I think it is pretty clear that the manifestation google's ideology has secluded many who might have backed its progress originally. Is it too late for an open source, peer managed search network to form? Namely, in place of advertisements funding the service, how feasible would it be for the future's mainstream search to be managed by an academic network of global universities, catering to traffic via proximity, bolstering search features through open peer review and funded by mutually beneficial public sourcing?
Many services have proved they can be managed without a nanny looking after everything, is search the same?
To slightly generalise, how long do all of these companies think they should be the ones maintaining 90% of the world's personal data and communication's needs? If there is an urgency now to migrate people's lifestyles to electronic venues then surely centralised and wide publicity based campaigns would be the quickest, however how does this effect the long term economy, culture and education of people looking after themselves? If one were to presume that the future is people maintaining their own computer files the way they can iron and put away their clothes, do these companies care about whether they are prolonging this future from happening? And if people knew the advantages of both methods, what would it take to boycott one and put some effort into attaining the other? Will education forever be viewed as a threat to social economy?
I would recommend this blog for very comprehensive coverage of the independent scene globally, they seem to have been in to it for a decently long time too http://indygamer.blogspot.com/
Yep, an option for using the thumb to toggle layouts should definitely be there too. But since you use the other hand to cradle a phone I think side buttons should also be a feature.
Most importantly, I think a default symmetrically toggled layout would be much more easier to adjust to, important for mainstream adoption.
My dream would be to see half-keyboards with proper key travel implemented on phones, allowing one hand to type in the home position while the other hand has access to a press and hold toggle button on the side or rear of the device which changes between a mirrored-layout left and right hand sides of a full keyboard; i.e. p toggles with q, o with w etc.
I think this would be the best compromise with having to learn a new input and keeping decently-sized keys with travel on a phone.
First of all there is the usefulness of any touch functionality at all on a computer, which I would say increases with the crampedness of the conditions you are operating the computer with. On a desk, the keyboard and mouse is more likely to be closer to your hands than most of the screen space, so for most UIs there isn't any benefit.
For using laptops on the go (or on the couch) it is a different story, two examples to think about: a taskbar on the bottom lies just above the keyboard, so you can directly touch the tasks or shortcuts to access them. It is like an extra row of programmable feedback capable keys. Secondly scrolling webpages is like pushing paper, yes you can use the scollbars but an adobe-reader like grab and drag function provided by a firefox extension makes this a much more dreamlike experience. Directly pressing on links is also simply more intuitive as you are only looking at one space on the screen from will to execution of will. Touch is simply a more streamlined experience, with some speed benefits in certain cases.
To me multi touch is simply an additional dimension on top of this, the ability to not only scroll but zoom ala Jeff Han's implementation. And to be able to right click and use other function gestures of course.
Also I can only imagine how much more accurate cursor recognition would be in response to finger presses with a multi touch capable screen. Current touch screens can be jittery with fingertips, although fair much better using fingernails.
I don't think multi touch is the end of the story, I would also like to see at the very least passive tactile feedback like the one provided by the Immersion Touchsense for mice like the Logitech ifeel. Buttons really should feel like buttons for faster recognition and mainstream acceptance.
As far as I know the main disadvantage notebook sellers have had with adding touch screens is with the graininess it can add to the display. I am not sure how the technology will improve in this area. But the Toshiba Portege 2000, Panasonic R5 and various Fujitsu subnotebooks each around 1kg in weight had options for touchscreen, and these were not even convertible tablets. Most of them were only ever released in Japan though.
I would like such an option of every app I use. Even if I can't choose the specific colours, a window manager option to invert colours would at least allow me to use 2000's technology without thinking it has de-evolved since the original terminal displays in terms of low-intensity screen reading.
In the e-book front Adobe Reader has the option to do this for text documents but not bitmap (honestly I have to take extreme steps to format most pdf documents to be screen readable, adjusting crop margins to kill the whitespace, and sometimes exporting to tiff to invert colours), while the Window's DJVU reader recently allowed bitmap documents to have colours inverted, probably due to feedback from users. An option I adore.
I think the problems people experience in computer sci/eng are systemic of the maths requirements of science majors in general
In my opinion all maths subjects should be dropped - and replaced by major-specific maths subjects (some of these exists for engineering majors). In my eyes the problem with taking a pure/applied maths subject when you are not a maths major is that come end of the semester, the lecturer can't say 'oh ok now you know what to do when you need to use this idea' because they have no idea what you want to do. Instead all they can do is stick to what they believe is the common ground between their knowledge of maths and yours, drilling you on how well you know the ins and outs of the the methodology, and basically I could not give a stuff about how quickly I can perform an algorithm on paper 50 times over.
I would rather be tested on how I can translate the ideas of my major into mathematics. Which is damned well all care about now that I am doing research.
It's worth the money of paying for extra classes. It's a core issue of the science education system. Academics need to be fed anyhow.
Here is my take on the obsolescence of mathematics in the spirit of what happened to Latin after Gutenburg's movable type
Have a look through SciTE, based on Scintilla (which is what the popular windows edtior Notepad++ is based on also)
It uses xml config files to format various languages, so it's easy to edit all at once. And then you can use whatever fonts and formatting for different elements you choose - although the only time I use proportional (and italics) is for comments
I doubt whether either of these points were especially considered under the ruling, but wonder if they will turn out to have a visible effect on the internet market:
1. "Free" physical inspection service Physical stores pay for floorspace and employee time when offering a 'free service' of customer inspection. Customers who might have physically checked out goods at a physical store and then went home to order one cheaper online now have no incentive to not buy it on the spot if both are selling at the minimum price, one one hand protecting the service, on the other effectively ending the choice to pay for this service or not.
2. End-user price The actual price which internet buyers pay often is the retail price plus shipping and handling. If internet retailers are not allowed to undercut the floor price by the cost of shipping the product, or similarly sell through "free shipping", then minimum internet prices will necessarily be higher than physical stores.
I just wanted to say, I think that 95 percent of all exams are cop-outs, whether issued so deliberately or just because they were lulled-up that way. This is not including 'take-home' exams. In a perfect world, rather than spend all the resources we have on lawyers, advertising, physical distribution of virtual goods, cash registers their operators, and who knows what else, we could have more people compensated to learn how to teach and have them teach and spend time assessing students individually or in smaller groups over longer periods of examining, paying attention to who they actually are and what they have to say. And even in this perfect world, there would still be more room for people to become teachers through the returns of what that education gives back. To those who say that machines, computers, paperless offices and trust-based systems take jobs away from people, who might also say that exams are the natural result of logistics, I say - please consider the nature of what education provides a society and how far a human mind can actually go. And please do not give up.
While AMD might be cluing us in on the next big consumer processing fetish, be sure to keep your private details hidden if you choose to go for the Torrenza. The RIA could be bustin down your door any second for suspicion of intent to speed up your multi-peer downloads...
I remember reading about BOCHS emulation on the WinCE platform, which one guys used to install Win98 on a Jornada 720 (StrongARM 206Mhz, 32MB ram). It took 17 hours... the emulated left only 12MB for the operating environment. http://www.hpcfactor.com/reviews/editorial/bochs-2 -1-1/
I would be more interested in technology that can add quasi-3D tactile sense to a touch display. I have been using resistive touch screens with my fingertips for a long time I truly believe that they are more intuitive (eye candyish buttons that you can press are just irresistable) and more practical especially in cramped spaces. For the market to try this of course it would miracle of course, and I think that is in the form of tactile feedback to assure them what their fingers are actually touching... At the moment there is too much potential confusion as to how much pressure is needed, where the cursors is under the mass of fleshed pressed against the screen etc..
I could conceive of two ways this could be achieved, passive where the whole screen receives a vibration based on movement (essentially how tactile mice work), and active where a grid of buzzers paint the landscape.
I don't see how holograms are ever going to turn holodecks in the foreseeable future so I do think touch displays are an important platform to develop.
It's worth remembering that the majority of people who will allow you to rip them off a thousand dollars only do so because they know how easy it is to rip off a thousand dollars from somebody else. Don't think you aren't participating in the perpetuate of that line of thought
Agreed, 'no interface' perhaps on a practical level when it comes to touch and drag, but for the zooming he should probably have said no 'no GUI'. A point I think is just as big anyway (in another context), as setting up some mouse gestures acts extremely well on the desktop today.
As a general idea, any interface which is literally at your fingertips or at your cursor being better than a toolbar or icon is something I agree with. I always prefer using desktop popup menus and application context menus.
I know quake would have brought out the start of many journies into online gaming/fpsing for a lot of people, I will still remember it though as the first transformation of the "3d game" into a tool which the industry uses for promoting something like hardcore novel realism on your monitor. From the library of game textures which embedded endless rusting steel pipes and industrial interiors to low-res digitised photos of inanimate tough growling faces on sports or street characters with prism arms, the conversion of the pixel placed 2d gaming into socially-cued pixel encrusted object interaction with empathy was a glorious and influential mess. On one hand the largely backyard impletation of texturing methods was a new freedom for artists to fast produce practical mechanisms, but in the end a mainstream strive for the familiar attitude took hold. Not before quake do I remember identifying this intention in games, not only was it such a huge leap in technology but the first time I could hear the 'confidence' boiling in gamers who smelt the rising of their long-imprisoned art into a tangibly flauntable showpiece to the world. Similarly, developers keen on harnessing real-world friendly mechanics began to adopt a model of depicting the same hollywood stereotype scenes in endless generations each time with the promise of additional pixels added to some beef cake's yelling mouth.
Many gaming player-types have been made over the last 10 years but the one which makes me feel the most is the group who try and bring attention to a niche of games which go for individual look and make use of game engine technology in an organic manner, in a sense letting the limitations of the format speak its own identity. I don't know what made this so rare in the industry, but something about the pride of developers unable to outrun their own hyping of graphic technology made me think it was simply forgotten about. It's the mix of the great with the bland in games like quake which in some ways has made the current era in gaming a long and easily marketable one.
So what is good, outside Amado and Microsoft. The code is still closed and the concepts still owned, and businesses with no software alternative still have to move the cost to their clients who will move it somewhere else. Good will be what Amado decides to do with the money, act the same way as Microsoft and let his idea remained closed or act differently.
For those interested in how computers play a role in all of this, it can be a great advantage. Allow me to paste the conclusion from my learning site and then pimp it.
Using computers to discover Japanese is all about choice. You can choose the words you look up faster, choose your dictionary, choose what online texts and video you would like to look at, choose which words are cool or relevant to today's culture, choose to stick to copying and pasting from documents or use kanji handwriting recognition dictionaries with printed texts. Assume that anything is possible and know what to search for. These are ways Japanese language learning had not established before because computers themselves never had those choices.
Just for students already started, google is one of the most overlooked tools... you won't always need someone to tell you whether you sentence is right if google tells you 50,000 other people think it is at least "good enough":P
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is pretty clear that the manifestation google's ideology has secluded many who might have backed its progress originally. Is it too late for an open source, peer managed search network to form? Namely, in place of advertisements funding the service, how feasible would it be for the future's mainstream search to be managed by an academic network of global universities, catering to traffic via proximity, bolstering search features through open peer review and funded by mutually beneficial public sourcing?
Many services have proved they can be managed without a nanny looking after everything, is search the same?
To slightly generalise, how long do all of these companies think they should be the ones maintaining 90% of the world's personal data and communication's needs? If there is an urgency now to migrate people's lifestyles to electronic venues then surely centralised and wide publicity based campaigns would be the quickest, however how does this effect the long term economy, culture and education of people looking after themselves? If one were to presume that the future is people maintaining their own computer files the way they can iron and put away their clothes, do these companies care about whether they are prolonging this future from happening? And if people knew the advantages of both methods, what would it take to boycott one and put some effort into attaining the other? Will education forever be viewed as a threat to social economy?
We call it Voight-Kampff for short.
Amazing... I guess marketers can admit anything to anybody but themselves
Did they also carry statistics on which workers were able to touch type, and type in what wpm bracket?
People who can touch type are more likely to view e-mail as a natural way to communicate, less alienating and less stressful.
Of course those people who can type twice as fast as another are also going to complain less in comparison about writing e-mail.
I would recommend this blog for very comprehensive coverage of the independent scene globally, they seem to have been in to it for a decently long time too
http://indygamer.blogspot.com/
Yep, an option for using the thumb to toggle layouts should definitely be there too. But since you use the other hand to cradle a phone I think side buttons should also be a feature.
Most importantly, I think a default symmetrically toggled layout would be much more easier to adjust to, important for mainstream adoption.
My dream would be to see half-keyboards with proper key travel implemented on phones, allowing one hand to type in the home position while the other hand has access to a press and hold toggle button on the side or rear of the device which changes between a mirrored-layout left and right hand sides of a full keyboard; i.e. p toggles with q, o with w etc.
I think this would be the best compromise with having to learn a new input and keeping decently-sized keys with travel on a phone.
First of all there is the usefulness of any touch functionality at all on a computer, which I would say increases with the crampedness of the conditions you are operating the computer with. On a desk, the keyboard and mouse is more likely to be closer to your hands than most of the screen space, so for most UIs there isn't any benefit.
For using laptops on the go (or on the couch) it is a different story, two examples to think about: a taskbar on the bottom lies just above the keyboard, so you can directly touch the tasks or shortcuts to access them. It is like an extra row of programmable feedback capable keys.
Secondly scrolling webpages is like pushing paper, yes you can use the scollbars but an adobe-reader like grab and drag function provided by a firefox extension makes this a much more dreamlike experience. Directly pressing on links is also simply more intuitive as you are only looking at one space on the screen from will to execution of will. Touch is simply a more streamlined experience, with some speed benefits in certain cases.
To me multi touch is simply an additional dimension on top of this, the ability to not only scroll but zoom ala Jeff Han's implementation. And to be able to right click and use other function gestures of course.
Also I can only imagine how much more accurate cursor recognition would be in response to finger presses with a multi touch capable screen. Current touch screens can be jittery with fingertips, although fair much better using fingernails.
I don't think multi touch is the end of the story, I would also like to see at the very least passive tactile feedback like the one provided by the Immersion Touchsense for mice like the Logitech ifeel. Buttons really should feel like buttons for faster recognition and mainstream acceptance.
As far as I know the main disadvantage notebook sellers have had with adding touch screens is with the graininess it can add to the display. I am not sure how the technology will improve in this area. But the Toshiba Portege 2000, Panasonic R5 and various Fujitsu subnotebooks each around 1kg in weight had options for touchscreen, and these were not even convertible tablets. Most of them were only ever released in Japan though.
I would like such an option of every app I use. Even if I can't choose the specific colours, a window manager option to invert colours would at least allow me to use 2000's technology without thinking it has de-evolved since the original terminal displays in terms of low-intensity screen reading.
In the e-book front Adobe Reader has the option to do this for text documents but not bitmap (honestly I have to take extreme steps to format most pdf documents to be screen readable, adjusting crop margins to kill the whitespace, and sometimes exporting to tiff to invert colours), while the Window's DJVU reader recently allowed bitmap documents to have colours inverted, probably due to feedback from users. An option I adore.
(sorry missing link)m athematics.php
http://www.users.on.net/~luffy/diamonds/cultural/
I think the problems people experience in computer sci/eng are systemic of the maths requirements of science majors in general
In my opinion all maths subjects should be dropped - and replaced by major-specific maths subjects (some of these exists for engineering majors). In my eyes the problem with taking a pure/applied maths subject when you are not a maths major is that come end of the semester, the lecturer can't say 'oh ok now you know what to do when you need to use this idea' because they have no idea what you want to do. Instead all they can do is stick to what they believe is the common ground between their knowledge of maths and yours, drilling you on how well you know the ins and outs of the the methodology, and basically I could not give a stuff about how quickly I can perform an algorithm on paper 50 times over.
I would rather be tested on how I can translate the ideas of my major into mathematics. Which is damned well all care about now that I am doing research.
It's worth the money of paying for extra classes. It's a core issue of the science education system. Academics need to be fed anyhow.
Here is my take on the obsolescence of mathematics in the spirit of what happened to Latin after Gutenburg's movable type
Have a look through SciTE, based on Scintilla (which is what the popular windows edtior Notepad++ is based on also)
It uses xml config files to format various languages, so it's easy to edit all at once. And then you can use whatever fonts and formatting for different elements you choose - although the only time I use proportional (and italics) is for comments
http://scintilla.sourceforge.net/SciTE.html
"At the end of the day it is all too easy for this stuff to trigger an unbalanced mind (like my own)"
I doubt whether either of these points were especially considered under the ruling, but wonder if they will turn out to have a visible effect on the internet market:
1. "Free" physical inspection service
Physical stores pay for floorspace and employee time when offering a 'free service' of customer inspection. Customers who might have physically checked out goods at a physical store and then went home to order one cheaper online now have no incentive to not buy it on the spot if both are selling at the minimum price, one one hand protecting the service, on the other effectively ending the choice to pay for this service or not.
2. End-user price
The actual price which internet buyers pay often is the retail price plus shipping and handling. If internet retailers are not allowed to undercut the floor price by the cost of shipping the product, or similarly sell through "free shipping", then minimum internet prices will necessarily be higher than physical stores.
I just wanted to say, I think that 95 percent of all exams are cop-outs, whether issued so deliberately or just because they were lulled-up that way. This is not including 'take-home' exams. In a perfect world, rather than spend all the resources we have on lawyers, advertising, physical distribution of virtual goods, cash registers their operators, and who knows what else, we could have more people compensated to learn how to teach and have them teach and spend time assessing students individually or in smaller groups over longer periods of examining, paying attention to who they actually are and what they have to say. And even in this perfect world, there would still be more room for people to become teachers through the returns of what that education gives back. To those who say that machines, computers, paperless offices and trust-based systems take jobs away from people, who might also say that exams are the natural result of logistics, I say - please consider the nature of what education provides a society and how far a human mind can actually go. And please do not give up.
Ask them to stop partnering with Microsoft's console division
While AMD might be cluing us in on the next big consumer processing fetish, be sure to keep your private details hidden if you choose to go for the Torrenza. The RIA could be bustin down your door any second for suspicion of intent to speed up your multi-peer downloads...
I remember reading about BOCHS emulation on the WinCE platform, which one guys used to install Win98 on a Jornada 720 (StrongARM 206Mhz, 32MB ram). It took 17 hours... the emulated left only 12MB for the operating environment.2 -1-1/
http://www.hpcfactor.com/reviews/editorial/bochs-
I would be more interested in technology that can add quasi-3D tactile sense to a touch display. I have been using resistive touch screens with my fingertips for a long time I truly believe that they are more intuitive (eye candyish buttons that you can press are just irresistable) and more practical especially in cramped spaces. For the market to try this of course it would miracle of course, and I think that is in the form of tactile feedback to assure them what their fingers are actually touching... At the moment there is too much potential confusion as to how much pressure is needed, where the cursors is under the mass of fleshed pressed against the screen etc..
I could conceive of two ways this could be achieved, passive where the whole screen receives a vibration based on movement (essentially how tactile mice work), and active where a grid of buzzers paint the landscape.
I don't see how holograms are ever going to turn holodecks in the foreseeable future so I do think touch displays are an important platform to develop.
It's worth remembering that the majority of people who will allow you to rip them off a thousand dollars only do so because they know how easy it is to rip off a thousand dollars from somebody else. Don't think you aren't participating in the perpetuate of that line of thought
Agreed, 'no interface' perhaps on a practical level when it comes to touch and drag, but for the zooming he should probably have said no 'no GUI'. A point I think is just as big anyway (in another context), as setting up some mouse gestures acts extremely well on the desktop today.
As a general idea, any interface which is literally at your fingertips or at your cursor being better than a toolbar or icon is something I agree with. I always prefer using desktop popup menus and application context menus.
I know quake would have brought out the start of many journies into online gaming/fpsing for a lot of people, I will still remember it though as the first transformation of the "3d game" into a tool which the industry uses for promoting something like hardcore novel realism on your monitor. From the library of game textures which embedded endless rusting steel pipes and industrial interiors to low-res digitised photos of inanimate tough growling faces on sports or street characters with prism arms, the conversion of the pixel placed 2d gaming into socially-cued pixel encrusted object interaction with empathy was a glorious and influential mess. On one hand the largely backyard impletation of texturing methods was a new freedom for artists to fast produce practical mechanisms, but in the end a mainstream strive for the familiar attitude took hold. Not before quake do I remember identifying this intention in games, not only was it such a huge leap in technology but the first time I could hear the 'confidence' boiling in gamers who smelt the rising of their long-imprisoned art into a tangibly flauntable showpiece to the world. Similarly, developers keen on harnessing real-world friendly mechanics began to adopt a model of depicting the same hollywood stereotype scenes in endless generations each time with the promise of additional pixels added to some beef cake's yelling mouth.
Many gaming player-types have been made over the last 10 years but the one which makes me feel the most is the group who try and bring attention to a niche of games which go for individual look and make use of game engine technology in an organic manner, in a sense letting the limitations of the format speak its own identity. I don't know what made this so rare in the industry, but something about the pride of developers unable to outrun their own hyping of graphic technology made me think it was simply forgotten about. It's the mix of the great with the bland in games like quake which in some ways has made the current era in gaming a long and easily marketable one.
So what is good, outside Amado and Microsoft. The code is still closed and the concepts still owned, and businesses with no software alternative still have to move the cost to their clients who will move it somewhere else. Good will be what Amado decides to do with the money, act the same way as Microsoft and let his idea remained closed or act differently.
For those interested in how computers play a role in all of this, it can be a great advantage. Allow me to paste the conclusion from my learning site and then pimp it.
a nese/computerlearning.php
:P
Using computers to discover Japanese is all about choice. You can choose the words you look up faster, choose your dictionary, choose what online texts and video you would like to look at, choose which words are cool or relevant to today's culture, choose to stick to copying and pasting from documents or use kanji handwriting recognition dictionaries with printed texts. Assume that anything is possible and know what to search for. These are ways Japanese language learning had not established before because computers themselves never had those choices.
http://www.users.on.net/~luffy/diamonds/other/jap
Just for students already started, google is one of the most overlooked tools... you won't always need someone to tell you whether you sentence is right if google tells you 50,000 other people think it is at least "good enough"