"...when Windows was released, the typical user had years of experience with DOS. Clearly, no one should ever have switched to Windows..."
The switch to Windows allowed people to do things they would not have been able to do, and wanted to. Games, internet applications, better word processing, etc. were all Windows benefits. Linux is an alternative to Windows, not a necessary upgrade. For the average person, the only benefit to switching to Linux is saving a few dollars and a bit more security. That's simply not enough to make them enter an unfamiliar environment.
"...studies show that people who haven't used either system find Linux just as easy to use as Windows"
I certainly advocate new users starting with Linux - my argument is against the reasons to switch right now.
"...saying, "there's no reason to switch, because we would have to switch" just doesn't make any sense. Come up with a real reason, or just quiet down.""
Switching is a major cost in itself. An entirely new operating system/interface has to be learned, different applications must be used (and learned), etc.. If you've ever moved (or considered moving) your residence, you should be well aware of the costs of moving itself as a factor in the decision.
1. The typical user has several years of experience with Windows.
2. Most hardware will be autodetected and supported by Windows (typical users don't have cutting-edge technology). If not, the hardware typically has a CD and simple instructions.
3. A huge amount of discussion (maybe the majority) is about the effects of issues on people not reading/..
Installing Windows is extremely easy, and no major administration or configuration is necessary for a typical user.
There was no implication that/. readers were the sole target of the grandparent.
Most importantly, typical users are already familiar with Windows. There isn't any reason for them to learn an entirely new operating system when there is no real benefit (any security gains and cost savings are more than overmatched by lack of hardware support, documentation, and universality across distros, among other things).
What does sessionmanagement have to do with my post? My bookmarks, windows, and desktop are all fine, so I'm not sure what "problem" you're referring to.
I don't need to run many apps at a time (see parent).
I haven't had a virus/security problem in years. Keeping NAV/NIS up to date and configured intelligently is easy and effective.
Most importantly, people don't spend much time working with their OS. I check email, browse the web, create text documents and spreadsheets, and listen to music. None of those are any easier in Linux (I'm using Firebird, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice, for the record), and NIS/NAV keeps my machine quite safe. Do I tweak Windows? Certainly, but that doesn't mean I'm interested in learning to use a new OS which doesn't increase functionality. Running XP isn't costing me a dime (I got it years ago), so there's no cost saving.
Exactly how will this work outside the US? Considering that $0.01 is a lot of money in third-world countries, and not much in the UK, you can't just make it a flat rate. But if you make it a sliding scale, what's to prevent a spammer from using an address in Somalia to make it cheaper?
"I wonder how long it would be before the legality of thwarting observation by wearing such devices would be decided by the supreme court."
Since the only reason to wear it would be to disable security devices, there's no reason to think that the laws already on the books wouldn't take care of you.
"Unless students vote with their feet by boycotting classes that require overpriced textbooks, and threatening to switch schools or majors if a required course requires the overpriced textbook, there's never going to be any change."
That's ridiculous. We're not talking about CDs here - you'd be boycotting your way straight to a lower-paying job. You can't boycott a required class, and there are always people who will want to take optional classes (if there weren't, they wouldn't be offered). Switching majors isn't an option for anyone who actually has direction in their life - I'm not going into CompLit just because Psych textbooks cost more. Switching schools isn't a threat either - firstly, you'll typically set yourself back a great deal by doing so, and secondly, there are plenty of people willing to take your place.
Popups are tolerable, so long as there's only ONE AT A TIME. Having 7 windows open up like that is not only annoying (maybe I don't want to close 7 windows or maybe I don't want to see more than one picture), but also a waste of resources (maybe I don't want to dedicate that much bandwidth). In addition, it requires a webmaster with no foresight, as the massive bandwidth and data transfer amounts are otherwise completely avoidable.
Personally, the second all of those opened I closed them, and didn't give a second thought to exploring the site. I consider it equivalent to a virus, worm, or hack-job. If an outside source causes my computer to do something I didn't want it to, it's hijacking, no matter their intent.
'Hippie' business ventures (characterized in this instance by an assumption that everyone involved will 'stay cool') aren't a good idea. You can't base a big project like this on the hopes that no one will change their mind or behave in a 'bizarre manner'. UL was doomed from the start - never underestimate the necessity and power of a well-written contract.
This is far from new, and cognitive psychologists have had excellent evidence of it for decades. It's called an incubation period, and the benefit is a result of trying new methods - if you keep at something, you tend to get "stuck" in one line of thinking, and stopping (or removing focus) allows your brain to more easily try something "new".
Dorm room. Virtually no heat. Broken printer. Net connection that went from "decent" to "off" every 5 minutes. Weather would go from 70 degrees and sunny at 9:30AM to snowing at noon to raining at 2PM, with no accurate forecasts. Antisocial roomate who never left the room, wouldn't speak to me, and always ate Peanut M&Ms & Snickers despite my constant reminders that I was highly allergic and the odor alone could kill me (no joke). Neighbor whose feet managed to make the entire hall smell. Guy down the hall who used to make fishsticks, stinking up every corner of the place. Collapsed cot-mattress. Chair covered in unidentifiable stains. One toilet for ~30 guys. No car. Depressed city (slum) in the middle of nowhere. Etc.
Ah, memories of freshman year... It really wasn't that bad, but it sure looks terrible on paper.
Civilians can't legally own/operate anti-aircraft weapons in the UK, so I doubt anyone will be shooting at it with bullets. Sarcasm is another story, of course...
You can make a pseudo-legit message sell something. Are you telling me friends don't recommend websites through email where you're from? Spammers are known for trying to shout their product at you, but it doesn't take a genius to be discreet.
Crapflooding is essentially what I'm worried about, though - if spammers do it enough, filters will cease to be useful (spammer benefit: less people will use them). From my end, it just means a whole lot of junk I can't filter.
I think you missed my point. If the spammers just send pseudo-legit messages, there won't be any way to distinguish them from legit, no matter how good your filter is. If the only statistical difference between them and legit is the fact that you don't know them (and the content is incorrect/inapplicable), computer filters will be useless.
Open up the last legit email you got from a friend. Now imagine that exact email, using different names, was sent to a million addresses. Imaging you were a recipient - how could your filter tell the real email from the fake?
Will -20 degree days (like most of the northeastern US is having today), or 105 degree+ days in direct sunlight damage them? How about having a radiator right below it (my parents' house has most of its heating system just below windows)? Ah, and lets not forget dog saliva and claw scratches.
"...if we kept government quality information, we'd be required to surrender a copy of that information to the government. Now that's scary."
No, it's not. What exactly could the government do with your prints? Add them to the massive database used in criminal investigations? Knowing you were late to work is only of interest to the authorities if you're suspected of committing a crime at that specific time. Perish the thought of you not being able to commit a crime.
Share the info with who? What will someone do with the information? If they give it to the feds, it can be added to fingerprint files, which is a good thing (your don't have the right to commit a crime). Unless there is lax security and someone can figure out a way to manufacture a fake fingerprint based on the data in the scanning system and fool law enforcement with it, I don't see the negatives.
I'm worried about spammers realizing that they can effectively negate the usefulness of filters without breaking a sweat (spammers, please don't read the following). If they switched from super-short fake messages to mock-real messages (a paragraph or two long, a legit-sounding subject, etc.) and they all sent out millions a day, everyone would be forced to turn off their filters. There would be no effective to distinguish those fake messages from real messages for most people (without a whitelist/blacklist system, which does more harm than good for most).
In such a situation, email would grind to a halt. Anyone who kept trying to train their filters would just end up blocking most legit emails, and those who don't train for it or turn off would be flooded with real and fake messages they can't distinguish between. The messages would even be profitable, so long as your "friend" included a link to some "cool website" that happens to sell [fill in spam product here]. Go ahead and train your filter to block emails containing URLs. Hah! Maybe if you don't have a job, friends, or buy things over the internet you can, but for most it's just not going to work.
Slashdot Mirror
"...when Windows was released, the typical user had years of experience with DOS. Clearly, no one should ever have switched to Windows..."
The switch to Windows allowed people to do things they would not have been able to do, and wanted to. Games, internet applications, better word processing, etc. were all Windows benefits. Linux is an alternative to Windows, not a necessary upgrade. For the average person, the only benefit to switching to Linux is saving a few dollars and a bit more security. That's simply not enough to make them enter an unfamiliar environment.
"...studies show that people who haven't used either system find Linux just as easy to use as Windows"
I certainly advocate new users starting with Linux - my argument is against the reasons to switch right now.
"...saying, "there's no reason to switch, because we would have to switch" just doesn't make any sense. Come up with a real reason, or just quiet down.""
Switching is a major cost in itself. An entirely new operating system/interface has to be learned, different applications must be used (and learned), etc.. If you've ever moved (or considered moving) your residence, you should be well aware of the costs of moving itself as a factor in the decision.
1. The typical user has several years of experience with Windows. 2. Most hardware will be autodetected and supported by Windows (typical users don't have cutting-edge technology). If not, the hardware typically has a CD and simple instructions. 3. A huge amount of discussion (maybe the majority) is about the effects of issues on people not reading /..
Installing Windows is extremely easy, and no major administration or configuration is necessary for a typical user.
/. readers were the sole target of the grandparent.
There was no implication that
Most importantly, typical users are already familiar with Windows. There isn't any reason for them to learn an entirely new operating system when there is no real benefit (any security gains and cost savings are more than overmatched by lack of hardware support, documentation, and universality across distros, among other things).
What does sessionmanagement have to do with my post? My bookmarks, windows, and desktop are all fine, so I'm not sure what "problem" you're referring to.
I don't need to run many apps at a time (see parent).
I haven't had a virus/security problem in years. Keeping NAV/NIS up to date and configured intelligently is easy and effective.
Most importantly, people don't spend much time working with their OS. I check email, browse the web, create text documents and spreadsheets, and listen to music. None of those are any easier in Linux (I'm using Firebird, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice, for the record), and NIS/NAV keeps my machine quite safe. Do I tweak Windows? Certainly, but that doesn't mean I'm interested in learning to use a new OS which doesn't increase functionality. Running XP isn't costing me a dime (I got it years ago), so there's no cost saving.
Sorry, but Linux simply isn't ready for typical users.
Note: Programmers and people with excessive amounts of free time are not 'typical users'.
"Giving them photons"?
Yes, and if I shoot you I'm just "giving you lead".
"Infrared"?
If I used a sniper rifle, I'd be harder to trace, too.
If you knowingly commit a crime, your ridiculous excuses won't get you anywhere.
Exactly how will this work outside the US? Considering that $0.01 is a lot of money in third-world countries, and not much in the UK, you can't just make it a flat rate. But if you make it a sliding scale, what's to prevent a spammer from using an address in Somalia to make it cheaper?
"I wonder how long it would be before the legality of thwarting observation by wearing such devices would be decided by the supreme court."
Since the only reason to wear it would be to disable security devices, there's no reason to think that the laws already on the books wouldn't take care of you.
"he wouldn't be my boss, he would be the janitor."
Unless you're the assistant janitor, in which case he's both...
"Anyone have a SCO mirror?"
Queen: "Magic mirror, on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?"
SCO Mirror: "SCO owns the features that make the human nose, eyes, and cheeks 'fair'. Snow White will be hearing from our lawyers promptly."
He's obviously never been to a real football game. Brits put American fans to shame (for the record, I'm American myself).
"Unless students vote with their feet by boycotting classes that require overpriced textbooks, and threatening to switch schools or majors if a required course requires the overpriced textbook, there's never going to be any change."
That's ridiculous. We're not talking about CDs here - you'd be boycotting your way straight to a lower-paying job. You can't boycott a required class, and there are always people who will want to take optional classes (if there weren't, they wouldn't be offered). Switching majors isn't an option for anyone who actually has direction in their life - I'm not going into CompLit just because Psych textbooks cost more. Switching schools isn't a threat either - firstly, you'll typically set yourself back a great deal by doing so, and secondly, there are plenty of people willing to take your place.
Popups are tolerable, so long as there's only ONE AT A TIME. Having 7 windows open up like that is not only annoying (maybe I don't want to close 7 windows or maybe I don't want to see more than one picture), but also a waste of resources (maybe I don't want to dedicate that much bandwidth). In addition, it requires a webmaster with no foresight, as the massive bandwidth and data transfer amounts are otherwise completely avoidable .
Personally, the second all of those opened I closed them, and didn't give a second thought to exploring the site. I consider it equivalent to a virus, worm, or hack-job. If an outside source causes my computer to do something I didn't want it to, it's hijacking, no matter their intent.
An acronym has to be pronounceable (definitionally and functionally); anyone can say "muh-dah" (MUDDA) but who's going to say "dah-oo" (DAAU)?
'Hippie' business ventures (characterized in this instance by an assumption that everyone involved will 'stay cool') aren't a good idea. You can't base a big project like this on the hopes that no one will change their mind or behave in a 'bizarre manner'. UL was doomed from the start - never underestimate the necessity and power of a well-written contract.
This is far from new, and cognitive psychologists have had excellent evidence of it for decades. It's called an incubation period, and the benefit is a result of trying new methods - if you keep at something, you tend to get "stuck" in one line of thinking, and stopping (or removing focus) allows your brain to more easily try something "new".
Dorm room. Virtually no heat. Broken printer. Net connection that went from "decent" to "off" every 5 minutes. Weather would go from 70 degrees and sunny at 9:30AM to snowing at noon to raining at 2PM, with no accurate forecasts. Antisocial roomate who never left the room, wouldn't speak to me, and always ate Peanut M&Ms & Snickers despite my constant reminders that I was highly allergic and the odor alone could kill me (no joke). Neighbor whose feet managed to make the entire hall smell. Guy down the hall who used to make fishsticks, stinking up every corner of the place. Collapsed cot-mattress. Chair covered in unidentifiable stains. One toilet for ~30 guys. No car. Depressed city (slum) in the middle of nowhere. Etc.
Ah, memories of freshman year... It really wasn't that bad, but it sure looks terrible on paper.
Civilians can't legally own/operate anti-aircraft weapons in the UK, so I doubt anyone will be shooting at it with bullets. Sarcasm is another story, of course...
You can make a pseudo-legit message sell something. Are you telling me friends don't recommend websites through email where you're from? Spammers are known for trying to shout their product at you, but it doesn't take a genius to be discreet.
Crapflooding is essentially what I'm worried about, though - if spammers do it enough, filters will cease to be useful (spammer benefit: less people will use them). From my end, it just means a whole lot of junk I can't filter.
I think you missed my point. If the spammers just send pseudo-legit messages, there won't be any way to distinguish them from legit, no matter how good your filter is. If the only statistical difference between them and legit is the fact that you don't know them (and the content is incorrect/inapplicable), computer filters will be useless.
Open up the last legit email you got from a friend. Now imagine that exact email, using different names, was sent to a million addresses. Imaging you were a recipient - how could your filter tell the real email from the fake?
Will -20 degree days (like most of the northeastern US is having today), or 105 degree+ days in direct sunlight damage them? How about having a radiator right below it (my parents' house has most of its heating system just below windows)? Ah, and lets not forget dog saliva and claw scratches.
"...if we kept government quality information, we'd be required to surrender a copy of that information to the government. Now that's scary."
No, it's not. What exactly could the government do with your prints? Add them to the massive database used in criminal investigations? Knowing you were late to work is only of interest to the authorities if you're suspected of committing a crime at that specific time. Perish the thought of you not being able to commit a crime.
Share the info with who? What will someone do with the information? If they give it to the feds, it can be added to fingerprint files, which is a good thing (your don't have the right to commit a crime). Unless there is lax security and someone can figure out a way to manufacture a fake fingerprint based on the data in the scanning system and fool law enforcement with it, I don't see the negatives.
I'm worried about spammers realizing that they can effectively negate the usefulness of filters without breaking a sweat (spammers, please don't read the following). If they switched from super-short fake messages to mock-real messages (a paragraph or two long, a legit-sounding subject, etc.) and they all sent out millions a day, everyone would be forced to turn off their filters. There would be no effective to distinguish those fake messages from real messages for most people (without a whitelist/blacklist system, which does more harm than good for most).
In such a situation, email would grind to a halt. Anyone who kept trying to train their filters would just end up blocking most legit emails, and those who don't train for it or turn off would be flooded with real and fake messages they can't distinguish between. The messages would even be profitable, so long as your "friend" included a link to some "cool website" that happens to sell [fill in spam product here]. Go ahead and train your filter to block emails containing URLs. Hah! Maybe if you don't have a job, friends, or buy things over the internet you can, but for most it's just not going to work.