In what world do you live where tax-sponsored programs don't have billing and accounting? I work in public sector, and I can tell you this is absolutely not the case. In many cases, it's more complex than in private sector.
Really the only thing you avoid is collection costs.
Dear Typical Slashdot Ranter Who Ignores Psychology and Economics in Favor of Technology,
Your post is rather nonsensical. Please refer to: Reality.
Google is not your rich uncle, and Google is not doing this to be a "nice guy." Google is a company. Google is making money. Google is scrambling to fix this issue because Google realizes it pisses its users off. Google realizes that if Google pisses its users off, Google makes less money.
Oh yes, insightful indeed. Don't be mad that Google lost your data because they never said they wouldn't.
On a related note, don't be mad when I club you over the head with a wooden bat for ignoring reality in favor of technicality, because I never said I wouldn't. If someone or some company offers a service that involves storage of your data for you, why would there be anything but an implied commitment to, say, store that data for you?
We're not talking about whether we can sue Google. We're talking about being pissed off. Head out of sand, please.
May I call your attention to the following part of my original post:
I misinterpreted that portion of your post originally. Apologies. Nevertheless, there will be a cognitive ambiguity that will slow down processing of typing instructions compared to if you had only one way to type. If you want to liken it to computer code, it's adding some extra if-else branches (this is not how it works in the brain, but it works as a basic analogy).
I'm not even going to bother arguing with you on your other point. Your simplistic belief about the nature of the brain is clearly unshakable. Good for you for having conviction.
I find it likely that this decision is because you cannot support your suggestion. I'm not sure why you are arguing (with no supporting facts) such a fundamental and elementary notion with someone who spent years of his life studying this stuff, but whatever...
You did not mention this epiphany in your post, so I'm not sure how I was supposed to tease that out, even with the most perfect of "reading comprehension skills" (unless you were referring to mind-reading?).
As for your belief that the "separation of powers" in the brain which results in a "flowchart" of processing is bizarre, well there's not much I can do about that. This is well-established, and if you find it bizarre then perhaps you should find a book...
The author suggests that a coefficient of 0.10 or higher is necessary for significance. This is not typically considered the threshold for social sciences like psychology. The significance threshold level of 0.05 is typically used.
They counteracted the effects of the small sample size by only selecting Ruby developers with nothing better to do on a Wed night, and then generalizing the results to all of humanity.
If you are using two different keyboard layouts, I highly doubt your claim that your typing speed has IMPROVED since you added the second keyboard layout. The two tasks (typing on the two layouts) are so cognitively similar that a new processing layer would need to be created to route the instructions to the correct memory locations in your cerebellum. The thought of "A" no longer directly maps to a typing instruction set. It has to go through a decision node to select whether we are talking about "A" in layout 1 or layout 2, as they are different muscle movement sequences.
Now, I know that people (like my father) refuse to turn their phones off while in flight because "the FCC doesn't know their heads from third base"
I could care less about the FCC's opinion on the matter, especially since they nearly changed their minds. But how can you ignore the potential for interference with the plane's navigation systems or wireless pilot control systems? That's where the FAA is coming from; and the FAA is an organization I have at least some faith in.
Logically, if it's a technical problem using a cellphone from a plane, it would also be a problem using it from the top of a tall building. In a metropolitan area, the top of a skyscraper would be "line of sight" to hundreds of cellphone towers.
The last part of your point is arguable, but aside from that, how does this relate to being 36k feet in the air on a plane moving 600mph? The issue is not being able to reach many towers. The issue is that you would effectively be constantly moving from cell to cell. The cell industry is convinced this would wreak havoc with their network, and I'm pretty sure I'm on board with that assessment.
And, of course, the comparison does not address the potential navigation system interference, but I assume that was intentional, so I won't counterpoint that aspect.
All of these sites have clauses saying they are not responsible for price display/calculation errors. This is in the small print of every print ad as well.
This makes no sense. I don't read books online because it's uncomfortable and inconvenient. Movies and TV shows are shown on a projected screen with no pause button (unless you have special equipment) and, in the case of TV, interruptions of advertising.
Online books don't take over physical books because physical books have more value.
BT takes over TV and movie theaters because movies/episodes downloaded over BT have more value than their original equivalents.
I knew some AC would say this, so I should have just preemptively explained it.
If the sentence were "Don't use the same word three times in the same sentence", then you would be correct. However, the sentence is "Grammar tip", which is a fragment. The second part is an appositive, relating to "tip." The colon is the giveaway.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, I see. Well that's one of those debates I try to avoid...
Why do you think it is not good for Americans? American businesses would be one set of businesses utilizing the outsourcing.
In what world do you live where tax-sponsored programs don't have billing and accounting? I work in public sector, and I can tell you this is absolutely not the case. In many cases, it's more complex than in private sector.
Really the only thing you avoid is collection costs.
Clearly one can only get pissed off about things that are well defined by law. I stand corrected. Thank you.
We are not talking about the law. We are not talking about getting sued. We are talking about users getting pissed off. Again, you miss the point.
Your assumption that I use these services is also wrong.
As for your feeling that offering a service isn't an implied commitment to offer a service, well that's just odd.
Dear Typical Slashdot Ranter Who Ignores Psychology and Economics in Favor of Technology,
Your post is rather nonsensical. Please refer to: Reality.
Google is not your rich uncle, and Google is not doing this to be a "nice guy." Google is a company. Google is making money. Google is scrambling to fix this issue because Google realizes it pisses its users off. Google realizes that if Google pisses its users off, Google makes less money.
Sincerely,
A Grounded Man
Oh yes, insightful indeed. Don't be mad that Google lost your data because they never said they wouldn't.
On a related note, don't be mad when I club you over the head with a wooden bat for ignoring reality in favor of technicality, because I never said I wouldn't. If someone or some company offers a service that involves storage of your data for you, why would there be anything but an implied commitment to, say, store that data for you?
We're not talking about whether we can sue Google. We're talking about being pissed off. Head out of sand, please.
If being bored by Canadian copyright stories is anti-Canadianism, then I guess you've got me pegged.
May I call your attention to the following part of my original post:
I misinterpreted that portion of your post originally. Apologies. Nevertheless, there will be a cognitive ambiguity that will slow down processing of typing instructions compared to if you had only one way to type. If you want to liken it to computer code, it's adding some extra if-else branches (this is not how it works in the brain, but it works as a basic analogy).
I'm not even going to bother arguing with you on your other point. Your simplistic belief about the nature of the brain is clearly unshakable. Good for you for having conviction.
I find it likely that this decision is because you cannot support your suggestion. I'm not sure why you are arguing (with no supporting facts) such a fundamental and elementary notion with someone who spent years of his life studying this stuff, but whatever...
You did not mention this epiphany in your post, so I'm not sure how I was supposed to tease that out, even with the most perfect of "reading comprehension skills" (unless you were referring to mind-reading?).
As for your belief that the "separation of powers" in the brain which results in a "flowchart" of processing is bizarre, well there's not much I can do about that. This is well-established, and if you find it bizarre then perhaps you should find a book...
The author suggests that a coefficient of 0.10 or higher is necessary for significance. This is not typically considered the threshold for social sciences like psychology. The significance threshold level of 0.05 is typically used.
who else stopped reading the summary out of disinterest upon reaching the first instance of "Canada"?
They counteracted the effects of the small sample size by only selecting Ruby developers with nothing better to do on a Wed night, and then generalizing the results to all of humanity.
If you are using two different keyboard layouts, I highly doubt your claim that your typing speed has IMPROVED since you added the second keyboard layout. The two tasks (typing on the two layouts) are so cognitively similar that a new processing layer would need to be created to route the instructions to the correct memory locations in your cerebellum. The thought of "A" no longer directly maps to a typing instruction set. It has to go through a decision node to select whether we are talking about "A" in layout 1 or layout 2, as they are different muscle movement sequences.
Now, I know that people (like my father) refuse to turn their phones off while in flight because "the FCC doesn't know their heads from third base"
I could care less about the FCC's opinion on the matter, especially since they nearly changed their minds. But how can you ignore the potential for interference with the plane's navigation systems or wireless pilot control systems? That's where the FAA is coming from; and the FAA is an organization I have at least some faith in.
Logically, if it's a technical problem using a cellphone from a plane, it would also be a problem using it from the top of a tall building. In a metropolitan area, the top of a skyscraper would be "line of sight" to hundreds of cellphone towers.
The last part of your point is arguable, but aside from that, how does this relate to being 36k feet in the air on a plane moving 600mph? The issue is not being able to reach many towers. The issue is that you would effectively be constantly moving from cell to cell. The cell industry is convinced this would wreak havoc with their network, and I'm pretty sure I'm on board with that assessment.
And, of course, the comparison does not address the potential navigation system interference, but I assume that was intentional, so I won't counterpoint that aspect.
John W. Backus Dies at 82; Developed FORTRAN
In that order?
jcr, meet Lobbyist. Lobbyist, meet jcr.
Integrate the browser into the operating system? Brilliant!
All of these sites have clauses saying they are not responsible for price display/calculation errors. This is in the small print of every print ad as well.
Nothing new here. Move along.
IT workers who are disgruntled, paranoid, generally show up late, argue with colleagues
I'm more interested in the implication that there are IT workers who don't exhibit this work behavior.
This makes no sense. I don't read books online because it's uncomfortable and inconvenient. Movies and TV shows are shown on a projected screen with no pause button (unless you have special equipment) and, in the case of TV, interruptions of advertising.
Online books don't take over physical books because physical books have more value.
BT takes over TV and movie theaters because movies/episodes downloaded over BT have more value than their original equivalents.
Nothing. The grammatical irony was the only point.
No... it's not.
I knew some AC would say this, so I should have just preemptively explained it.
If the sentence were "Don't use the same word three times in the same sentence", then you would be correct. However, the sentence is "Grammar tip", which is a fragment. The second part is an appositive, relating to "tip." The colon is the giveaway.
See? AC's don't always know everything.
I can't help but point out that your grammar tip is a fragment fragment fragment.