When people say "People do/have/are/etc." they actually mean "I do/have/are/etc." But it's more comforting to believe you're part of a crowd, even when you're not.
There are a lot of people who have never had a proper tomato. The difference between one that fully ripened on the vine and a supermarket tomato is so large they might as well be completely different fruits.
Seriously, if you're going to cook with tomatoes, buy a decent brand of canned tomatoes rather than chop up fresh supermarket tomatoes. Even canned tomatoes are superior to those suspiciously homogeneous tomato-shaped wads of toilet paper.
I know on T-Mobile you can block all text messages.
That's not perfect, because maybe you do want to receive some of them, but it keeps you from being forced to pay. Your carrier might have something similar.
What annoys me is international texting fees. $0.30? And it comes out of my prepaid message bucket? I encourage people to get a Blackberry and a data plan. The BB messenger is so far superior to text messages it's not even funny.
There's nothing wrong with PHP. Actually it has an advantage, in that so many open source Web toolkits are written in PHP. Which is great for a young programmer, in that they can get into the code, find something they want to change or improve, type a couple of lines and hit "Refresh". They've just done something, in seconds.
This kind of immediate gratification can't be overstated for young kids, no matter what skill they're trying to acquire.
Palm tries to sneak into the playground, gets caught, and it's somehow Apple's fault? Palm was foolish to think they could get away with pretending to be an iPod.
People don't use gold for it's intrinsic value as a metal. It's used because sometimes you can't buy a herd of goats with a thousand cans of Dinty Moore stew. Gold is small, convenient, historical, and rare, so it makes a pretty good medium of exchange.
Historically paper money only had value because it was backed by gold, or some other known commodity. Now it's backed by faith. How's that working out for everybody?
Yeah, no kidding. After all those years of "There are no applications for Macs! Buy a PC!" in the press, now we get "There are too many applications for the iPhone, IS IT DOOMED?????"
Actually, I don't think anyone has necessarily figured out what to do with twitter yet,
We can agree on this.
but it seems like a good way to publish a record of some sort of public information.
We can't agree on this. If the up-and-coming generation isn't fascinated enough by Twitter to use it then it's near useless. Twitter is only useful as a push platform if a lot of people use it. I don't use it, and have no interest in doing so, because my time is better spent elsewhere. Facebook I do use, however, because it's a more robust and interesting platform. Of course, that's just me, but I think even Twitter had to admit that they have a large number of derelict accounts, so I'm probably not as unique as I'd like to believe.
I don't think the take-away on this kid's report is that we're all going to talk over Xbox.
It seems like a great way to institute an emergency information network, because it can handle the load.
IIRC Twitter has had significant scaling problems, and if that remains true then that is simply wrong. It worked decently well for that school shooting, but it would utterly fail for, say, Katrina. Which isn't to say don't use it, but I do mean to say that you don't depend on it.
It really doesn't, because it's anecdotal. The plural of anecdote is not data.
This maxim is often used where it doesn't fit.
What makes this report so compelling to people, IMO, is because it is so close to the source. If you send a 40-year-old ML analyst out to collect "data", what will he come back with? Maybe a lot of facts and figures, but it may or may not have any particular relevance. If the answer were to be found in easily collectible data there wouldn't be much mystery to business forecasting.
On the other hand, a 15-year-old says that nobody in his social group gives a shit about Twitter. Twitter only has relevance, business-wise, as a large, global presence. If the next generation prefers to keep their communications among their local monkeysphere while engaging in commonly shared activities, what does that say about Twitter's opportunity for growth? What does that say about what kind of investments you should be making? What does that say about how you market things? These are compelling questions, and the company positioned to take advantage of it may steamroll over those who are not.
After months and months of rah-rah Twitter articles in the business press, one kid basically says that Ashton Kutcher's brain farts are not worth $50 million in VC. Whether he's right or wrong remains to be seen, but it's not absurd, and discarding it out of hand because it's anecdotal is probably a mistake.
Maybe for 10 year olds, but certainly not for the rest of us.
Thing about 10 year olds, they don't stay that way. These kinds of reports are what people and corporations use to plan for the future.
I'm not suggesting that the report is the end-all be-all, but it does hint that maybe what people today are terribly excited about today may not be sustainable.
The language's sort() algorithm is like engineered wood. The structural engineer doesn't specify the exact method of building a wood truss--he specifies a certain brand and the length and moves on. He does that because most construction isn'tFalling Water. Most construction is very prosaic. Programming is much the same--a few really intricate and unique things, but big chunks of same-old same-old.
So what's the future look like? A merging of the blogosphere and traditional media to something new?
The "blogosphere" (God I hate that word), if it has a purpose, is to either amplify or correct what comes out of the traditional media outlets. It's a very symbiotic relationship, and probably won't work co-joined.
That's fascinating, but a corporation is still a legal entity that is not entitled to all the protections of the law in the same way that a person is.
"Kinda like a person" is, by definition, not a person. It's a convenient shorthand that gives people (real people, not corporation-people) the wrong impression. So stop it.
This is just another example of a fundamental flaw in how campaign finance works in the US, and the current party in power shares the culpability with the prior party in power.
I've a question: how come it's always obviously graft when Republicans do it, but it's a sign that the system is flawed when Democrats do it?
Why can't it be simple vote-buying no matter who does it? And why hasn't tar-and-feathering made a comeback yet?
When somebody tells you that a corporation is considered a person, that person is talking out of their ass.
A corporation is a legal entity. It is not a person. It shares some privileges with people, but that's a different thing altogether. Somebody, once, used the analogy of "a corporation as a person" and now we've got a lot of half-witted nonsense floating around because of it.
Next person that tells you "a corporation is like a person", ask them how many businesses they've incorporated. If it's zero, you're perfectly within your rights to kick them in the knee.
I also know a number of hunters and hikers who go to places were the GPS in cell phones won't work, but a GPS receiver still will.
This.
Even some of the older handheld units are squirrelly when you're really off in the weeds. Handheld units really come into their own when you start talking about marine usage, where durability, water resistance and flotation come into play.
Gmail, Docs, Chrome? Actual users, and with Apps they turn into actual customers.
All of which are free and/or beta, giving Google the nice out "Hey, it's beta/free? WTF do you want?"
I think a lot of Slashdot users have gotten their excitement over Linux On The Desktop (Finally) confused with Google's ability to deliver such a product. Wishes do not make good substitutes for extensive experience. Which is not to say that it can't happen, but I'm not yet prepared to accept that Google shits rainbows and baby giggles based on a blog post.
Interestingly, Chrome OS is apparently a bare-bones Linux + a "new windowing system" + the Chrome browser.
The only thing that interests me is how ebullient people are about something that they know nothing about, simply because it's got Google's name on it.
As Ted Dziuba put it, Google's very good at selling ads. Supporting actual customers? Not so much.
Everybody who has replied to me used words that, if uttered anywhere near a locker room, would earn the speaker a thorough wedgie. Yet they are unanimous in their assertion that it's non-trivial.
This should be trivial, it's just that the toolmakers (browser makers, etc.) don't bother with proper support for more than the bare basics of SSL.
I think you answered yourself.
The Web works because it has very low friction. Having to play idiot games with certificates and managing them adds tremendous friction. That you don't seem to see this suggests you haven't thought very carefully about the consequences of such a system, if at all.
The reason why DNSSEC seems to be such a good idea is because it gets you a high percentage of exactly what you're talking about without being an utter UI cockup.
If I were setting up a secure site, it'd be SSL-only. As part of the account-setup process, you'd be asked to generate a client certificate and upload the public certificate (over an SSL connection) to the server to be attached to your account. From that point on, when you attempted to log on using your username the server would only accept the request if it came over a connection presenting the client certificate attached to that username.
Your suggestion just gave me the piss-shudders.
A lot of people are incapable of correctly setting up Outlook. You will build the worlds most secure site that nobody uses.
Slashdot Mirror
That's because skateboarders are dangerous and destructive.
When people say "People do/have/are/etc." they actually mean "I do/have/are/etc." But it's more comforting to believe you're part of a crowd, even when you're not.
People don't give a shit about the Segway.
There are a lot of people who have never had a proper tomato. The difference between one that fully ripened on the vine and a supermarket tomato is so large they might as well be completely different fruits.
Seriously, if you're going to cook with tomatoes, buy a decent brand of canned tomatoes rather than chop up fresh supermarket tomatoes. Even canned tomatoes are superior to those suspiciously homogeneous tomato-shaped wads of toilet paper.
I know on T-Mobile you can block all text messages.
That's not perfect, because maybe you do want to receive some of them, but it keeps you from being forced to pay. Your carrier might have something similar.
What annoys me is international texting fees. $0.30? And it comes out of my prepaid message bucket? I encourage people to get a Blackberry and a data plan. The BB messenger is so far superior to text messages it's not even funny.
For some reason I'm reminded of The Wire's Stringer trying to introduce Robert's Rules of Order to da thug life.
There's nothing wrong with PHP. Actually it has an advantage, in that so many open source Web toolkits are written in PHP. Which is great for a young programmer, in that they can get into the code, find something they want to change or improve, type a couple of lines and hit "Refresh". They've just done something, in seconds.
This kind of immediate gratification can't be overstated for young kids, no matter what skill they're trying to acquire.
Palm tries to sneak into the playground, gets caught, and it's somehow Apple's fault? Palm was foolish to think they could get away with pretending to be an iPod.
People don't use gold for it's intrinsic value as a metal. It's used because sometimes you can't buy a herd of goats with a thousand cans of Dinty Moore stew. Gold is small, convenient, historical, and rare, so it makes a pretty good medium of exchange.
Historically paper money only had value because it was backed by gold, or some other known commodity. Now it's backed by faith. How's that working out for everybody?
Yeah, no kidding. After all those years of "There are no applications for Macs! Buy a PC!" in the press, now we get "There are too many applications for the iPhone, IS IT DOOMED?????"
Morons.
The future is nao!
Sometimes I truly wonder what the fuck we think we're doing with computers.
We can agree on this.
We can't agree on this. If the up-and-coming generation isn't fascinated enough by Twitter to use it then it's near useless. Twitter is only useful as a push platform if a lot of people use it. I don't use it, and have no interest in doing so, because my time is better spent elsewhere. Facebook I do use, however, because it's a more robust and interesting platform. Of course, that's just me, but I think even Twitter had to admit that they have a large number of derelict accounts, so I'm probably not as unique as I'd like to believe.
I don't think the take-away on this kid's report is that we're all going to talk over Xbox.
IIRC Twitter has had significant scaling problems, and if that remains true then that is simply wrong. It worked decently well for that school shooting, but it would utterly fail for, say, Katrina. Which isn't to say don't use it, but I do mean to say that you don't depend on it.
This maxim is often used where it doesn't fit.
What makes this report so compelling to people, IMO, is because it is so close to the source. If you send a 40-year-old ML analyst out to collect "data", what will he come back with? Maybe a lot of facts and figures, but it may or may not have any particular relevance. If the answer were to be found in easily collectible data there wouldn't be much mystery to business forecasting.
On the other hand, a 15-year-old says that nobody in his social group gives a shit about Twitter. Twitter only has relevance, business-wise, as a large, global presence. If the next generation prefers to keep their communications among their local monkeysphere while engaging in commonly shared activities, what does that say about Twitter's opportunity for growth? What does that say about what kind of investments you should be making? What does that say about how you market things? These are compelling questions, and the company positioned to take advantage of it may steamroll over those who are not.
After months and months of rah-rah Twitter articles in the business press, one kid basically says that Ashton Kutcher's brain farts are not worth $50 million in VC. Whether he's right or wrong remains to be seen, but it's not absurd, and discarding it out of hand because it's anecdotal is probably a mistake.
Thing about 10 year olds, they don't stay that way. These kinds of reports are what people and corporations use to plan for the future.
I'm not suggesting that the report is the end-all be-all, but it does hint that maybe what people today are terribly excited about today may not be sustainable.
Very few people buy Porches.
The language's sort() algorithm is like engineered wood. The structural engineer doesn't specify the exact method of building a wood truss--he specifies a certain brand and the length and moves on. He does that because most construction isn't Falling Water. Most construction is very prosaic. Programming is much the same--a few really intricate and unique things, but big chunks of same-old same-old.
The "blogosphere" (God I hate that word), if it has a purpose, is to either amplify or correct what comes out of the traditional media outlets. It's a very symbiotic relationship, and probably won't work co-joined.
That's fascinating, but a corporation is still a legal entity that is not entitled to all the protections of the law in the same way that a person is.
"Kinda like a person" is, by definition, not a person. It's a convenient shorthand that gives people (real people, not corporation-people) the wrong impression. So stop it.
I've a question: how come it's always obviously graft when Republicans do it, but it's a sign that the system is flawed when Democrats do it?
Why can't it be simple vote-buying no matter who does it? And why hasn't tar-and-feathering made a comeback yet?
When somebody tells you that a corporation is considered a person, that person is talking out of their ass.
A corporation is a legal entity. It is not a person. It shares some privileges with people, but that's a different thing altogether. Somebody, once, used the analogy of "a corporation as a person" and now we've got a lot of half-witted nonsense floating around because of it.
Next person that tells you "a corporation is like a person", ask them how many businesses they've incorporated. If it's zero, you're perfectly within your rights to kick them in the knee.
This.
Even some of the older handheld units are squirrelly when you're really off in the weeds. Handheld units really come into their own when you start talking about marine usage, where durability, water resistance and flotation come into play.
All of which are free and/or beta, giving Google the nice out "Hey, it's beta/free? WTF do you want?"
I think a lot of Slashdot users have gotten their excitement over Linux On The Desktop (Finally) confused with Google's ability to deliver such a product. Wishes do not make good substitutes for extensive experience. Which is not to say that it can't happen, but I'm not yet prepared to accept that Google shits rainbows and baby giggles based on a blog post.
The only thing that interests me is how ebullient people are about something that they know nothing about, simply because it's got Google's name on it.
As Ted Dziuba put it, Google's very good at selling ads. Supporting actual customers? Not so much.
Everybody who has replied to me used words that, if uttered anywhere near a locker room, would earn the speaker a thorough wedgie. Yet they are unanimous in their assertion that it's non-trivial.
Nerds.
You have the oddest definition of "Just Work" that I've ever seen.
And then:
I think you answered yourself.
The Web works because it has very low friction. Having to play idiot games with certificates and managing them adds tremendous friction. That you don't seem to see this suggests you haven't thought very carefully about the consequences of such a system, if at all.
The reason why DNSSEC seems to be such a good idea is because it gets you a high percentage of exactly what you're talking about without being an utter UI cockup.
Your suggestion just gave me the piss-shudders.
A lot of people are incapable of correctly setting up Outlook. You will build the worlds most secure site that nobody uses.