I know it's not always your own fault, but you can affect that. With driverless you cannot.
If the robot cars are configured to drive defensively, then you would need a simultaneous failure before you were in a greater risk. Wanna bet odds are lower for a simultaneous error than the odds of you blacking out for some reason (heart attack, seizure, stroke, etc).
Loss of control is hard for humans, but most of us don't freak when riding on a bus, train, or airplane.
A couple of high-school students could rig up a belt with buttons on it that he could jab his "estimates" at. It could even be one button that adds 30 seconds to the game. It could add these estimates up for him so he doesn't have to use "discretion", and it could even beam this number to the main scoreboard. It would be a fun class project and soccer could grow some Darwinian tech legs.
Except that when the game is over, they are still playing, and only the ref knows the magic number.
It would be trivial to convey the ref's knowledge to the scoreboard. Nothing has to count down, just display the same number that the ref has in his head - just like the card they throw up on the sidelines at the half.
When I watch an association football/soccer game(soccer's a British word, BTW), I have no idea how much time is left in the game because they haven't yet embraced this advanced game-clock technology. Somewhere, soccer scientists are toiling away trying to figure out how to get remaining game time to display on these strange liquid crystal displays people have hanging in their homes. If only there were some way to transmit stoppage information from the referee to some kind of a signal receptor contrivance! Damn you, physics!
On the other side of the Atlantic, I still can't watch American football on the damn internet. The American football scientists are diligently working on some kind of technology that could transmit games directly to a home computing device. Once invented, the video will flow directly from the field to my eyeballs - because of this flow I'm sure marketers will call it flooding or creeking. I look forward to a time when I can creek NFL games to my tabletop computer.
The Canadians have us all beat, with their captured space-alien technology that allows the puck to render the boards transparent, allowing us to see it in all it's soft blue glow.
Sorry I still believe there is a strong market for sub $300 laptops.
Of course there is, but why would you want to sell into that market? The profit must be incredibly slim. You'd have to be in it for some strategic reason.
It should be illegal for these companies to keep user generated content once the user deletes it.
That's my gut reaction, too. But..
What if I walked over to a public bulletin board every day and took a picture of all the stuff people had posted. That's probably OK, right? (Creepy, but OK.)
What if I crawled Facebook every day and archived all of the publicly accessible stuff? That's probably OK, right?
So at the least, Facebook should be able to archive all of the publicly accessible stuff on their site. Otherwise, you are limiting what they can do with their own data in a way that their potential competitors are not limited.
Personally, I look at Office and I see nearly the same program that I was using in 1994 or 1995. Sure, there have been some nice new features - but aside from incremental improvements and a whole lot of fluff (Clippy, web export, new views, etc.), the feature set has largely been static. I can see a deranged manager thinking that they need an entirely new interface so that Office can "grow", but honestly, the idea that Office will have a large number of new features requiring such a beast is not supported by history. They may have great plans, but I'll believe it when I see it:)
Part of the issue is that while the ribbon change allows for this sort of layering, Microsoft hasn't done it yet. The product looks like a more confusing version of the old product not a product with tens of thousands of menu items making heavy use of AI determined contexts.
Exactly. It's a GUI element that may or may not be better for very complicated software - but Office certainly doesn't need it now. Even if you argue that it is better - as some fairly do - there is no good reason to cut out the menus in this version.
Yes, I use Office 2011 on Mac and 2010 on PC - you can turn the ribbon on or off on the Mac version. It is almost exactly the same as the MS Office 2010 PC version of the ribbon (some features are missing in the Mac version). There are (free?) plugins that give you the menus back on the PC version. It's not a matter of MS being short on resources, it's about them deliberately forcing you to relearn the interface for their own purposes.
Maybe by 2020 I'll be more efficient, but I'm still not quite up to where I was a year ago when I made the switch from 2003 - and when on the Mac version I often still "cheat" and use the menus. I'm trying to recover some of my old speed by using keyboard shortcuts, but the ribbon shortcuts are all pretty long - Alt and then the ribbon tab letter shortcut and then the sub-button (is that a word?) shortcut, and then the item shortcut. For some things like the paste special options in Excel there is no keyboard shortcut and so you have to make your own button. Fine, that's always been the case... but now my button disappears when the ribbon decides to change unless it is important enough to go in the "don't call it a toolbar" toolbar in the Windows version. The Mac version still lets you customize the toolbar and menu items, so you can still just add the built-in "Paste Values" button (for instance) in the old way, or you can make a custom macro and put it there.
LOL, listen to me... I'm not even one of the haters. I'm the guy that all the ribbon haters come to when they want to know how to do something:) But I can definitely sympathize with them - there may be some eventual advantage gained by going with "the Ribbon" exclusively, but right now it is just frustrating a lot of long-time users with zero productivity gain... in fact the exact opposite.
LOL, that's what I was thinking. It's like ranting about how they are getting around greens fees at the public course by building their own course. Not exactly an issue for the 99% crew.
The old Office 2003 interface was "pre-existing" as well. Both Mac 2008 and Win 2003 version of office had traditional menus, and yet when the respective replacements came out, they kept the traditional interface alongside the ribbon on Mac and hid the menus entirely on the Windows version. Partly this must have to do with the ridiculous situation that would arise if they did away with the menus on Mac, which would leave a big empty grey bar across the top of the screen for no reason other than sheer stubbornness. In any case, I'm pretty sure a single intern could keep the menu items hooked up to the respective dialog boxes that are now invoked by buttons on the ribbon - it's not a case of development effort.
Slashdot Mirror
I know it's not always your own fault, but you can affect that. With driverless you cannot.
If the robot cars are configured to drive defensively, then you would need a simultaneous failure before you were in a greater risk. Wanna bet odds are lower for a simultaneous error than the odds of you blacking out for some reason (heart attack, seizure, stroke, etc).
Loss of control is hard for humans, but most of us don't freak when riding on a bus, train, or airplane.
LOL @ discretion in the silicon age.
A couple of high-school students could rig up a belt with buttons on it that he could jab his "estimates" at. It could even be one button that adds 30 seconds to the game. It could add these estimates up for him so he doesn't have to use "discretion", and it could even beam this number to the main scoreboard. It would be a fun class project and soccer could grow some Darwinian tech legs.
Except that when the game is over, they are still playing, and only the ref knows the magic number.
It would be trivial to convey the ref's knowledge to the scoreboard. Nothing has to count down, just display the same number that the ref has in his head - just like the card they throw up on the sidelines at the half.
When I watch an association football/soccer game(soccer's a British word, BTW), I have no idea how much time is left in the game because they haven't yet embraced this advanced game-clock technology. Somewhere, soccer scientists are toiling away trying to figure out how to get remaining game time to display on these strange liquid crystal displays people have hanging in their homes. If only there were some way to transmit stoppage information from the referee to some kind of a signal receptor contrivance! Damn you, physics!
On the other side of the Atlantic, I still can't watch American football on the damn internet. The American football scientists are diligently working on some kind of technology that could transmit games directly to a home computing device. Once invented, the video will flow directly from the field to my eyeballs - because of this flow I'm sure marketers will call it flooding or creeking. I look forward to a time when I can creek NFL games to my tabletop computer.
The Canadians have us all beat, with their captured space-alien technology that allows the puck to render the boards transparent, allowing us to see it in all it's soft blue glow.
Jane Fonda, you sure have an interesting Slashdot username.
Sorry I still believe there is a strong market for sub $300 laptops.
Of course there is, but why would you want to sell into that market? The profit must be incredibly slim. You'd have to be in it for some strategic reason.
Why create something, give it out for free, and then allow businesses to take your work, profit from it, and give nothing back?
You didn't really give it out for free (as in freedom) if you retain control.
Strangely, Japan seems to be behind the US in mobile robots for doing heavy work.
I'm fairly certain this has military roots, with some added help from the massive US university system.
Another way to put it is: Trust them or not, they are usually in the best position to deal with an ongoing crisis. Note the weasel word "usually".
In America, Swedish women dismiss men with golf clubs.
In general I agree with your post, but I do think they deserve all the ribbing they get over their 8-letter-filename patent.
Or it's my wife's computer and she just keeps dismissing ANY message that comes up without reading it.
You'd carry your DSLR out with you to a "rager" or bar?
Or maybe he just read an iPhone or Android story on Slashdot and believed all of the frothing lunatic haters.
It is possible that an employee of a studio is downloading via torrents without permission.
Indeed, one of the people with whom we pass around "The Hard Drive" is an IP lawyer for one of the big media companies.
It should be illegal for these companies to keep user generated content once the user deletes it.
That's my gut reaction, too. But..
What if I walked over to a public bulletin board every day and took a picture of all the stuff people had posted. That's probably OK, right? (Creepy, but OK.)
What if I crawled Facebook every day and archived all of the publicly accessible stuff? That's probably OK, right?
So at the least, Facebook should be able to archive all of the publicly accessible stuff on their site. Otherwise, you are limiting what they can do with their own data in a way that their potential competitors are not limited.
The private data might be different...
The ocean?
Yeah, who knows? You could certainly be right!
Personally, I look at Office and I see nearly the same program that I was using in 1994 or 1995. Sure, there have been some nice new features - but aside from incremental improvements and a whole lot of fluff (Clippy, web export, new views, etc.), the feature set has largely been static. I can see a deranged manager thinking that they need an entirely new interface so that Office can "grow", but honestly, the idea that Office will have a large number of new features requiring such a beast is not supported by history. They may have great plans, but I'll believe it when I see it :)
The tech lore is that Bill Gates was wowed by the guy heading the ribbon team...
Part of the issue is that while the ribbon change allows for this sort of layering, Microsoft hasn't done it yet. The product looks like a more confusing version of the old product not a product with tens of thousands of menu items making heavy use of AI determined contexts.
Exactly. It's a GUI element that may or may not be better for very complicated software - but Office certainly doesn't need it now. Even if you argue that it is better - as some fairly do - there is no good reason to cut out the menus in this version.
Yes, I use Office 2011 on Mac and 2010 on PC - you can turn the ribbon on or off on the Mac version. It is almost exactly the same as the MS Office 2010 PC version of the ribbon (some features are missing in the Mac version). There are (free?) plugins that give you the menus back on the PC version. It's not a matter of MS being short on resources, it's about them deliberately forcing you to relearn the interface for their own purposes.
Maybe by 2020 I'll be more efficient, but I'm still not quite up to where I was a year ago when I made the switch from 2003 - and when on the Mac version I often still "cheat" and use the menus. I'm trying to recover some of my old speed by using keyboard shortcuts, but the ribbon shortcuts are all pretty long - Alt and then the ribbon tab letter shortcut and then the sub-button (is that a word?) shortcut, and then the item shortcut. For some things like the paste special options in Excel there is no keyboard shortcut and so you have to make your own button. Fine, that's always been the case... but now my button disappears when the ribbon decides to change unless it is important enough to go in the "don't call it a toolbar" toolbar in the Windows version. The Mac version still lets you customize the toolbar and menu items, so you can still just add the built-in "Paste Values" button (for instance) in the old way, or you can make a custom macro and put it there.
LOL, listen to me... I'm not even one of the haters. I'm the guy that all the ribbon haters come to when they want to know how to do something :) But I can definitely sympathize with them - there may be some eventual advantage gained by going with "the Ribbon" exclusively, but right now it is just frustrating a lot of long-time users with zero productivity gain... in fact the exact opposite.
A lot of the 99% folks you hang out with fly private jets into SJC?
LOL, that's what I was thinking. It's like ranting about how they are getting around greens fees at the public course by building their own course. Not exactly an issue for the 99% crew.
The old Office 2003 interface was "pre-existing" as well. Both Mac 2008 and Win 2003 version of office had traditional menus, and yet when the respective replacements came out, they kept the traditional interface alongside the ribbon on Mac and hid the menus entirely on the Windows version. Partly this must have to do with the ridiculous situation that would arise if they did away with the menus on Mac, which would leave a big empty grey bar across the top of the screen for no reason other than sheer stubbornness. In any case, I'm pretty sure a single intern could keep the menu items hooked up to the respective dialog boxes that are now invoked by buttons on the ribbon - it's not a case of development effort.
Nonetheless, it proves that MS is willing to co-develop both interfaces under certain market conditions.