Everyone was happily moving along in a world where more gradients, more gloss, or more 3D was the way of the future. Then Apple changed all that by going retro. They still used gradients and gloss, but in a more subtle way. Their icons were 2D, flat, iconic rather than 3D and realistic. This changed more than just GUIs: slideshows, packaging, advertisements, and trade show posters are changing too.
Microsoft is just following the trend. This will be consistent with the look and feel of Metro, and Visual Studio 2012.
One of the fundamental problems with the constitution is that it provides for no penalty for violating it. Ex: It is okay to vote for, or sign, a law that violates the constitution. And the law even gets to sit on the books and become enforcable until an injunction is made against it. It is okay for police to deprive someone of their civil rights. Doing so is merely a procedural violation requiring some paperwork. This is all because the founding fathers assumed that the kinds of people who would be in these positions would be people of such impeccable character that they would never even consider doing this. Oops.
What country are you in where gays are not ostracized or harmed but pot smokers are harassed and arrested daily? It surely isn't the USA, where the police don't have time to waste on pot smokers: they walk right by them in public. Go visit a construction site some day. Yet hardly a month goes by where there isn't a story of an anti-gay protest or anti-gay violence somewhere.
The step after that, is admitting that this is also supported by mainstream Americans. Here at Slashdot we would like to think that it is the people -vs- the politicians. But in reality the people support this too. Despite rhetoric to the contrary, most Americans trust the government and the military to look out for them, and so they support warrant-less wiretapping and infinite detention because they perceive that it protects them from terrorists.
So often after a reset we get panicked calls along the lines of 'Word isn't installed any more!" Then someone has to go down to show the user in person where it is.
This is caused by start menu bloat.
Example 1: Start - All Programs - Adobe Reader - Adobe Reader Adobe Reader opens automatically when I encounter such a file. It doesn't need to be on the menu at all, let alone two levels in.
Example 2: Start - All Programs - Company Name - Product Name - Version - (Release Notes, Application itself, Uninstall) Ugh, so many problems with this.
Given a new machine with 5 CD burning apps pre-installed, anti-virus, trialware; then the stuff your domain admin put in there; then your own apps - the start menu will need a scroll bar just to find Microsoft Word.
1. Read Slashdot headline 2. Become outraged 3. Furiously read comments 4. See Insightful post and realize summary is inflammatory 5. Tag story with "badsummary" 6. Move on.
I need some more people to do #5 with me. Then the process will become: 1. Read Slashdot headline 2. See "badsummary" tag 3. Move on.
If Apple created a TV it would be awesome and terrible.
Apple has the ability to make things that seem "futuristic" just by incorporating the technologies that everyone begs and pleads to be put into devices, but companies never do. Ex: Voice recognition is a killer app in the living room. The ability to say "Play the next episode of " without picking-up a remote, or running the Netflix/Hulu/DVR app, would be great. A tiny bit of intelligence would be good too: "Play the next episode of that is not a multipart episode" is a good query. Recognizing the person speaking also opens up lots of possibilities.
But if Apple did it, it wouldn't work with which would be frustrating. Maybe that would be your Linux streaming box, or your stereo with the optical audio system, or your favorite streaming service that you just bought a subscription to.
I skimmed the Slashdot comments to see if the test was a good test, or what it measured, or sample questions... and all I saw was bickering over Republicans, Democrats, and Mexicans. (Slashdot is usually better than this actually: such discussions rarely reach 4s and 5s) So I looked at the comments on the article and they are the same, just blaming rednecks and teacher's unions.
It seems that the general public cannot discuss the subject of schools or tests rationally. So how can we teach our children to think rationally? I am in awe.
Peeling apples is wasteful, and they aren't as nutritious. The wax has been used for nearly 100 years, and is perfectly safe. Go lick the cake frosting off of a birthday candle: you'll ingest more wax doing that than eating a waxed apple.
I notice that you used the word "artificial" there in the same way that people use "chemical." You are guilty of the very mistake in thinking that this article is trying to warn people against. Do you assume the wax is artificial? Is it a chemical? Is it dangerous? If so, how?
Isn't this just a case of colloquial vs. technical language?
It is more than that The colloquial meaning of "chemical" has a negative connotation. The colloquial meaning of "work" and "weight" do not. Furthermore, the words "work" and "weight" existed before their scientific meanings were defined. So the definitions are generally compatible. Unless we are in space, or on another planet, the colloquial meaning of "weight" is perfectly compatible with the scientific meaning. And no one confuses "work" as measured in Joules with "work" measured in man-hours.
But with "chemical" we have a problem. People tend to think a "chemical" is some dangerous thing that a nerd in a lab came up with but probably has some nefarious yet-undiscovered health effect. That means you can prove that a "chemical" is safe scientifically, and the public won't listen. But some hippie extracts the "organic" juice from a coconut and even if that "chemical" is less safe, people will perceive it as safer. This skews the market. It causes people, governments, and businesses make bad decisions. People distrust chemists and fewer people go into chemistry-related fields. The doubt causes people not take their medicine, or skip their vaccines.
It breeds distrust and harms overall public health.
This isn't just pedantry. The problem with co-opting scientific words to have a different mainstream meaning is that it reduces people's ability to read and understand science. Someone might find a scientific article that talks about a new type of (soap, pesticide, fuel, spice) but calls it a chemical. The naive reader is immediately convinced that this new product is unsafe. This causes politicians to make bad policy decisions too.
Scientists tend to lose in public debates against non-scientists. This is often because the anti-science opponent may use politically loaded terms to sway the audience.
You can see examples of this in history (recent U.S. presidents) as well as literature (1984).
People often give me odd looks when I open my 17" Macbook Pro and boot to Windows, there is a reason it was rated "Best Windows laptop" a few years ago. It is usually high-end, lightweight, with a 1920x1200 display. The manufacturer supports OS X and Windows on it. Last time I looked I did not see a comparable offering from Dell, even at the same price.
My only complaint is that it isn't quite good enough for gaming.
e right to privacy was forfeit by sharing the material with a third party,
Really? Where is the line drawn?
If I send an email, did I share it with my ISP so it is not private? What about my stock portfolio stored on vanguard.com? Or the pictures of me naked I stored on dropbox.com?
Now here's some REAL math based upon real world experience (almost 20 years of CFL usage). CFLs and LEDs don't live any longer than incandescents...
Did you just claim that your own personal experience is somehow better than someone else's? Your experience does not trump others. And it doesn't trump the studies either. CFL lifespan with 3 citations.
The only CFL bulb I've ever seen go bad was the one I broke myself. LED's routinely last decades in alarm clocks, computers, and industrial machinery.
I don't know how European courts work, but both the US and UK use the common law system, where judges do make law. If you are studying to be a lawyer in one of those countries, you will spend more classes and study time looking at historical precedents set by judges than you will spend reading laws passed by a legislative body. Perhaps the EU courts are different, but don't say that "half the world does not understand how a court works" when that actually is how courts work in many countries.
I am not sure what you are asking me to explain, but I can try.
The court grants Roberts’ motion for summary judgment.... but it doesn't engage in any analysis because, in the court's view, plaintiffs have not produced any evidence of association with Adams' campaign that Roberts knew about—and any Facebook association is insufficient:
So the article is saying that the summary judgement was based on the fact that there was no evidence that the sheriff knew about their "likes" on facebook, or their bumper stickers, etc. Because of that, the case never went to court, no verdict was rendered, and so nothing is binding. Nothing binding = no precedent.
People use Hulu because I don't have cable. Isn't that the point?
The move toward authentication is fueled by cable companies and networks looking to protect and profit from their content.
It seems that allowing cable companies to purchase content providers wasn't a good idea after all. Oh wait, that's what everyone except the FCC said already.
It can't be a precedent because it was determined in summary judgement. The whole thing about the first amendment was buried in the summary judgement decision, but it is irrelevant at this point.
Wow! Do you have a link for that? So it isn't like they can play dumb that they didn't realize the hypocrisy. Obama actually spelled-out his own hypocrisy in the order?
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone was happily moving along in a world where more gradients, more gloss, or more 3D was the way of the future. Then Apple changed all that by going retro. They still used gradients and gloss, but in a more subtle way. Their icons were 2D, flat, iconic rather than 3D and realistic. This changed more than just GUIs: slideshows, packaging, advertisements, and trade show posters are changing too.
Microsoft is just following the trend. This will be consistent with the look and feel of Metro, and Visual Studio 2012.
Diesel hybrids are common in buses for this very reason.
One of the fundamental problems with the constitution is that it provides for no penalty for violating it. Ex: It is okay to vote for, or sign, a law that violates the constitution. And the law even gets to sit on the books and become enforcable until an injunction is made against it. It is okay for police to deprive someone of their civil rights. Doing so is merely a procedural violation requiring some paperwork. This is all because the founding fathers assumed that the kinds of people who would be in these positions would be people of such impeccable character that they would never even consider doing this. Oops.
What country are you in where gays are not ostracized or harmed but pot smokers are harassed and arrested daily? It surely isn't the USA, where the police don't have time to waste on pot smokers: they walk right by them in public. Go visit a construction site some day. Yet hardly a month goes by where there isn't a story of an anti-gay protest or anti-gay violence somewhere.
The step after that, is admitting that this is also supported by mainstream Americans. Here at Slashdot we would like to think that it is the people -vs- the politicians. But in reality the people support this too. Despite rhetoric to the contrary, most Americans trust the government and the military to look out for them, and so they support warrant-less wiretapping and infinite detention because they perceive that it protects them from terrorists.
I'm sorry, but the enemy is us.
Thanks Slashdot for eliminating everything I had in angle brackets. Now the body of the post makes no sense. [grumble]
So often after a reset we get panicked calls along the lines of 'Word isn't installed any more!" Then someone has to go down to show the user in person where it is.
This is caused by start menu bloat.
Example 1: Start - All Programs - Adobe Reader - Adobe Reader
Adobe Reader opens automatically when I encounter such a file. It doesn't need to be on the menu at all, let alone two levels in.
Example 2: Start - All Programs - Company Name - Product Name - Version - (Release Notes, Application itself, Uninstall)
Ugh, so many problems with this.
Given a new machine with 5 CD burning apps pre-installed, anti-virus, trialware; then the stuff your domain admin put in there; then your own apps - the start menu will need a scroll bar just to find Microsoft Word.
1. Read Slashdot headline
2. Become outraged
3. Furiously read comments
4. See Insightful post and realize summary is inflammatory
5. Tag story with "badsummary"
6. Move on.
I need some more people to do #5 with me. Then the process will become:
1. Read Slashdot headline
2. See "badsummary" tag
3. Move on.
If Apple created a TV it would be awesome and terrible.
Apple has the ability to make things that seem "futuristic" just by incorporating the technologies that everyone begs and pleads to be put into devices, but companies never do. Ex: Voice recognition is a killer app in the living room. The ability to say "Play the next episode of " without picking-up a remote, or running the Netflix/Hulu/DVR app, would be great. A tiny bit of intelligence would be good too: "Play the next episode of that is not a multipart episode" is a good query. Recognizing the person speaking also opens up lots of possibilities.
But if Apple did it, it wouldn't work with which would be frustrating. Maybe that would be your Linux streaming box, or your stereo with the optical audio system, or your favorite streaming service that you just bought a subscription to.
I skimmed the Slashdot comments to see if the test was a good test, or what it measured, or sample questions... and all I saw was bickering over Republicans, Democrats, and Mexicans. (Slashdot is usually better than this actually: such discussions rarely reach 4s and 5s) So I looked at the comments on the article and they are the same, just blaming rednecks and teacher's unions.
It seems that the general public cannot discuss the subject of schools or tests rationally. So how can we teach our children to think rationally? I am in awe.
good teachers and fire bad ones
Question: Do good teachers cost more than bad ones?
That is the case in other fields, but I'm not sure about teaching.
All it takes is one terrorist with a chin-up bar and we are all doomed!
Peeling apples is wasteful, and they aren't as nutritious. The wax has been used for nearly 100 years, and is perfectly safe. Go lick the cake frosting off of a birthday candle: you'll ingest more wax doing that than eating a waxed apple.
I notice that you used the word "artificial" there in the same way that people use "chemical." You are guilty of the very mistake in thinking that this article is trying to warn people against. Do you assume the wax is artificial? Is it a chemical? Is it dangerous? If so, how?
Isn't this just a case of colloquial vs. technical language?
It is more than that The colloquial meaning of "chemical" has a negative connotation. The colloquial meaning of "work" and "weight" do not. Furthermore, the words "work" and "weight" existed before their scientific meanings were defined. So the definitions are generally compatible. Unless we are in space, or on another planet, the colloquial meaning of "weight" is perfectly compatible with the scientific meaning. And no one confuses "work" as measured in Joules with "work" measured in man-hours.
But with "chemical" we have a problem. People tend to think a "chemical" is some dangerous thing that a nerd in a lab came up with but probably has some nefarious yet-undiscovered health effect. That means you can prove that a "chemical" is safe scientifically, and the public won't listen. But some hippie extracts the "organic" juice from a coconut and even if that "chemical" is less safe, people will perceive it as safer. This skews the market. It causes people, governments, and businesses make bad decisions. People distrust chemists and fewer people go into chemistry-related fields. The doubt causes people not take their medicine, or skip their vaccines.
It breeds distrust and harms overall public health.
This isn't just pedantry. The problem with co-opting scientific words to have a different mainstream meaning is that it reduces people's ability to read and understand science. Someone might find a scientific article that talks about a new type of (soap, pesticide, fuel, spice) but calls it a chemical. The naive reader is immediately convinced that this new product is unsafe. This causes politicians to make bad policy decisions too.
Scientists tend to lose in public debates against non-scientists. This is often because the anti-science opponent may use politically loaded terms to sway the audience.
You can see examples of this in history (recent U.S. presidents) as well as literature (1984).
Agreed.
People often give me odd looks when I open my 17" Macbook Pro and boot to Windows, there is a reason it was rated "Best Windows laptop" a few years ago. It is usually high-end, lightweight, with a 1920x1200 display. The manufacturer supports OS X and Windows on it. Last time I looked I did not see a comparable offering from Dell, even at the same price.
My only complaint is that it isn't quite good enough for gaming.
e right to privacy was forfeit by sharing the material with a third party,
Really? Where is the line drawn?
If I send an email, did I share it with my ISP so it is not private? What about my stock portfolio stored on vanguard.com? Or the pictures of me naked I stored on dropbox.com?
Now here's some REAL math based upon real world experience (almost 20 years of CFL usage). CFLs and LEDs don't live any longer than incandescents...
Did you just claim that your own personal experience is somehow better than someone else's? Your experience does not trump others. And it doesn't trump the studies either. CFL lifespan with 3 citations.
The only CFL bulb I've ever seen go bad was the one I broke myself. LED's routinely last decades in alarm clocks, computers, and industrial machinery.
I don't know how European courts work, but both the US and UK use the common law system, where judges do make law. If you are studying to be a lawyer in one of those countries, you will spend more classes and study time looking at historical precedents set by judges than you will spend reading laws passed by a legislative body. Perhaps the EU courts are different, but don't say that "half the world does not understand how a court works" when that actually is how courts work in many countries.
lol, something must be wrong with the preview button. :-)
I am not sure what you are asking me to explain, but I can try.
The court grants Roberts’ motion for summary judgment.... but it doesn't engage in any analysis because, in the court's view, plaintiffs have not produced any evidence of association with Adams' campaign that Roberts knew about—and any Facebook association is insufficient:
So the article is saying that the summary judgement was based on the fact that there was no evidence that the sheriff knew about their "likes" on facebook, or their bumper stickers, etc. Because of that, the case never went to court, no verdict was rendered, and so nothing is binding. Nothing binding = no precedent.
Fill me in if I am wrong here.
People use Hulu because I don't have cable. Isn't that the point?
The move toward authentication is fueled by cable companies and networks looking to protect and profit from their content.
It seems that allowing cable companies to purchase content providers wasn't a good idea after all. Oh wait, that's what everyone except the FCC said already.
It can't be a precedent because it was determined in summary judgement. The whole thing about the first amendment was buried in the summary judgement decision, but it is irrelevant at this point.
yet when similar policies were enacted in other public places there was no outcry
Just Google for TSA bus
Wow! Do you have a link for that? So it isn't like they can play dumb that they didn't realize the hypocrisy. Obama actually spelled-out his own hypocrisy in the order?