The teenager gets very, very ill. Soon the teenager wants nothing whatever to do with cigarettes.
So, why not the same thing with porn? Make him masturbate 40 times. Hire a bunch of women to press boobs into him at all hours of the day. Expose him some curable VDs.
He won't like porn much after that.
Now, as for the psychological damage, well, you can be held responsible for that I think.
Cause if it is, they're in for a world of hurt.
Holy GOD it's hot here.
1. Hire programmers.
2. Open facility in place known for making good, strong coffee.
3. Dangle said coffee in front of programmers noses.
4. Move programmers to Kenya
5. ???
6. Profit!
Now, where did I put those tales?
OOOOH! Here they are? Man, I've been looking for them forever.
I've got the brains, my brother Sean's got the looks, let's make lots of money.
Where's the point about intellectual and emotional maturity?
I've always felt that, at least for some, rabid and rapid defense of something is a sign of personal need to justify one's choices. Perhaps I just spent a good chunk of money on a console or a laptop. Perhaps I think I'm okay financially for it, but, deep down, I'm a tad nervous as most large ticket purchases probably do to many folks. And I can't return it. Then I go online and see just how horribly ill-sighted my choice was, in the foaming, stated opinion of others.
Now, if I am intellectually and emotionally mature, I will probably not respond. But if I'm not, I'm going on the defense! How dare they say my $2100 MacBook is a "piece of dung that a Dung Beetle wouldn't even roll around." I must justify my purchase to complete strangers, dammit! (Nevermind the fact that the dung-poster probably is justifying her own choices.)
I appreciate someone trying to shine a light on this topic, but I hope the author doesn't expect any fanboys to slap themselves on the forward. "OH! That's what I'm doing! All this time! Silly me."
Cheers,
Mike...
Would someone out there with time please recreate the badger-badger/mushroom-mushroom flash animation with the following:
... settlement... settllllment
(badgers, badgers, badgers becomes) patents, patents, patents
(mushroom, mushroom becomes) lawsuit, lawsuit
(snake part goes) Out-of Court settlement! Settlement
Etc.
Thanks. I have no skills.
Cheers,
Mike...
This marks the first legitimate shot for a Kirk/Spock TV pilot.
Star Trek
The Search for Spock's Nipple
I kind of understand what Palm is going for here, but I sincerely doubt that people who already carry around laptops with EvDO/xG connections are going to carry around _another_ device to pair with their "smart" phone.
Having said that.. here are a couple of things that are interesting to me:
1. It could allow people to leave the laptop at the office. Not everyone has or can afford a really slender, light-weight laptop or, if they do, perhaps this could lighten the daily load.
2. Presume the O/S's pairing with a smart phone does something so supremely exciting, Palm could sell the O/S separately for a much smaller price. Tun it emulated and provide something you _can't_ getting carrying a laptop and a smartphone together. (I'm not sure what that would be.)
I hope I'm wrong here, but right now this looks suspiciously like those old NEC MobilePro systems. Instant-On with O.K. connectivity options for the time, but it ran Windows CE, was dreadfully slow, and the slow serial connection for synchronization didn't inspire confidence.
Cheers,
Mike...
I feel compelled somehow to vote for...
THE HYPNO-TOAD
But now let's go after other such practices like Rent-To-Own and Rent-A-Center.
I understand this guy's anger. I wanted to try to get away from LED lights, too. I have a ton of them here in my office. So, my wife and I decided we would go on vacation to a remote location where there couldn't possibly be any, camping out in rural Arizona. But I was shocked when my wife pulled me out of the tent to show me that dad-gum SKY was filled with LEDs blinking and pulsing. WTF is that? God's hard drive? His switches? Jesus Christ!
He said a long time ago we have to get rid of the keyboard. He STILL hasn't done it. Dammit, Bill, or billg, or whatever you want to be called, because you didn't get rid of the keyboard all these nice people are going to jail. Oooooh, I could pinch you!
I keed. I keed.
Maybe you should've spent less time on the PowerPoint slides and more time thinking about how your idea was going to (figuratively) grab Billg around the throat and shake him until he said, "That's the best idea I've ever heard since I've been here at Microsoft."
I mean, shit, do you really think you're going to impress the CEO of Microsoft with a PowerPoint presentation, of all things?
I've worked with bosses like that. Presuming you could impress them, they'd never let you know it. They still tell you your idea sucks and that you suck and that they don't understand why they hired you in the first place. They wish you were dead, sock you in the gut, etc. They're bullies. That's the point of the article, I think.In general, however, I don't know if this story is an example of 'billg' so much as it is an example of asshole bosses, of which there are legions.
$500,000 is a lot of money. But is a loss of $500,000 more significant for a diamond-retailer or a baseball-card retailer? Granted $500,000 is $500,000, but when I saw what type of business realized that drop -- a business in which a single sale can be $5000 and more -- it seemed to me it would be much more significant for a company where a single sale is more in the $500 range.
I wonder if the writer used the most extreme example they could find, but one that doesn't amount to very much?
My point was more about that there can be other reasons why a site may not support other browsers, that it was more than arrogance or cluelessness.
Cheers,
Mike...
Wow. So many of the comments here just assume the worst about people. The users are lazy or stupid, the developers are "n00bs" or the people that run the websites are arrogant. And, yeah, I'm sure that's the case for some.
I propose a much simpler answer: Return-on-investment.
Here's an example: When the site was created, it was around the time that building for IE was considered a must-have and getting a presence on the Internet meant untold riches coming your way. Companies hired designers based on those premises. The designers delivered. The companies sunk a chunk of money into it.
A few years later, designing for _ALL_ browsers is a must-have, but... The company didn't make the untold riches they were promised (turns out people would rather buy tube bending by phone and email). They don't see the point in sinking money into a redesign for a website that doesn't amount to much in the company's overall income.
Yeah, it annoys me when Firefox doesn't work on a site, but I have alternatives and, for the most part, some of those sites are indeed being retooled little by little. All of my bank sites support Firefox without question. Something not true a couple of years ago.
Cheers,
Mike...
m
:-)
Don't you mean, "AAAAAAAAAAAhhh..." Seriously, though, I think you might be onto something for the ad campaign.Ah, but wouldn't that make you more comfortable, at least afterwards?
I am waiting for the corporate apologists to show up.
"Hey! Why don't you read the fine print."
"Gimp! Research your damn options and pay the extra $60/month for a contract-free options."
"GUH! I have no patience for stupid consumers."
But, seriously folks, why are these things okay?
Why is small, difficult-to-read fine print okay?
Why can't features be in fine print gotchas be in large print?
Why is it that a company can advertise something as true that others can show to be false?
Why can a company call themselves "perfect" when it's not?
Why is it okay that a company obfuscates things from their potential consumers?
But, I know, I'm stupid because I didn't understand the legalese. I'm an ass because I didn't pay the extra fee for the contract-free option. I'm stupid because I didn't pay the extra $60/month.
Of course, I'm stupid until one of these little things hits the one that accuses me. Then they're like, "HeeeeeY! WTF, yo?"
As though...
m
If you think this article is stupid and an insult to your technical prowess, go to the firehose and vote it down.
Not everyone on Slashdot is at the same level as everyone else. While I've known all the stuff in the article for 10-12 years, I'm certain there's a significant number of people here that have no idea about process forking, or what the init process is. Thank you.
I primarily work on Windows-based systems having only touched on *nix-based systems here and there and even though I run a Linux laptop, I still only have a basic understanding of how it all works.
Based upon so many of the comments here, though, it's apparent that one simply must KNOW this information before coming to this site. Stuff that matters, indeed, but that stuff better be for l33ts.
m
"Because I said so."
Hmmm.. maybe it's best to just disable E911 while in-flight.