The solution he proposes can be thought of in two ways. One is to look at it a shortcut keys of infinate length. IE addition to the 30-odd single letter shortcuts possible on a keyboard (^c ^x etc) you can also type ^ls or ^repaginate. The Caps Lock key is not really a Caps Lock Key - it is a command key that just happens to be where the caps lock Key is on PC keyboards (BTW as any unix guru will tell you, that is where God intended the control key to be).
Ok, but then, instead of holding down a key all the time, it's surely more comfortable to press some key just once to start a command, and then press either the same or another key to submit it. This also gives you the possibility to (a) cancel the command if while typing it you decide not to do it, and (b) to edit the command you're just typing (or did you never have a typo?). Ok, say that first key is actually a combination of two keys (e.g. a "Meta" key and the x key), the submit key is the enter key, and the cancel key is the combination of Ctrl and g. Now what do you get? Emacs!
Yes, you can issue commands per command name in emacs, too (with another key combination, you can even execure arbitrary list expressions). Of course most people consider it less annoying to just press Ctrl-_ than to type M-x undo Ret, but if you prefer the second, you can have it (and if your command isn't bound to a key or menu [yes, Emacs also has those!], it's actually the only chance to execute it).
Indeed, all document-oriented UIs aimed (with various levels of success) at hiding the application "behind" the document.
And of course the OS is something you don't see too much even in conventional designs. Not even if you are using the command line; what you see there is the shell. The OS structures shine through only indirectly (e.g. the file system through the way you access files; indeed this might be the only OS-level part you usually see).
Indeed, I would hate having to frequently switch between two things there (say, between a program to edit and an online reference for some library). On traditional interfaces the other thing is usually just a single click or keypress away.
Well, given that they license the patents only for CDDL licensed code, the intent is IMHO crystal clear: It gives OpenSolaris on one hand the needed credibility (because what is the source code worth if you can't use it due to patents), and on the other hand gives a distinct competitive advantage to it over other OSS code (because it can use those patents, while Linux, BSD etc. can't).
According to the IBM legal statement, the patent license applies only for open source licenses which were listed at the OSI website "as of 01/11/2005" (which I assume means Jan 11, 2005; not November 1, 2005). Unfortunately I don't know how to check when a license was listed there. So does anyone know if the CDDL was already listed at that date? That is, may CDDL code use both IBM's and Sun's patents, or are they excluded from IBM's license through the date requirement?
Actually this only proofs that it has learned that those knobs are dangerous. It doesn't proof that it remembers the event. (To make it clear: I do think that cats and other animals are able to remember). You cannot tell from that behaviour if, assuming your cat could speak, it would say: "I fear those knobs; I don't know why but I'm absolutely sure they are dangerous" (i.e. it developed a "knobphobia"), or if it would say "I fear those knobs because the last time I was playing with them I got a shocking water shower!"
Actually, it's deactivating your firewall, and all that malware from the unconscious enters your consciousness.
Re:Many Young People Never have used Typewriters
on
New Standard Keyboard
·
· Score: 1
My complaint about the keyboard is that there are far too many keys. Half the keys on the board I never use. The Keypad, the function keys, and all those weird buttons above the function keys that are different on every keyboard but do nothing on any keyboard; who needs this stuff?
I do (Ok, not those extra buttons, but keypad and function keys).
This deserves a blessed +5 funny moderation! Unfortunately I don't currently have a potion of moderation, so I just write this post in the dust on the slashdot ground with my uncursed +0 keyboard. I just hope that by doing so I don't trigger an offtopic trap...
I just recognized that there's also a third interpretation:
3. He asks if you have used colaborative fiction writing tools in order to know that it is possible to write fiction about the subject of collaborative fiction writing.
1. He asks if you did know that it is possible to write fiction about the subject of using collaborative fiction writing tools to write collaborative fiction.
2. He asks if you did know that it is possible to use collaborative fiction writing tools to write fiction about the subject of collaborative fiction writing.
No surprise that your internal English parser reported an ambiguity error.
Your applications are used over the web - you don't have to worry about software upgrades or fixing your parent's computer after some installation as everything is done by your ISP.
Exactly that is something to worry about! Imagine you are writing something important with a web-based word processor. You are close to deadline, and all you have to do now is to print out that stuff (or to convert it to PDF and mail it). Nobody would be so insane to update his word processor at exactly this point. But with web applications, it's your app provider who decides when to update. Since at every time there's likely someone who is close to deadline with sonething, so the provider cannot avoid that. And the new version may have a slight bug or incompatibility which doesn't affect 99.9% of all users but completely breaks your file. Now remember you are close to deadline. Sucks, eh?
Of course, I guess MS would dream of web applications: Don't charge for the program, charge for the time you use it! You are slow in writing? Well, too bad for you, you'll pay more! Of course in addition to paying for your internet access (with normal apps I don't need to be online unless I want to explicitly get data from the net or send data to the net; with web apps, you'll have to be online even for writing a simple text!) I don't think they (as well as many other companies) could withstand the temption.
I guess in the world you envision (all apps are web based), paper and pen would get a revival (because writing with pen on paper is just cheaper). The text program would likely be started up only for typing in the final text.
Also, web applications are very volnerable to DoS attacks. Imagine Word would be replaced by a hypothetical WebWord. Now you have just to make a DoS attack on the WebWord server, and suddenly nobody could edit his WebWord documents!
You should read the post you answered to again. He did not write that it would be equivalent to the rest of the universe being accelerated, but he wrote it's the same as the stuff being decelerated from.99c to 0. Which is true as you can easily see at the following example:
You are at a train station. One train goes through with constant speed. The other one starts and accelerates until it reaches the same speed as the train going through.
Now for someone sitting in the train going through, the other train initially moves together with the station, and then it decelerates until it rests relative to him.
It definitely fails in being a good headline. Luanch 2? Does that mean the second Launch? Or do they plan to launch two rockets?
Yes, the article then tells me the missing information. And that part it the essential one: That China plans to send two people up (actually, they'll not send Astronauts, but Taikonauts:-))
Slashdot Mirror
Even better: The GNU/SCO virus!
Ok, but then, instead of holding down a key all the time, it's surely more comfortable to press some key just once to start a command, and then press either the same or another key to submit it. This also gives you the possibility to (a) cancel the command if while typing it you decide not to do it, and (b) to edit the command you're just typing (or did you never have a typo?).
Ok, say that first key is actually a combination of two keys (e.g. a "Meta" key and the x key), the submit key is the enter key, and the cancel key is the combination of Ctrl and g. Now what do you get? Emacs!
Yes, you can issue commands per command name in emacs, too (with another key combination, you can even execure arbitrary list expressions). Of course most people consider it less annoying to just press Ctrl-_ than to type M-x undo Ret, but if you prefer the second, you can have it (and if your command isn't bound to a key or menu [yes, Emacs also has those!], it's actually the only chance to execute it).
Maybe the middle button?
Indeed, all document-oriented UIs aimed (with various levels of success) at hiding the application "behind" the document.
And of course the OS is something you don't see too much even in conventional designs. Not even if you are using the command line; what you see there is the shell. The OS structures shine through only indirectly (e.g. the file system through the way you access files; indeed this might be the only OS-level part you usually see).
Indeed, I would hate having to frequently switch between two things there (say, between a program to edit and an online reference for some library). On traditional interfaces the other thing is usually just a single click or keypress away.
Or with brewing a liquid that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
Well, given that they license the patents only for CDDL licensed code, the intent is IMHO crystal clear: It gives OpenSolaris on one hand the needed credibility (because what is the source code worth if you can't use it due to patents), and on the other hand gives a distinct competitive advantage to it over other OSS code (because it can use those patents, while Linux, BSD etc. can't).
According to the IBM legal statement, the patent license applies only for open source licenses which were listed at the OSI website "as of 01/11/2005" (which I assume means Jan 11, 2005; not November 1, 2005). Unfortunately I don't know how to check when a license was listed there. So does anyone know if the CDDL was already listed at that date? That is, may CDDL code use both IBM's and Sun's patents, or are they excluded from IBM's license through the date requirement?
Actually this only proofs that it has learned that those knobs are dangerous. It doesn't proof that it remembers the event. (To make it clear: I do think that cats and other animals are able to remember). You cannot tell from that behaviour if, assuming your cat could speak, it would say: "I fear those knobs; I don't know why but I'm absolutely sure they are dangerous" (i.e. it developed a "knobphobia"), or if it would say "I fear those knobs because the last time I was playing with them I got a shocking water shower!"
Actually, it's deactivating your firewall, and all that malware from the unconscious enters your consciousness.
I do (Ok, not those extra buttons, but keypad and function keys).
On German (QWERTZ) keyboard layout, that's worse than escape (Ctrl+AltGr+8).
This deserves a blessed +5 funny moderation! Unfortunately I don't currently have a potion of moderation, so I just write this post in the dust on the slashdot ground with my uncursed +0 keyboard. I just hope that by doing so I don't trigger an offtopic trap ...
I just recognized that there's also a third interpretation:
3. He asks if you have used colaborative fiction writing tools in order to know that it is possible to write fiction about the subject of collaborative fiction writing.
Well, there are two possible interpretations:
1. He asks if you did know that it is possible to write fiction about the subject of using collaborative fiction writing tools to write collaborative fiction.
2. He asks if you did know that it is possible to use collaborative fiction writing tools to write fiction about the subject of collaborative fiction writing.
No surprise that your internal English parser reported an ambiguity error.
HEFAO?
But anyway, Java and JavaScript are no acronyms at all, and XMLHttpRequest is only partially.
Exactly that is something to worry about! Imagine you are writing something important with a web-based word processor. You are close to deadline, and all you have to do now is to print out that stuff (or to convert it to PDF and mail it). Nobody would be so insane to update his word processor at exactly this point. But with web applications, it's your app provider who decides when to update. Since at every time there's likely someone who is close to deadline with sonething, so the provider cannot avoid that. And the new version may have a slight bug or incompatibility which doesn't affect 99.9% of all users but completely breaks your file. Now remember you are close to deadline. Sucks, eh?
Of course, I guess MS would dream of web applications: Don't charge for the program, charge for the time you use it! You are slow in writing? Well, too bad for you, you'll pay more! Of course in addition to paying for your internet access (with normal apps I don't need to be online unless I want to explicitly get data from the net or send data to the net; with web apps, you'll have to be online even for writing a simple text!) I don't think they (as well as many other companies) could withstand the temption.
I guess in the world you envision (all apps are web based), paper and pen would get a revival (because writing with pen on paper is just cheaper). The text program would likely be started up only for typing in the final text.
Also, web applications are very volnerable to DoS attacks. Imagine Word would be replaced by a hypothetical WebWord. Now you have just to make a DoS attack on the WebWord server, and suddenly nobody could edit his WebWord documents!
No thanks, I prefer to have my software on disk.
You should read the post you answered to again. He did not write that it would be equivalent to the rest of the universe being accelerated, but he wrote it's the same as the stuff being decelerated from .99c to 0. Which is true as you can easily see at the following example:
You are at a train station. One train goes through with constant speed. The other one starts and accelerates until it reaches the same speed as the train going through.
Now for someone sitting in the train going through, the other train initially moves together with the station, and then it decelerates until it rests relative to him.
And if m is not equal to zero, but p is (i.e. we have a particle with non-zero mass at rest), then this equation reduces to E=mc^2.
Your car is driven by the radio? Interesting. I only know cars driven by the engine ...
Actually you are using wireless power all the time. For example in your car: The fuel is certainly not transported by wire.
Ever looked for an electrical contact on an electrical toothbrush? Hint: There is none, and wasn't for quite some time.
SCO!
It definitely fails in being a good headline.
:-))
Luanch 2? Does that mean the second Launch? Or do they plan to launch two rockets?
Yes, the article then tells me the missing information. And that part it the essential one: That China plans to send two people up (actually, they'll not send Astronauts, but Taikonauts