Well 7mph above a 30mph speed limit represents a lot of extra energy going into a collision. So those whining motorists unable to keep below the speed limit don't get much sympathy from me. Too many seem to think the roads are their personal playground.
I agree entirely. But given the choice of two newspaper headlines "Motorist Drives At 7mph Over Speed Limit & Might Hit Old Lady Crossing Road" or "Thug Batters Old Lady For £20 In Her Purse", which would you rather see dealt with first?
Then I congratulate you (seriously) for doing your public duty - and if and when they find the guy guilty, I'm all for the police locking him in a cell and throwing away the key, or even taking him round the back of the police station and putting a bullet in his brain stem.
But let me put it this way:
A very small percentage of people who use computers are paedophiles.
Or:
A very large percentage of people who use computers consider themselves responsible and moral enough to live as decent citizens within the law without the need for the police to snoop on them.
So please don't link child porn and privacy intrusion because there is no link - it's just an excuse for ineffectual police forces to forget about proper detective work and just assume that everyone is automatically guilty of something by snooping on them using technology.
For the learning-impaired at "news for nerds", the parent's point was that the only thing that should matter to you or me about Hans Reiser is the file system he designed and the programs he wrote, and then only if you use the damned things.
Actually, no. I really meant that Bill Gates strangles puppies & treads on the heads of kittens.
...if the entire Mac is smaller, there is much less chance of scruffy art students trying to blind me with a light reflection from their little silver "Snapple" logo from their "Big Macs" evertime I walk into the local coffee shop.
Plus if it's that small, I can smack said art student around the head and drop his "Mini Mac" into his "Chocca-Macca-Poser-mericano" also!
We have an ineffectual police force that only has an interest in producing pretty graphs that can be passed to the government to show how well they are solving crimes. Less police patrol our streets, more are sat in nice warm police stations sat behind computer or CCTV monitors.
Additionally, what this means is that the seriousness of a crime has little or no relevance any more over here. And since someone driving at 7mph over the speed limit is deemed to be committing a "crime", it's far easier for our police to sit in the backs of their cars with speed cameras in the middle of major roads catching "criminals" than it is to put the large amount of detection resources to solve a rape or murder.
Likewise, our glorious government has chosen to put CCTV cameras everywhere which means that someone who drops a piece of litter can be fined but a mugger in a hooded sweatshirt won't be identifiable on camera. They've done this because despite grossly high taxation here, there is a huge waste of public money in this country with our own Members of Parliament being able to put in unlimited expense claims for anything from decorating their own houses, employing unqualified members of their own families and, yes, even claiming for widescreen TVs on expenses.
So now we have cameras just about everywhere, our government wants to exercise more control over us. Quite clearly, trying to scare us that there are millions of paedophiles prowling the Internet and every street corner hasn't worked because, in practice, there has been no real change in the number of sex crimes against children. Consequently, despite playing the "terrorism" card against us all, they can still find little or no justification to monitor what everyone does on the Internet as they would really like to do.
Therefore, the solution is to turn more of the easily-targetted "great unwashed" into criminals by extending the pornography laws as above - this allows them to continue with their "Internet is dangerous" arguments in the hope of gaining control of it.
Incidentally, I have no personal interest in that type of pornographic material but I am a firm believer (like the judge) in that anything that goes on between consenting adults is up to them - so if they're into violent sex and want to film it to sell it to someone else, then let them get on with it if they all agree to it.
No, I don't. As with lightswitches, there are several good ways of doing one. There is no "best" way, because it depends on context, environment, requirements and users. However, there definitely are good and bad ways.
Okay, I accept that point. But it's still all down to user preference - for example, in Windows XP I find the default desktop totally unusable which is why every PC I ever run it on has "Classic" desktop instead. Sure, it still has it's limitations but my 16 year old niece only ever uses the default XP one. Neither way is wrong or right, it's just personal preference - even though you may feel you have more insight into UIs based on your development experience.
Obviously not, otherwise the phrase "legacy crap" would be pointless. What it does mean is crap that is still around because, well mostly because it's been around for so long. The "Start" menu is an example. Even MS internal UI tests shortly before Win95 was released showed very clearly that it was a totally botched idea. However, by that time it was impossible to change it in time for release, so it stuck around. And in Vista it was kept because by now it is "the way" and the users would revolt if it were changed.
But, with all respect, why is that relevant? Yes, you're an experienced UI developer, you have insight into the way a UI should be designed but if most people have adjusted the way they work to the "Windows way" then what's the problem? Most PC users are Joe Public users, they're prepared to put a little effort into understanding how a UI works but once they can get it to do some of the things they want it to do, like sending an email or editing a photo, they probably could care less about how the UI should work.
I never said I didn't use Linux since 2000, please go and re-read what I actually wrote. I used to be part of the Gnome user interface development group. That was in circa 2000. I gave up that, and that's what I wrote, nothing more.
I have reread your post and unless you were expecting me to infer that information via some kind of psychic link, I can't see that in your original post. I'm sure with your low Slashdot UID number, you're a well-known person on here and many people know your background but I'm afraid I don't know you from Adam. But I digress.
And I could actually argue that whilst I do use and prefer Gnome most commonly on the Linux desktop, it's quite clear that it has some very intrinsic problems - the worst being the hideous waste of screen "real estate" even though (for me) it's far preferably to KDE due to the fact it's less bloated & doesn't have redundant eye-candy I have no need for. Besides which, I'm also a shell programmer and power user so I probably spend as much time there as I do using a mouse.
Again, how do you ratify my requirements against the fact that lots of other people like the "bells and whistles" of 3D desktops, Compiz, etc. etc.? It's quite clear that one size does not fit all.
Yes, you can probably program UIs "until the cows come home" but when it gets to having an opinion about how a UI should look and feel, your opinion is no more valid than that of anyone else.
My view on the whole UI issue is that if I care enough about how a UI feels then given the choice of UIs I have in Linux, it's up to me to get off my fat butt and learn how to configure it properly (which is precisely what I do). For others, a PC is just a tool and they're prepared to just sit and use what's put in front of them.
Ballmer to be knocked flat in the face by a joke rubber chair that rebounds off the wall he threw it at following his hearing the news of the fall in Microsoft profits?
And losing one of his teeth in the process so that whenever he smiles in a photograph, there's a black gap? And because of the tooth he lost, he ends up with a lisp and ends up shouting "Developerth, developerth, developerth"?
Yes, because a user-interface-philosophy takes a much longer time to propagate than a total kernel rewrite. Look at windos. How much of the software there uses UI guidelines that you can't even get a copy of anymore, because they're 10, 15 years old?
If I'm reading this right, then what you're essentially saying is that you believe there should be only one correct way to write a UI? Across all operating systems?
So doesn't the fact that Gnome, KDE, Fluxbox, Enlightenment, XFCE, FVWM, etc. exist on Linux tell you that not everyone agrees with that philosophy? Even I myself, who never uses KDE on Linux, use Gnome on my desktop, XFCE on my server and Enlightenment on my work machine - for differing reasons but appropriate to the environments I want to work in on those machines.
It is much harder to push through a change in your UI guidelines than it is to force a change in even a core API. Legacy crap is much worse in the HCI area than they are in the technical area, and we all know bad they are there.
I'm dying for a better explanation of this paragraph because it seems to be made up of very generic statements. And you're saying that because something is "legacy", that makes it "crap"?
But, to complete the picture, I simply gave up contributing to that effort. I used Linux as my desktop machine until a few weeks ago. So I'm a little up-to-date on what has changed in those eight years, and it isn't that much, really. Definitely nothing that makes me reconsider my vote on the matter.
Like I said, it's your choice entirely and not for me to convince you otherwise. But you've already changed from "not having used Linux since 2000" to "not having used Linux until a few weeks ago" so I'm finding it very difficult to pick up any substance in your argument.
Slashdot Mirror
By God man! So will you call it "the fourth hour" or do we have to put our blasted red jackets on again & sort you bloody colonials out more!
Yes, but I thought Pennywise the clown was okay.
Okay, okay, just the puppy then...
If it's a mullet, then please make yourself known to me for a damn good kicking!
I agree entirely. But given the choice of two newspaper headlines "Motorist Drives At 7mph Over Speed Limit & Might Hit Old Lady Crossing Road" or "Thug Batters Old Lady For £20 In Her Purse", which would you rather see dealt with first?
But let me put it this way:
A very small percentage of people who use computers are paedophiles.
Or:
A very large percentage of people who use computers consider themselves responsible and moral enough to live as decent citizens within the law without the need for the police to snoop on them.
So please don't link child porn and privacy intrusion because there is no link - it's just an excuse for ineffectual police forces to forget about proper detective work and just assume that everyone is automatically guilty of something by snooping on them using technology.
Actually, no. I really meant that Bill Gates strangles puppies & treads on the heads of kittens.
Presumably Sting is helping the RIAA find illegal downloads of "Message In A Bottle"?
...allegedly.
...I guess it's back to the drawing board with OJFS then.
Please stop using NTFS.
Plus if it's that small, I can smack said art student around the head and drop his "Mini Mac" into his "Chocca-Macca-Poser-mericano" also!
Cool!
It's crap and anyone who is into it probably needs to get a girlfriend. Now move along.
Additionally, what this means is that the seriousness of a crime has little or no relevance any more over here. And since someone driving at 7mph over the speed limit is deemed to be committing a "crime", it's far easier for our police to sit in the backs of their cars with speed cameras in the middle of major roads catching "criminals" than it is to put the large amount of detection resources to solve a rape or murder.
Likewise, our glorious government has chosen to put CCTV cameras everywhere which means that someone who drops a piece of litter can be fined but a mugger in a hooded sweatshirt won't be identifiable on camera. They've done this because despite grossly high taxation here, there is a huge waste of public money in this country with our own Members of Parliament being able to put in unlimited expense claims for anything from decorating their own houses, employing unqualified members of their own families and, yes, even claiming for widescreen TVs on expenses.
So now we have cameras just about everywhere, our government wants to exercise more control over us. Quite clearly, trying to scare us that there are millions of paedophiles prowling the Internet and every street corner hasn't worked because, in practice, there has been no real change in the number of sex crimes against children. Consequently, despite playing the "terrorism" card against us all, they can still find little or no justification to monitor what everyone does on the Internet as they would really like to do.
Therefore, the solution is to turn more of the easily-targetted "great unwashed" into criminals by extending the pornography laws as above - this allows them to continue with their "Internet is dangerous" arguments in the hope of gaining control of it.
Incidentally, I have no personal interest in that type of pornographic material but I am a firm believer (like the judge) in that anything that goes on between consenting adults is up to them - so if they're into violent sex and want to film it to sell it to someone else, then let them get on with it if they all agree to it.
I'm not denying that the BSD license allows them to do it - but the core point of Apple selling the work of other people still stands.
Okay, I accept that point. But it's still all down to user preference - for example, in Windows XP I find the default desktop totally unusable which is why every PC I ever run it on has "Classic" desktop instead. Sure, it still has it's limitations but my 16 year old niece only ever uses the default XP one. Neither way is wrong or right, it's just personal preference - even though you may feel you have more insight into UIs based on your development experience.
Obviously not, otherwise the phrase "legacy crap" would be pointless. What it does mean is crap that is still around because, well mostly because it's been around for so long. The "Start" menu is an example. Even MS internal UI tests shortly before Win95 was released showed very clearly that it was a totally botched idea. However, by that time it was impossible to change it in time for release, so it stuck around. And in Vista it was kept because by now it is "the way" and the users would revolt if it were changed.
But, with all respect, why is that relevant? Yes, you're an experienced UI developer, you have insight into the way a UI should be designed but if most people have adjusted the way they work to the "Windows way" then what's the problem? Most PC users are Joe Public users, they're prepared to put a little effort into understanding how a UI works but once they can get it to do some of the things they want it to do, like sending an email or editing a photo, they probably could care less about how the UI should work.
I never said I didn't use Linux since 2000, please go and re-read what I actually wrote. I used to be part of the Gnome user interface development group. That was in circa 2000. I gave up that, and that's what I wrote, nothing more.
I have reread your post and unless you were expecting me to infer that information via some kind of psychic link, I can't see that in your original post. I'm sure with your low Slashdot UID number, you're a well-known person on here and many people know your background but I'm afraid I don't know you from Adam. But I digress.
And I could actually argue that whilst I do use and prefer Gnome most commonly on the Linux desktop, it's quite clear that it has some very intrinsic problems - the worst being the hideous waste of screen "real estate" even though (for me) it's far preferably to KDE due to the fact it's less bloated & doesn't have redundant eye-candy I have no need for. Besides which, I'm also a shell programmer and power user so I probably spend as much time there as I do using a mouse.
Again, how do you ratify my requirements against the fact that lots of other people like the "bells and whistles" of 3D desktops, Compiz, etc. etc.? It's quite clear that one size does not fit all.
Yes, you can probably program UIs "until the cows come home" but when it gets to having an opinion about how a UI should look and feel, your opinion is no more valid than that of anyone else.
My view on the whole UI issue is that if I care enough about how a UI feels then given the choice of UIs I have in Linux, it's up to me to get off my fat butt and learn how to configure it properly (which is precisely what I do). For others, a PC is just a tool and they're prepared to just sit and use what's put in front of them.
Besides which, I cannot agree with your statement one bit - Microsoft makes damn good mice and joysticks!
And losing one of his teeth in the process so that whenever he smiles in a photograph, there's a black gap? And because of the tooth he lost, he ends up with a lisp and ends up shouting "Developerth, developerth, developerth"?
Ahem! OS X (=sold by Apple) is built on a BSD core (=other people's work).
and iDontgiveashit.
If I'm reading this right, then what you're essentially saying is that you believe there should be only one correct way to write a UI? Across all operating systems?
So doesn't the fact that Gnome, KDE, Fluxbox, Enlightenment, XFCE, FVWM, etc. exist on Linux tell you that not everyone agrees with that philosophy? Even I myself, who never uses KDE on Linux, use Gnome on my desktop, XFCE on my server and Enlightenment on my work machine - for differing reasons but appropriate to the environments I want to work in on those machines.
It is much harder to push through a change in your UI guidelines than it is to force a change in even a core API. Legacy crap is much worse in the HCI area than they are in the technical area, and we all know bad they are there.
I'm dying for a better explanation of this paragraph because it seems to be made up of very generic statements. And you're saying that because something is "legacy", that makes it "crap"?
But, to complete the picture, I simply gave up contributing to that effort. I used Linux as my desktop machine until a few weeks ago. So I'm a little up-to-date on what has changed in those eight years, and it isn't that much, really. Definitely nothing that makes me reconsider my vote on the matter.
Like I said, it's your choice entirely and not for me to convince you otherwise. But you've already changed from "not having used Linux since 2000" to "not having used Linux until a few weeks ago" so I'm finding it very difficult to pick up any substance in your argument.
...if everyone goes out & buys one of these, what will the "official" fanbois all move to in order to remain in an exclusive little elitist club?
If it's a new super heavy element then at least give it a super heavy name like "Herculium", "Atlasium" or something.
"Unbibium" sounds like it came from the mouth of a chemist who has just discovered far too much ethanol.
Shut your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and go "Bluh Bluh Bluh Bluh Bluh" very loudly for a few minutes.
Agreed, it is the Apple Fanboi approach to dealing with critism but it does work.