Soon you'll have recreated the functionality of a late 80's usenet client.
Agreed. The problem is even if you somehow you manage to create a webpage -> email/news gateway, you end up with three problems.
First, the advertising model that supports Slashdot falls on its face. Text-based ads in the form of footers could be attached, I suppose, but I'd hate to be the one trying selling the idea to the guy that signs the cheques.
Second, web weenies will object. I've seen perfectly good email lists disappear after switching to a web-based "forum" approach because the majority (vocal majority, perhaps) insist it's better.
Third, the moderation system, for all its fun and warts, would be rendered moot.
Me, I'd be only too happy to pay for something I can read in a text-based client, but I'm afraid it ain't gonna happen. My guess is we'll have to wait for more people to rediscover the 80s, or tough it out while waiting for Web 3.0.
I'm sure with a little thought, MS could come up with an industry leading text based interface that I could...
I'm not sure what you mean by "industry leading", but the new PowerShell is Microsoft's attempt at that. I've only had a brief look at it and was as disgusted as I was disappointed. I could speculate as to why so many Windows admins are impressed, but my conclusions would be even less charitable.
As for Cygwin, everyone, including the developers and maintainers, would be happy to see the reasons for its existence (interoperability) disappear, but no one is expecting that to happen any time soon.
Re:Does it disturb anyone else?
on
Linux 2.6.26 Out
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Nah, SATA gets rid of all that. No more master and slave. Now, we submit to the controller.
Actually, submitting to the controller is redundant. I guess that makes the above a joke within a joke for those who thought otherwise. From the relevant Wiki article:
In fact, the drivers in the host operating system perform the necessary arbitration and serialization, and each drive's controller operates independently. Both are really "slaves" to the driver in the host OS.
And because SATA presents the ATA interface to the system (the difference being how the chips are connected to the drive), you could say there's an additional joke in there, but one only those using SCSI would find funny.
Nicely done, but to elaborate further, the following excerpt from a better article on Ars Technica should help.
But the precedent this could set has ramifications far beyond the narrow matter of Comcast's particular throttling scheme. Should the order go through, it would send a strong signal that the "four freedoms" outlined in the policy statement have teeth behind them, that these are more than "suggestions," and that the principles of openness and consumer choice will guide the FCC's approach to broadband. In case you're one of the few who don't have the principles committed verbatim to memory, here's a recap (emphasis added):
To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice
To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement
To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network
To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers
so he's funny for misreading the headline and then making an obnoxious comment about it, but I'm a troll for properly reading his post and making an obnoxious comment?
I believe the OP was poking good fun at what he believed to be a grammatical error in the submission's subject line. Unfortunately, there is no error. Simply an awkward construct, not unlike an obnoxious comment trying to be funny.
I'd suggest you be kind to the mods by being judicious in what you post, as they're the ones stuck having to read and consider everything you post. They may return the favour. And the rest of us may appreciate it as much.
Because it's dark (dark is heavier than light, which is why it gets darker the deeper you go into the oceans), the cable sinks to the bottom. If the cables were full of light, they'd float to the top of the ocean where pirates could steal the bandwidth and possibly spread spam or even malware worldwide.
The trick, of course is ensuring that "undersea cables" remain so. For that, anchors are used. They're sort of like firewall anchors, but bigger and heavier.
Funny how kids used to do a lot better when schools didn't really care about kids' self-esteem and made them work diligently on paper.
Oooh. I expect you'll be slammed with all sorts of accusations for that bit of political incorrectness. My own opinion is the same, though I'm suspicious that a good chunk of the funding available for schools is tied up in ancillary efforts (self-esteem programs consultants, and administrators, among others) and hence not much is available for textbooks and clean bathrooms. Or, for that matter, things like more teachers.
the average public school is literally just a tax-supported daycare center that provides some education.
Could someone who was politically aware when Bush the First was in power please explain why belonging to the ACLU was such a dig back then?
It started before the Bush and Rove twins assumed power. Maybe someone who lives and breathes this stuff can provide a more informative link describing the tortured history, but if it helps, this Wiki article will get you started.
Most of this you can date back to the Reagan administration. A quick and dirty summary would be that Reagan was elected during a time when the country was suffering from the social and economic malaise arising out of, or during, the previous Carter administration. His election brought with it the religeous right (people who were so upset with the changes that started happening in the 1960s that they insisted the 1950s had to come back) and brought with them grass-roots campaigning and strategies. Fast foward a few years, and you end up with an organised and funded network of groups that can repeat the buzzwords and pseudo idealogies ad nauseum. Repeat something often enough and people start to believe it's true. And when large numbers are doing it in an orchestrated manner, even those who haven't drunk the koolaid will start to question their own beliefs.
It's worth pointing out that Fox news is a newcomer in that regard. While they're an especially vocal mouthpiece, the "enough people doing it" effect has spilled over so now you have the mainstream media (The New York Times, being a good example), routinely questioning themselves for perceived "liberal" biases. You'd think with the large numbers of people that are routinely listening to nothing but that echo chamber referred to as "talk radio", they'd learn to be happy.
If you examine the Timeline section in the Wiki article on the religous right, you'll be able to correlate how and when popular opinions and perceptions of things changed. As for the ACLU specifically, well, they were founded in 1920s, so they carry with them a lot of history. If you think the current political climate is polluted, imagine a time when instead of complaining about liberals, a good portion of the population were going on about communists and negro sympathizers.
Don't make us get probable cause! Probable cause is for losers! And put the bumpers back into my bowling lanes!
I'm a big fan of sarcasm, but instead of going the bumper-sticker advocacy route, I'd suggest visiting the ACLU and clicking the Donate Now button. That way when someone slams you with a "What are you? A pinko liberal card-carrying member of the ACLU?", they'd be at least partially correct for a change.
Similarly, you can visit the EFF website and become a member. Don't know if they give you a card to carry, but the free T-shirt could be worn by any geek with pride.
While I expect some of the more egregious abuses of the current administration may end when it packs up its bags and heads out the door, I don't expect to see the trend they represent to subside, or that in the future, there will fewer stories on Slashdot and in the mainstream press where the ACLU, the EFF and similar groups aren't forced to take yet another action to protect our rights.
This is about the same amount of protection as pulling out is a form of birth control.
In defense of the OP, he did offer what could be considered a reasonable set of comments. As for your counter arguments, it's worth pointing out that browsing to an "unknown site" is not synonymous with "all such browsing is subject to 0-day exploits", that the highly-publicised cases of devices being infected at the manufacturer are exceedingly rare, and that that the email attachment issue, to the extent it's relevant, can be addressed with workarounds.
Taken as a whole, my vote is with the OP.
If you want a battle of analogies, I'd suggest that while common sense may seem like a "pulling out" form of birth control, the near pathological reliance on antivirus software being present and running on all systems in a network is the equivalent of adopting the TSA model of security where any problems associated with having everyone or everything stopped, questioned, strip-searched, and investigated at every step (often using unknown or dubious criteria) are considered acceptable. Why? Because somebody is doing is doing something and therefore everything must be OK. And because everyone is doing it, with the exception of foreigners (Mac, Linux and BSD users, if you will), you're expected to get with the program or be considered suspect.
Granted, for some, or in some environments, adopting such a model may be unavoidable. But that's not to say it's the better alternative, or that the common sense alternative (something that supports an infinite number of layers) can be so easily be dismissed.
You're free to characterise any of the above as absurd, of course. But for my money, any comment that forces a re-examination of antivirus software and security in general is worth its weight in gold. My own version of absurd is seeing 500 people trading comments on Slashdot touting the benefits of their favourite antivirus program.
The problem is that we I.T. people are Data Hoarders. Even if the data isn't useful today, or at all useful into the foreseeable future, we still hang on to it. And we save every detail we can just to prove how clever we are to have been able to discover it in the first place.
I'm afraid the above is not unique to IT.
Check with your accounting department and ask them how long they, or the auditors, retain data, and how much of it they keep. You'll get similar answers (with varying reasons) from the folks in legal, and in sales. Then there's all those secretaries and assistants who don't know how or otherwise refuse to delete anything.
Yep you nailed it. The gas prices we're seeing have less to do with scarcity, and more to do with a captive market - well, that and the fact that the majority of oil producing countries are literally...
I'd offer the suggestion that Bush's "All options are on the table." drum beat of war comments with respect to Iran, or Israel's recent military exercises have something to do with it, but I'm still grappling with your the implicit "China isn't a factor." reasoning.
Despite "like's" notoriety in the hands, or mouths, of US teenagers, it is an effective and useful phrase and can enhance communication in both the written and spoken word.
You are so like totally not correct.
English is evolving. Learn to live with it.
What you're describing (advocating) is not evolution, but unfortunate mutations in the gene pool. Mother Nature, however, has other plans. If the process of natural selection doesn't take care of the problem, then my guess is that selective breeding (refusing to date retards, morons, and pathological illiterates) will.
The web is quickly turning into television - a bunch of stupid avertisements created by stupid people geared for stupid consumers.
And we like it that way!
The web is still way better than anything else we got.
To continue your metaphor, there's more channels than cable and satellite put together, so the odds are better that something somewhere is worth watching.
These social networking sites are just libraries of personal info about you that anyone can see.
Maybe that's the point?
Some years back I was involved in a civil suit involving my two dogs. I got a call from the producers of the Judge Judy show asking me whether I was interested in having the case handled in front of television cameras, the carrot part of the offer being that if I lost, they would pay for any and all costs.
At first I was, quite honestly, flattered. Hollywood producers calling me at home? Who wouldn't be, right? I thought about it for a few minutes and it seemed that that it could be a funny episode, given that my dogs were funny enough, and the nature of the case itself deserved a laugh track. Why not turn an annoying legal predicament into entertainment?
But then I thought of all the willing and eager contestants I'd seen on the Jerry Springer show over the years. I decided that trading my dignity and privacy for 15 minutes of fame and a few dollars by appearing on television show was A Really Stupid Idea, and told the woman at the other end of the phone, "No."
It would be a stretch to say that social networking sites fall into a similar category as the Jerry Springer show (not too many hillbillies on Facebook yet), but the desire to tell all, share all, and most importantly, be seen, is undeniably widespread in our modern culture. I guess the theory is that if enough people are doing it, it doesn't really matter. And if there are consequences (intended, or otherwise), then the notoriety and fame more than makes up for everything.
The key, again, is to choose text colors that are not "pure" from the MSPaint palette, but instead are pastel-ized enough to have equivalent contrast on your grey background of choice.
This is the first time I've seen someone make this comment. Every time I see a screenshot of someone's terminal that makes use of pure colours, I have trouble deciding whether the person is colour-blind, wears plaid trousers, or requires the extreme/gaudy contrast to make up for really bad vision.
The problem with toning down the colours is you get into an area where art students are comfortable but everyone else stumbles, typically with less than satisfactory results. Learning colour theory would help, of course. But still, coming up with a palette of a half-dozen or dozen colours requires effort, time and some talent. Hell, picking two or three colours to paint the exterior of a house without relying on the paint manufacturer's set of pre-prepared palettes can be a challenge for many. And that's before you decide on whether or not you even like those colours.
Vim users are fairly lucky in that a good many people have already expended the time and effort to design colour schemes. That's assuming you're not fussy, and the scheme renders identically on your work LCD, your laptop and every other monitor you use, and that the ambient light conditions in all environments are similarly consistent.
When you are high up in the organization and you have to come out of your cube for more than 50% of your day, what you disparage as "people skills" count for the majority of work.
Actually, you just sound like an idiot who stopped reading when you became incensed.
What I did was was make a comment with respect to the often repeated statement that people act in an entirely selfish manner, a mantra that, if the popular press is any indication, is taken as gospel.
If calling that socio-economic theory into question (by providing a data point of one) is viewed by you as "not addressing the issue", "idiotic", "half-cocked", and written by someone who "failed" English and was "incensed", then I'd suggest you get some fresh air. Maybe take the dog for a walk.
You can use that time to consider how your own use of the English language contributes nothing of value to this or any other discussion. Or is being civil and making a coherent point too much to ask?
Sure about that? If you shop at, say Whole Foods Market, for instance, most of the organic produce they sell is produced by Big Agra, not local farms.
No, I buy most everything at Farmer's Markets. And then I tend to buy from the vendors I get to know, which is pretty easy given that most people there are more than happy to talk about what they do and how they do it.
As for Walmart, well, that's a big issue. My only point is that the price of something is, at least for me, never the deciding factor in a purchase. Ruling out Walmart is as much a nobrainer as buying shit from people who have nothing to do with what they're selling you, and thus, aren't accountable.
In the end, we all our make choices. Unfortunately, most Americans aren't as smart, intelligent or well-educated as you and I, and they don't care about anything but themselves.
Thanks for the compliment, but like I said, I'm an ordinary person, and the principles behind my approach are no less so. If it's the triumph of optimism over experience that I believe even a harried Soccer mom who clips coupons in her spare time would stop shopping at Walmart after, for example, watching a documentary on the subject, then so be it.
The problem you have, Mr. Dada, is that you tend to assume that people care about how a company acts enough to influence their choices. But people choose based on what's best for their own livelihood (as well they should).
At the risk of sounding like a Birkenstock-wearing politically-correct social activist, I'd suggest that while that may a fair generalisation, it smacks of an orthodoxy that has its popularity and appeal founded in a comforting but simplistic view of the world.
I don't shop at Walmart, my food comes mostly from local organic farmers, I donate to animal shelters, and I offer political support to those who see and are willing to act beyond my own (or someone else's) immediate concerns or preferences. That applies to the proverbial pocketbook type issues as it does to things of a more general nature. I do not, however, wear Birkenstocks, stay as far away as possible from activists of any persuasion, and consider myself as very ordinary.
Doing the right thing, at least in principle, was something that we expected of ourselves and each other before we allowed ourselves to be redefined as self-interested mindless consumers, and selfishness was elevated to a virtue.
Why does this crap keep getting modded 'Insightful'? Presumably its by fellow armchair economists who agree that the atomic composition of the Earth responds to supply and demand. Retards.
I think the OP's point was not that Earth responds to supply and demand, but that available supply at a given point in time is related to exploration, which in can be seen as a function of price. You don't need to be an economist, armchair or otherwise, or be able to point Alberta on a map of Canada to see the obviousness of that.
I watched a documentary recently on China that described how the Chinese have gone and bought themselves an entire mountain in Peru to secure themselves a supply of copper for the next few decades. Apparently, the effect of this strategy is such that, according to the documentary, the world's (again, that's "ours" and not Mother Earth's) supply of copper is expected to increase dramatically while the price is expected to decrease by a factor of 8.
Re:Let's call it 'Google Tips and Tricks'
on
Google Apps Hacks
·
· Score: 1
The reviewer goes to the trouble of saying that most of the 'hacks' in the book are not actually hacks, but then goes on to call most of which were tips and tricks 'hacks'.
I think he was just being deferrential to the publication's preferred usage. Which is fair, but no less annoying. Besides, didn't you know?
Tips and Tricks are for kids, but Hacks are for h4ck3r5!
If you did want to read something into it, it would be that the state of computer literacy among the great unwashed masses is so low that ordinary features could be regarded as hacks, and then, that someone could actually make money selling a book describing them to such people.
Slashdot Mirror
Soon you'll have recreated the functionality of a late 80's usenet client.
Agreed. The problem is even if you somehow you manage to create a webpage -> email/news gateway, you end up with three problems.
First, the advertising model that supports Slashdot falls on its face. Text-based ads in the form of footers could be attached, I suppose, but I'd hate to be the one trying selling the idea to the guy that signs the cheques.
Second, web weenies will object. I've seen perfectly good email lists disappear after switching to a web-based "forum" approach because the majority (vocal majority, perhaps) insist it's better.
Third, the moderation system, for all its fun and warts, would be rendered moot.
Me, I'd be only too happy to pay for something I can read in a text-based client, but I'm afraid it ain't gonna happen. My guess is we'll have to wait for more people to rediscover the 80s, or tough it out while waiting for Web 3.0.
I'm sure with a little thought, MS could come up with an industry leading text based interface that I could ...
I'm not sure what you mean by "industry leading", but the new PowerShell is Microsoft's attempt at that. I've only had a brief look at it and was as disgusted as I was disappointed. I could speculate as to why so many Windows admins are impressed, but my conclusions would be even less charitable.
As for Cygwin, everyone, including the developers and maintainers, would be happy to see the reasons for its existence (interoperability) disappear, but no one is expecting that to happen any time soon.
Nah, SATA gets rid of all that. No more master and slave. Now, we submit to the controller.
Actually, submitting to the controller is redundant. I guess that makes the above a joke within a joke for those who thought otherwise. From the relevant Wiki article:
And because SATA presents the ATA interface to the system (the difference being how the chips are connected to the drive), you could say there's an additional joke in there, but one only those using SCSI would find funny.
So how many baskets of peas can you get me for a hog's head?
Nicely done, but to elaborate further, the following excerpt from a better article on Ars Technica should help.
so he's funny for misreading the headline and then making an obnoxious comment about it, but I'm a troll for properly reading his post and making an obnoxious comment?
I believe the OP was poking good fun at what he believed to be a grammatical error in the submission's subject line. Unfortunately, there is no error. Simply an awkward construct, not unlike an obnoxious comment trying to be funny.
I'd suggest you be kind to the mods by being judicious in what you post, as they're the ones stuck having to read and consider everything you post. They may return the favour. And the rest of us may appreciate it as much.
No light means it's dark.
But that's only half the story.
Because it's dark (dark is heavier than light, which is why it gets darker the deeper you go into the oceans), the cable sinks to the bottom. If the cables were full of light, they'd float to the top of the ocean where pirates could steal the bandwidth and possibly spread spam or even malware worldwide.
The trick, of course is ensuring that "undersea cables" remain so. For that, anchors are used. They're sort of like firewall anchors, but bigger and heavier.
Funny how kids used to do a lot better when schools didn't really care about kids' self-esteem and made them work diligently on paper.
Oooh. I expect you'll be slammed with all sorts of accusations for that bit of political incorrectness. My own opinion is the same, though I'm suspicious that a good chunk of the funding available for schools is tied up in ancillary efforts (self-esteem programs consultants, and administrators, among others) and hence not much is available for textbooks and clean bathrooms. Or, for that matter, things like more teachers.
the average public school is literally just a tax-supported daycare center that provides some education.
What, you don't want them to succeed?
Could someone who was politically aware when Bush the First was in power please explain why belonging to the ACLU was such a dig back then?
It started before the Bush and Rove twins assumed power. Maybe someone who lives and breathes this stuff can provide a more informative link describing the tortured history, but if it helps, this Wiki article will get you started.
Most of this you can date back to the Reagan administration. A quick and dirty summary would be that Reagan was elected during a time when the country was suffering from the social and economic malaise arising out of, or during, the previous Carter administration. His election brought with it the religeous right (people who were so upset with the changes that started happening in the 1960s that they insisted the 1950s had to come back) and brought with them grass-roots campaigning and strategies. Fast foward a few years, and you end up with an organised and funded network of groups that can repeat the buzzwords and pseudo idealogies ad nauseum. Repeat something often enough and people start to believe it's true. And when large numbers are doing it in an orchestrated manner, even those who haven't drunk the koolaid will start to question their own beliefs.
It's worth pointing out that Fox news is a newcomer in that regard. While they're an especially vocal mouthpiece, the "enough people doing it" effect has spilled over so now you have the mainstream media (The New York Times, being a good example), routinely questioning themselves for perceived "liberal" biases. You'd think with the large numbers of people that are routinely listening to nothing but that echo chamber referred to as "talk radio", they'd learn to be happy.
If you examine the Timeline section in the Wiki article on the religous right, you'll be able to correlate how and when popular opinions and perceptions of things changed. As for the ACLU specifically, well, they were founded in 1920s, so they carry with them a lot of history. If you think the current political climate is polluted, imagine a time when instead of complaining about liberals, a good portion of the population were going on about communists and negro sympathizers.
Don't make us get probable cause! Probable cause is for losers! And put the bumpers back into my bowling lanes!
I'm a big fan of sarcasm, but instead of going the bumper-sticker advocacy route, I'd suggest visiting the ACLU and clicking the Donate Now button. That way when someone slams you with a "What are you? A pinko liberal card-carrying member of the ACLU?", they'd be at least partially correct for a change.
Similarly, you can visit the EFF website and become a member. Don't know if they give you a card to carry, but the free T-shirt could be worn by any geek with pride.
While I expect some of the more egregious abuses of the current administration may end when it packs up its bags and heads out the door, I don't expect to see the trend they represent to subside, or that in the future, there will fewer stories on Slashdot and in the mainstream press where the ACLU, the EFF and similar groups aren't forced to take yet another action to protect our rights.
This is about the same amount of protection as pulling out is a form of birth control.
In defense of the OP, he did offer what could be considered a reasonable set of comments. As for your counter arguments, it's worth pointing out that browsing to an "unknown site" is not synonymous with "all such browsing is subject to 0-day exploits", that the highly-publicised cases of devices being infected at the manufacturer are exceedingly rare, and that that the email attachment issue, to the extent it's relevant, can be addressed with workarounds.
Taken as a whole, my vote is with the OP.
If you want a battle of analogies, I'd suggest that while common sense may seem like a "pulling out" form of birth control, the near pathological reliance on antivirus software being present and running on all systems in a network is the equivalent of adopting the TSA model of security where any problems associated with having everyone or everything stopped, questioned, strip-searched, and investigated at every step (often using unknown or dubious criteria) are considered acceptable. Why? Because somebody is doing is doing something and therefore everything must be OK. And because everyone is doing it, with the exception of foreigners (Mac, Linux and BSD users, if you will), you're expected to get with the program or be considered suspect.
Granted, for some, or in some environments, adopting such a model may be unavoidable. But that's not to say it's the better alternative, or that the common sense alternative (something that supports an infinite number of layers) can be so easily be dismissed.
You're free to characterise any of the above as absurd, of course. But for my money, any comment that forces a re-examination of antivirus software and security in general is worth its weight in gold. My own version of absurd is seeing 500 people trading comments on Slashdot touting the benefits of their favourite antivirus program.
The problem is that we I.T. people are Data Hoarders. Even if the data isn't useful today, or at all useful into the foreseeable future, we still hang on to it. And we save every detail we can just to prove how clever we are to have been able to discover it in the first place.
I'm afraid the above is not unique to IT.
Check with your accounting department and ask them how long they, or the auditors, retain data, and how much of it they keep. You'll get similar answers (with varying reasons) from the folks in legal, and in sales. Then there's all those secretaries and assistants who don't know how or otherwise refuse to delete anything.
... The Fellatious Article
The article sucked?
Yep you nailed it. The gas prices we're seeing have less to do with scarcity, and more to do with a captive market - well, that and the fact that the majority of oil producing countries are literally ...
I'd offer the suggestion that Bush's "All options are on the table." drum beat of war comments with respect to Iran, or Israel's recent military exercises have something to do with it, but I'm still grappling with your the implicit "China isn't a factor." reasoning.
Despite "like's" notoriety in the hands, or mouths, of US teenagers, it is an effective and useful phrase and can enhance communication in both the written and spoken word.
You are so like totally not correct.
English is evolving. Learn to live with it.
What you're describing (advocating) is not evolution, but unfortunate mutations in the gene pool. Mother Nature, however, has other plans. If the process of natural selection doesn't take care of the problem, then my guess is that selective breeding (refusing to date retards, morons, and pathological illiterates) will.
The web is quickly turning into television - a bunch of stupid avertisements created by stupid people geared for stupid consumers.
And we like it that way!
The web is still way better than anything else we got.
To continue your metaphor, there's more channels than cable and satellite put together, so the odds are better that something somewhere is worth watching.
Actually, Rob, they have explained it. Please see the explanation on Wikipedia for the power chord.
I think he was referring to the characteristic sound of the SG.
These social networking sites are just libraries of personal info about you that anyone can see.
Maybe that's the point?
Some years back I was involved in a civil suit involving my two dogs. I got a call from the producers of the Judge Judy show asking me whether I was interested in having the case handled in front of television cameras, the carrot part of the offer being that if I lost, they would pay for any and all costs.
At first I was, quite honestly, flattered. Hollywood producers calling me at home? Who wouldn't be, right? I thought about it for a few minutes and it seemed that that it could be a funny episode, given that my dogs were funny enough, and the nature of the case itself deserved a laugh track. Why not turn an annoying legal predicament into entertainment?
But then I thought of all the willing and eager contestants I'd seen on the Jerry Springer show over the years. I decided that trading my dignity and privacy for 15 minutes of fame and a few dollars by appearing on television show was A Really Stupid Idea, and told the woman at the other end of the phone, "No."
It would be a stretch to say that social networking sites fall into a similar category as the Jerry Springer show (not too many hillbillies on Facebook yet), but the desire to tell all, share all, and most importantly, be seen, is undeniably widespread in our modern culture. I guess the theory is that if enough people are doing it, it doesn't really matter. And if there are consequences (intended, or otherwise), then the notoriety and fame more than makes up for everything.
The key, again, is to choose text colors that are not "pure" from the MSPaint palette, but instead are pastel-ized enough to have equivalent contrast on your grey background of choice.
This is the first time I've seen someone make this comment. Every time I see a screenshot of someone's terminal that makes use of pure colours, I have trouble deciding whether the person is colour-blind, wears plaid trousers, or requires the extreme/gaudy contrast to make up for really bad vision.
The problem with toning down the colours is you get into an area where art students are comfortable but everyone else stumbles, typically with less than satisfactory results. Learning colour theory would help, of course. But still, coming up with a palette of a half-dozen or dozen colours requires effort, time and some talent. Hell, picking two or three colours to paint the exterior of a house without relying on the paint manufacturer's set of pre-prepared palettes can be a challenge for many. And that's before you decide on whether or not you even like those colours.
Vim users are fairly lucky in that a good many people have already expended the time and effort to design colour schemes. That's assuming you're not fussy, and the scheme renders identically on your work LCD, your laptop and every other monitor you use, and that the ambient light conditions in all environments are similarly consistent.
When you are high up in the organization and you have to come out of your cube for more than 50% of your day, what you disparage as "people skills" count for the majority of work.
You leave your cube?
Who keeps an eye on that red stapler, then?
Actually, you just sound like an idiot who stopped reading when you became incensed.
What I did was was make a comment with respect to the often repeated statement that people act in an entirely selfish manner, a mantra that, if the popular press is any indication, is taken as gospel.
If calling that socio-economic theory into question (by providing a data point of one) is viewed by you as "not addressing the issue", "idiotic", "half-cocked", and written by someone who "failed" English and was "incensed", then I'd suggest you get some fresh air. Maybe take the dog for a walk.
You can use that time to consider how your own use of the English language contributes nothing of value to this or any other discussion. Or is being civil and making a coherent point too much to ask?
Sure about that? If you shop at, say Whole Foods Market, for instance, most of the organic produce they sell is produced by Big Agra, not local farms.
No, I buy most everything at Farmer's Markets. And then I tend to buy from the vendors I get to know, which is pretty easy given that most people there are more than happy to talk about what they do and how they do it.
As for Walmart, well, that's a big issue. My only point is that the price of something is, at least for me, never the deciding factor in a purchase. Ruling out Walmart is as much a nobrainer as buying shit from people who have nothing to do with what they're selling you, and thus, aren't accountable.
In the end, we all our make choices. Unfortunately, most Americans aren't as smart, intelligent or well-educated as you and I, and they don't care about anything but themselves.
Thanks for the compliment, but like I said, I'm an ordinary person, and the principles behind my approach are no less so. If it's the triumph of optimism over experience that I believe even a harried Soccer mom who clips coupons in her spare time would stop shopping at Walmart after, for example, watching a documentary on the subject, then so be it.
The problem you have, Mr. Dada, is that you tend to assume that people care about how a company acts enough to influence their choices. But people choose based on what's best for their own livelihood (as well they should).
At the risk of sounding like a Birkenstock-wearing politically-correct social activist, I'd suggest that while that may a fair generalisation, it smacks of an orthodoxy that has its popularity and appeal founded in a comforting but simplistic view of the world.
I don't shop at Walmart, my food comes mostly from local organic farmers, I donate to animal shelters, and I offer political support to those who see and are willing to act beyond my own (or someone else's) immediate concerns or preferences. That applies to the proverbial pocketbook type issues as it does to things of a more general nature. I do not, however, wear Birkenstocks, stay as far away as possible from activists of any persuasion, and consider myself as very ordinary.
Doing the right thing, at least in principle, was something that we expected of ourselves and each other before we allowed ourselves to be redefined as self-interested mindless consumers, and selfishness was elevated to a virtue.
Why does this crap keep getting modded 'Insightful'? Presumably its by fellow armchair economists who agree that the atomic composition of the Earth responds to supply and demand. Retards.
I think the OP's point was not that Earth responds to supply and demand, but that available supply at a given point in time is related to exploration, which in can be seen as a function of price. You don't need to be an economist, armchair or otherwise, or be able to point Alberta on a map of Canada to see the obviousness of that.
I watched a documentary recently on China that described how the Chinese have gone and bought themselves an entire mountain in Peru to secure themselves a supply of copper for the next few decades. Apparently, the effect of this strategy is such that, according to the documentary, the world's (again, that's "ours" and not Mother Earth's) supply of copper is expected to increase dramatically while the price is expected to decrease by a factor of 8.
The reviewer goes to the trouble of saying that most of the 'hacks' in the book are not actually hacks, but then goes on to call most of which were tips and tricks 'hacks'.
I think he was just being deferrential to the publication's preferred usage. Which is fair, but no less annoying. Besides, didn't you know?
Tips and Tricks are for kids, but Hacks are for h4ck3r5!
If you did want to read something into it, it would be that the state of computer literacy among the great unwashed masses is so low that ordinary features could be regarded as hacks, and then, that someone could actually make money selling a book describing them to such people.