10 years ago I would have agreed with you, but most of the things you describe I would probably do with web apps if I were starting from scratch today. That said, I just had to make a planning tool in Excel (not my choice) that pulled in HR data from ActiveDirectory and SharePoint and it worked well enough... it just seemed old-fashioned. Or maybe I'm just tired of VBA:)
I read in a separate piece that they only have two batteries, so the system can be overwhelmed when they launch 7 missiles simultaneously. It also doesn't cover every populated area.
I've written trade papers using Word (I'm dating myself here... all of my higher-ed stuff was in WordPerfect). I do almost all of my test plans, results, etc now in Word. It's adequate for non-pixel-perfect stuff like that. Collaboration is a PITA, though. The diff tools have gotten better, and your collaborator can be trained to use the review tools - so I won't complain about those... though I still think taking two plain-text files and diffing them is more straightforward most of the time. It's also much less painful if you run the same version, and if your layout settings and fonts are the same.
Tables are still, after all these years, funky in Word. Word has three distinct layout layers that interact in funky ways, and you never quite know which method the other person is using. Every time you make changes, you have to fuss with the tables and figures again. For some reason, table and figure labels and references are fussy and prone to formatting nightmares. Each document gets its own little personality, with its own list of workarounds. This is all manageable when you are the sole author, but it gets a bit unwieldy when there are two or (God forbid) more authors. One of my colleagues and I just get all the content right in Google Docs (Drive) and then one of us manhandles it into Word. This has it's own issues (figure and table labeling and references), but at least the collaboration part is smoother, and it gets us away from the formatting game.
It depends what you mean by "editable". If you want someone else to edit text or other content, then it doesn't really matter what program you use. Word's markup tools can be helpful here, but I find that few actually know how to use them.
If you care that both parties see the same formatting, then you CAN use MS Office, but you need to make sure that both parties have the same version of Office, the same OS, the same fonts, and are very careful about the program settings. In particular, Word can be set to be more WYSIWYG, which means it will be sensitive to the printer you have set as default. At the end of the day, though, the "final" version should still be proofed to PDF and reviewed by the other party, because Word is not a page layout program, and to treat it so will eventually burn you. If you work with people both inside and outside the US, the whole A4/Letter paper size really screws up Word formatting.
Powerpoint is better at keeping the layout (it doesn't automatically page, for instance). The problem with Powerpoint collaboration is that it lets you paste in damn near anything. That OLE object you paste in will only work if the other party has the same program installed. That video will only work if they have the same codecs. Fonts can be a problem if they forgot to save them or if the font was not marked as embeddable. If I'm doing a presentation, I bring a laptop to hook up to the site's projector. For backup, I bring PDFs on a memory stick or two. I used to bring transparencies as well, but I haven't seen an overhead projector in so long that I've stopped doing that:)
I like approval voting, exactly because it is easier to explain than most Condorcet methods. While far from perfect, I still think it is better than plurality or IRV.
Word is not a good format for exchanging documents that need to look the same between computers. Word formatting changes between versions and, worse, between default printers (depending on settings). Powerpoint is OK most of the time, provided you have the correct fonts and are running the same version. The entire Office suite gives you no way to easily tell what version the file originated with, or even if it came from a Mac or PC. These details make a big difference in layout.
Point is, you should probably be insisting on PDFs for "important documents".
Yeah I feel pretty stupid for buying it. The ads almost bother me more than the redundant control panels, mystery magic screen corners, hidden start menu/screen, and overall user unfriendliness. On the other hand, it was only $40 for the pro version - if I have to spend another $5, it was still cheap compared to 7.
Probably has something to do with Article 1 defining the powers granted to the Legislature, but Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus with an Executive Order.
Thanks for Start8 - I'll have to look into that. My in-laws are coming to stay and I'm having bad dreams about teaching them the new interface. $5 is well worth it if it works well.
You are preaching to the choir, man. I already said I agree. I guess you don't count the Civil War as a "catastrophe". Another example I could have used was the Alien and Sedition Acts.
I agree that, if used as the sole currency for a given GROWING economy, it will inherently increase in value.
However, I do not agree that Bitcoin will necessarily represent a growing part of the economy once it matures. In fact, if it is successful I expect competition to actually reduce it's use. If it isn't successful, then it doesn't really matter what happens to it:)
I did read the line above it, but it doesn't seem related to the final sentence. And frankly, it's a very strange measure anyway - I'm not even sure how to respond to it.
I wasn't really addressing the bizarre "civil liberties lost per dead American" metric, but rather the "No catastrophe... has ever advanced us so far towards a police state" bit.
I'd agree with your sentiment if Bitcoins were liable to replace a nation's currency. IMHO, they will never be more than a convenient exchange medium for niche transactions, and thus won't necessarily need to inflate unless their usage grows. If they get popular, I expect competition to arise, which would further keep their value in check.
- Nothing changes --> deflation --> doom
I agree that if it does continue to rise in value it is doomed as people will simply hoard it, reducing it's utility. Then.... crash! Oddly, it might then become useful if the system survives.
- Attempt to inflate it --> not everyone agrees on how --> war of the BC forks --> confidence in decentralized digital currencies devastated --> government-backed schemes like MintChip snatch the price
I fully expect competition to arise if Bitcoin is successful, and I expect this will help keep the value of Bitcoin in check. People SHOULD have their confidence in any currency devastated - you should not be holding on to a lot of currency, no matter the form. On the other hand, confidence in the short-term stability of a currency is indeed critical, and Bitcoin could very well be doomed to wild swings without a central authority to stabilize it.
- Entity X somehow (?) succeeds to induce controlled inflation without triggering fork wars --> people realize just how much power they're putting in the hands of Entity X - decide a large democratically-elected government can be trusted better --> MintChip
Agreed that doesn't seem likely.
- BC somehow becomes a runaway hit --> existing traceability-based economy, system of taxes, law enforcement, option trading,... threatened --> legislative crackdown --> MintChip
Also a possibility - though I think the fact that Bitcoin is more traceable than cash works in its favor here.
A smart guy like yourself should have no problem telling a dumbass like me exactly what kind of scam Bitcoin is, then. I like how, in your country with native English, you don't capitalize proper names.
Slashdot Mirror
10 years ago I would have agreed with you, but most of the things you describe I would probably do with web apps if I were starting from scratch today. That said, I just had to make a planning tool in Excel (not my choice) that pulled in HR data from ActiveDirectory and SharePoint and it worked well enough... it just seemed old-fashioned. Or maybe I'm just tired of VBA :)
I read in a separate piece that they only have two batteries, so the system can be overwhelmed when they launch 7 missiles simultaneously. It also doesn't cover every populated area.
I've written trade papers using Word (I'm dating myself here... all of my higher-ed stuff was in WordPerfect). I do almost all of my test plans, results, etc now in Word. It's adequate for non-pixel-perfect stuff like that. Collaboration is a PITA, though. The diff tools have gotten better, and your collaborator can be trained to use the review tools - so I won't complain about those... though I still think taking two plain-text files and diffing them is more straightforward most of the time. It's also much less painful if you run the same version, and if your layout settings and fonts are the same.
Tables are still, after all these years, funky in Word. Word has three distinct layout layers that interact in funky ways, and you never quite know which method the other person is using. Every time you make changes, you have to fuss with the tables and figures again. For some reason, table and figure labels and references are fussy and prone to formatting nightmares. Each document gets its own little personality, with its own list of workarounds. This is all manageable when you are the sole author, but it gets a bit unwieldy when there are two or (God forbid) more authors. One of my colleagues and I just get all the content right in Google Docs (Drive) and then one of us manhandles it into Word. This has it's own issues (figure and table labeling and references), but at least the collaboration part is smoother, and it gets us away from the formatting game.
It depends what you mean by "editable". If you want someone else to edit text or other content, then it doesn't really matter what program you use. Word's markup tools can be helpful here, but I find that few actually know how to use them.
If you care that both parties see the same formatting, then you CAN use MS Office, but you need to make sure that both parties have the same version of Office, the same OS, the same fonts, and are very careful about the program settings. In particular, Word can be set to be more WYSIWYG, which means it will be sensitive to the printer you have set as default. At the end of the day, though, the "final" version should still be proofed to PDF and reviewed by the other party, because Word is not a page layout program, and to treat it so will eventually burn you. If you work with people both inside and outside the US, the whole A4/Letter paper size really screws up Word formatting.
Powerpoint is better at keeping the layout (it doesn't automatically page, for instance). The problem with Powerpoint collaboration is that it lets you paste in damn near anything. That OLE object you paste in will only work if the other party has the same program installed. That video will only work if they have the same codecs. Fonts can be a problem if they forgot to save them or if the font was not marked as embeddable. If I'm doing a presentation, I bring a laptop to hook up to the site's projector. For backup, I bring PDFs on a memory stick or two. I used to bring transparencies as well, but I haven't seen an overhead projector in so long that I've stopped doing that :)
I like approval voting, exactly because it is easier to explain than most Condorcet methods. While far from perfect, I still think it is better than plurality or IRV.
Word is not a good format for exchanging documents that need to look the same between computers. Word formatting changes between versions and, worse, between default printers (depending on settings). Powerpoint is OK most of the time, provided you have the correct fonts and are running the same version. The entire Office suite gives you no way to easily tell what version the file originated with, or even if it came from a Mac or PC. These details make a big difference in layout.
Point is, you should probably be insisting on PDFs for "important documents".
Yeah I feel pretty stupid for buying it. The ads almost bother me more than the redundant control panels, mystery magic screen corners, hidden start menu/screen, and overall user unfriendliness. On the other hand, it was only $40 for the pro version - if I have to spend another $5, it was still cheap compared to 7.
Then I'll try that first! :)
Though I won't sweat $5 (as in beer) - it's always nice to use free software when possible.
Probably has something to do with Article 1 defining the powers granted to the Legislature, but Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus with an Executive Order.
Thanks for Start8 - I'll have to look into that. My in-laws are coming to stay and I'm having bad dreams about teaching them the new interface. $5 is well worth it if it works well.
Exactly. If and when Metro apps become a "must have", only then will 8 offer anything compelling over 7.
That might sell as well as Ubuntu!
You are preaching to the choir, man. I already said I agree. I guess you don't count the Civil War as a "catastrophe". Another example I could have used was the Alien and Sedition Acts.
I agree that, if used as the sole currency for a given GROWING economy, it will inherently increase in value.
However, I do not agree that Bitcoin will necessarily represent a growing part of the economy once it matures. In fact, if it is successful I expect competition to actually reduce it's use. If it isn't successful, then it doesn't really matter what happens to it :)
He didn't end martial law - he was killed.
I did read the line above it, but it doesn't seem related to the final sentence. And frankly, it's a very strange measure anyway - I'm not even sure how to respond to it.
I'm not the one who went to the extreme. I was responding to:
No catastrophe, even of larger proportions, has ever advanced us so far towards police state.
Civil war doesn't count as a catastrophe?
I wasn't really addressing the bizarre "civil liberties lost per dead American" metric, but rather the "No catastrophe... has ever advanced us so far towards a police state" bit.
Obviously I agree. I was just responding to "No catastrophe, even of larger proportions, has ever advanced us so far towards police state."
That is just as obviously false.
No offense, but read up on what Lincoln did during the Civil War.
Suspended Habeus Corpus. Declared martial law in several US cities.
Leave the buttons, but make them change the entire style.
That'll learn 'em.
How can it not be deflationary?
I'd agree with your sentiment if Bitcoins were liable to replace a nation's currency. IMHO, they will never be more than a convenient exchange medium for niche transactions, and thus won't necessarily need to inflate unless their usage grows. If they get popular, I expect competition to arise, which would further keep their value in check.
- Nothing changes --> deflation --> doom
I agree that if it does continue to rise in value it is doomed as people will simply hoard it, reducing it's utility. Then.... crash! Oddly, it might then become useful if the system survives.
- Attempt to inflate it --> not everyone agrees on how --> war of the BC forks --> confidence in decentralized digital currencies devastated --> government-backed schemes like MintChip snatch the price
I fully expect competition to arise if Bitcoin is successful, and I expect this will help keep the value of Bitcoin in check. People SHOULD have their confidence in any currency devastated - you should not be holding on to a lot of currency, no matter the form. On the other hand, confidence in the short-term stability of a currency is indeed critical, and Bitcoin could very well be doomed to wild swings without a central authority to stabilize it.
- Entity X somehow (?) succeeds to induce controlled inflation without triggering fork wars --> people realize just how much power they're putting in the hands of Entity X - decide a large democratically-elected government can be trusted better --> MintChip
Agreed that doesn't seem likely.
- BC somehow becomes a runaway hit --> existing traceability-based economy, system of taxes, law enforcement, option trading,... threatened --> legislative crackdown --> MintChip
Also a possibility - though I think the fact that Bitcoin is more traceable than cash works in its favor here.
A smart guy like yourself should have no problem telling a dumbass like me exactly what kind of scam Bitcoin is, then. I like how, in your country with native English, you don't capitalize proper names.
Which can still save to DOC.