I think you've missed my point. I said it was geek friendly, because it is powerful, but its a powerful application that suffers from the typical under development of the user interface. Gimp is the only graphics application I use and I can do just about anything my Photoshop using friends can, but they couldn't or more importantly wouldn't because they've got a well designed application already.
Cloning popular interfaces is one way to create consistency, but good UI design will always stand on its own. People like things that work nicely.
Maybe in 5 years but I think its likely that Linux will continue to gain steam and end up picking up published versions of the originals anyway.
I mean Gimp is powerful, but its only geek friendly and unless OSS developers start codeveloping commercial branches of these projects I have my doubts about the commercial viability of most of them (of course Openoffice aside, though I've got some big gripes about that one too).
If Linux eclipses OSX you can expect to see some wierd marketing tricks from Microsoft. The question is will they continue selling their OS or give it away to compete and focus on applications.
I think your pretty dead-on. But I think open source software's weaknesses could also be its strengths.
Well designed UI's are something I'd gladly shell out money for. I use a system based entirely on open source software and every couple of days I nearly pull out my own hair. I'd like to see open source developers start to mix licenses more so that users *could* support them and in exchange get commercial style support and interfaces.
I think the time of free software is starting to pass and as the movement matures maybe we can focus on open source and be more willing to pay developers to develop.
I think the arguments have been that the US drug policy was born out of the prevailent racism and paranoia at the begining of the last century.
But you can't consider this lightly or you'll never really understand American drug policy. The scary thing about the moral police is that they are trying to do what they honestly believe is right and that makes them fairly complicated.
Besides, drugs are not benign and their effects on society (and more importantly your family and friends) can be disastrous.
I mean there is still addication, amphetamine induced psychosis, neurotoxicity and long term personallity changes we have to deal with. And anyone who thinks this couldn't happen to them or someone they care about is just holding their head in the sand.
And it sounds to me like we agree. Industry isn't as careful as it needs to be and aside from a few raving nuts I think they are the reason otherwise rational people are coming off anti-genetic science. Of course there are the theologists and the crazies, but thats always the case.
So far the best thing I've seen is the challenge response systems like bluebottle (free but very slow) or spamarrest (never used it, costs $34.95 per year).
I've been using bluebottle for over a month now and its so much nicer knowing new emails are really just that. Unfortunately its slow enough (at least the web interface, pop is faster) that I won't start recommending it to family and non-techy friends.
Police are (in my experience) pretty much like you and me. I've taken shit and met a lot of decent officers too. Its got to be about the hardest customer support job available.;-)
But protecting Joe user isn't high up on their list (especially, as numerous other have pointed out, since it wasn't the users computer that was hacked).
They collect all those rights to use against terrorists, pedophiles, music traders, random computer users, emailers and political ideologists. Not to prosecute teenage scripters, at least until a corporation complains. I mean, your just a voter.;-)
We use technology to augment nature in ways not previously possible on scales not perviously possible and our technology is increasing rapidly. The industrialist didn't have the atom bomb. Today we have Chemical and Biological warfare.
Things have changed and we are the steward of this technology. Whats the use of our adaptability? To recognize this and move beyond our simple hand-to-mouth reasoning, to focus on the broader picture. Maybe.
Is this unlikelihood of long term negative effects here on earth. Genetic code is very..intimate. Mistakes can out-live the generation(s) who created them in some pretty profound ways. And industry is no steward of due anything.
Thats my point. As a science I think its great. And a market ready technology I think its rushing to the gate.
I'll bet if open source sites took a little initiative and started using PNG Microsoft would have a reason to fix what is a ridiculously minor bug in their browser. Until then its just another chicken before the egg scenario.
1. Oppose the expansion of software patents to your country, if such patents are not available there now.
2. Insist that standards bodies in which you participate make an an "innovation compatible" (IC) license a requirement for any patents needed to implement a standard.
3. Develop and support software that works with non-patented file formats and network protocols, instead of patent-encumbered ones.
Circletimessquare has brought up some interesting points and I think that merits more then name calling. We learn more from our differences through honest and well tempered discussion.
Your misunderstanding me. I said to have them and move slowly. This can not be stopped, the benifits are too great and that will be seen. Every new science encounters some resistence this should be no different.
Hysterical is still better (IMHO) then indifferent. They may not understand the science, but they don't have to to understand that this has some potentially far reaching implications. And when industry becomes involved (which it is) it takes a lot of fire power. They may be uninformed but I'd rather have them and move slowly then not and be brash.
I think a lot of them would even agree that as a science its important (can't speak for all of them though).
I want to see genetic modifiactions that are at least interesting (this is close, but is it glow-in-the-dark of UV luminated?). I want my little girl a have a frightningly intellegent playmate or at least ludicrisly shaped.;-)
Bio-fantasy pets! Chimera? Mini-dragon? You know it's gonna happen.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you've missed my point. I said it was geek friendly, because it is powerful, but its a powerful application that suffers from the typical under development of the user interface. Gimp is the only graphics application I use and I can do just about anything my Photoshop using friends can, but they couldn't or more importantly wouldn't because they've got a well designed application already.
Cloning popular interfaces is one way to create consistency, but good UI design will always stand on its own. People like things that work nicely.
Maybe in 5 years but I think its likely that Linux will continue to gain steam and end up picking up published versions of the originals anyway.
I mean Gimp is powerful, but its only geek friendly and unless OSS developers start codeveloping commercial branches of these projects I have my doubts about the commercial viability of most of them (of course Openoffice aside, though I've got some big gripes about that one too).
Having a competitor who gives their software away, has tens of thousands of independant developers and uses a fairly different business model has got to scare the sh©t out of them.
If Linux eclipses OSX you can expect to see some wierd marketing tricks from Microsoft. The question is will they continue selling their OS or give it away to compete and focus on applications.
I think your pretty dead-on. But I think open source software's weaknesses could also be its strengths.
Well designed UI's are something I'd gladly shell out money for. I use a system based entirely on open source software and every couple of days I nearly pull out my own hair. I'd like to see open source developers start to mix licenses more so that users *could* support them and in exchange get commercial style support and interfaces.
I think the time of free software is starting to pass and as the movement matures maybe we can focus on open source and be more willing to pay developers to develop.
I think the arguments have been that the US drug policy was born out of the prevailent racism and paranoia at the begining of the last century.
But you can't consider this lightly or you'll never really understand American drug policy. The scary thing about the moral police is that they are trying to do what they honestly believe is right and that makes them fairly complicated.
Besides, drugs are not benign and their effects on society (and more importantly your family and friends) can be disastrous.
I mean there is still addication, amphetamine induced psychosis, neurotoxicity and long term personallity changes we have to deal with. And anyone who thinks this couldn't happen to them or someone they care about is just holding their head in the sand.
And it sounds to me like we agree. Industry isn't as careful as it needs to be and aside from a few raving nuts I think they are the reason otherwise rational people are coming off anti-genetic science. Of course there are the theologists and the crazies, but thats always the case.
So far the best thing I've seen is the challenge response systems like bluebottle (free but very slow) or spamarrest (never used it, costs $34.95 per year).
I've been using bluebottle for over a month now and its so much nicer knowing new emails are really just that. Unfortunately its slow enough (at least the web interface, pop is faster) that I won't start recommending it to family and non-techy friends.
Police are (in my experience) pretty much like you and me. I've taken shit and met a lot of decent officers too. Its got to be about the hardest customer support job available. ;-)
But protecting Joe user isn't high up on their list (especially, as numerous other have pointed out, since it wasn't the users computer that was hacked).
;-)
They collect all those rights to use against terrorists, pedophiles, music traders, random computer users, emailers and political ideologists. Not to prosecute teenage scripters, at least until a corporation complains. I mean, your just a voter.
The Showa Denko disaster? Try googling and see what comes up?
"Not ignorance, but ignorance of ignorance, is the death of knowledge."
-Alfred North Whitehead
We use technology to augment nature in ways not previously possible on scales not perviously possible and our technology is increasing rapidly. The industrialist didn't have the atom bomb. Today we have Chemical and Biological warfare.
Things have changed and we are the steward of this technology. Whats the use of our adaptability? To recognize this and move beyond our simple hand-to-mouth reasoning, to focus on the broader picture. Maybe.
For the catastrophies that end them. Then their cautious.
Is this unlikelihood of long term negative effects here on earth. Genetic code is very..intimate. Mistakes can out-live the generation(s) who created them in some pretty profound ways. And industry is no steward of due anything.
Thats my point. As a science I think its great. And a market ready technology I think its rushing to the gate.
I'll bet if open source sites took a little initiative and started using PNG Microsoft would have a reason to fix what is a ridiculously minor bug in their browser. Until then its just another chicken before the egg scenario.
And don't forget:
20 June 2003: The LZW patent expires today in the United States. However, patents on LZW are still in force in other countries. Please continue to refrain from using GIFs. More importantly, do not allow your communications to be censored by the whims of patent holders. Things you can do: Sign the petition: Burn all GIF's.
Sorry about the redundant question. Is it Linux friendly? Sounds interesting enough.
Circletimessquare has brought up some interesting points and I think that merits more then name calling. We learn more from our differences through honest and well tempered discussion.
I'd love to see the ref, but thats an interesting answer. Coming soon, to a Sushi bar near you. ;-)
Why would you?
Because he can think he must think. The onus is on us, to do no harm.
Your misunderstanding me. I said to have them and move slowly. This can not be stopped, the benifits are too great and that will be seen. Every new science encounters some resistence this should be no different.
Hysterical is still better (IMHO) then indifferent. They may not understand the science, but they don't have to to understand that this has some potentially far reaching implications. And when industry becomes involved (which it is) it takes a lot of fire power. They may be uninformed but I'd rather have them and move slowly then not and be brash.
I think a lot of them would even agree that as a science its important (can't speak for all of them though).
I want to see genetic modifiactions that are at least interesting (this is close, but is it glow-in-the-dark of UV luminated?). I want my little girl a have a frightningly intellegent playmate or at least ludicrisly shaped. ;-)
Bio-fantasy pets! Chimera? Mini-dragon? You know it's gonna happen.
What is it did breed and managed to make a previously edible species of fish inedible?
Thats the kind of situation that I'd be curious about. They may be relatively unimportant traits and still have some far reaching effects.
I don't know if it is, but that reads like a perfect troll.
;-)
the onus is on someone to PROVE a bad effect
Which Orson Wells type future did this happen in?