I'm not a huge fan of the Aqua GUI. In fact, I use a theme in lieu of its defaults. There are occasionally pointless violations of human interface guidelines and consistency for no apparent reason in OS X.
That said, why is Aero so f*****g ugly? Jeez, it's awful. I've seen better-looking FVWM screencaps! It's a real poor attempt at imitating Aqua. And I'm not convinced of the value of imitating Aqua in the first place, at least as far as widgets go.
MS has prolly a whole team of full-time, professional human interface people, and another team of full-time, professional graphic designers. Why do window managers and themes created by decentralized, often unpaid development efforts (i.e., GNOME, KDE, xfce + themes) routinely look better? Or maybe my tastes are just WAY off--I know this is a subjective matter. Perhaps Joe Sixpack likes the ugly mfing Aero look....
Voter fraud has nothing to do with how long the government has been democratic. In fact, an older democracy that cares about fraud would have better safeguards.
It's more a symptom of the 2 party system than anything. It's much easier to carry out operations undermining democracy when you only have two powers among which power is divided. You have more people in the right places, and less oversight.
First of all, you didn't substantiate a thing you just said.
Secondly, obviously you've never seen programs like Frontline, the McLaughlin Group, or Now, or seen the surveys about how well-informed people who take in different sorts of media are. Take, for example, this survey, which found that viewers of PBS and/or listeners of NPR are less than half as likely as readers of print media to have misconceptions about the Iraq war (and less than a quarter as likely as FoxNews viewers). Newspapers and magazines are usually corporate media, and as Goebbels said, a great propaganda news organization should give viewers less and less of a sense of what is going on the more they engage it. I can't tell you how many times I've seen absolute lies spawned or repeated by supposedly progressive and reliable newspapers such as the NY Times and the Washington Post (to which I subscribe). Occasionally, a retraction is later issued, but by then the damage is done. I also can't tell you how many times those newspapers have been complicit in burying or not following up on important stories.
Public broadcasting is only as good as the government will allow it and fund it to be, so it isn't perfect--but it's a damn sight better than any corporate media, print or otherwise, in the US.
The difference is that a percentage of people DO watch the commercials, or at least some of the brandings represented in the commercials seep into their subconscious. They wouldn't be putting commercials on TV if they didn't drive sales. Advertisers never expect ALL people to watch, much less, to be influenced by, their commercials. It's more of a scatter approach, like a shotgun instead of a sniper rifle, though they can focus by using gender- or culture-specific cues.
Well, since that isn't what I was endorsing, I don't think it's a valid critique. What this system sounds like is a corrupted public system.
Even here in the US, the minority of people who get their news from public television are better informed than people who get their news from corporate media in any form: newspapers, TV, radio. It is a fundamental injustice to divvy up the airwaves and distribute them to a handful of powerful corporations who have vested interests in presenting a certain viewpoint.
I believe the argument is that the show in fact is not free, that it is payed for by advertisements, and that you "pay" to see the show by sitting through those advertisements.
I don't have a problem with downloading and viewing sans commercials (do it myself with DVR and fast-forward, which is legal), I'm just letting you know what I think they would retort with. I happen to think that corporate-owned media is in violation of the spirit of my nation (USA). I believe the airwaves should belong to the public, and that the corporate/advertising model is fundamentally flawed. So even if such activities were illegal, I wouldn't look negatively upon them. Who needs more protection: the broadcaster or the consumer? I think the latter.
But yeah, Ruby is much closer to Smalltalk than Lisp indeed, Ruby's main "ancestors" are Smalltalk and Perl with some bits of Lisp & others thrown in.
As you note, Smalltalk and Perl clearly provided inspiration. There is support for functional programming, but I agree that Lisp is not a major contributor. I think the important point we are missing here is that Algol is the most direct and important ancestor of Ruby, at least syntactically. Python and TCL have their influences in Ruby as well.
I mean, whatever happened to digging through trash or stealing skivvies from the laundromat? They are violating the sanctity of a hallowed/. tradition by virtualizing it!
I don't think OS X's kernel is fast enough for Apple to displace Linux on big iron. I guess that could change with revised architectures into the future. Admittedly, I didn't read the article, and it is/. policy to mangle or quote out of context, but this sounds like FUD to me.
In a GUI system, this interface is part of the music player, not the file manager. Music player GUIs are designed to make locating music files and playing them in easily-customisable sequences simple and efficient.
This is increasingly not the case. In OS X, preview mode in the GUI will allow you to play certain media, including MP3s. Further, you can use metadata-based searches to allow some measure of locating music files take place in the file manager. Good stuff, it certainly doesn't hurt to have the capabilities in 2 places, if implemented well. The idea I think is to use central APIs that can be accessed from within the Finder and iTunes of other apps alike. I might be wrong on that point, but that's how it feels to the end user.
There. One line. Why do we need these cosmogonical definitions based on what we think happened at the formation of the solar system when we could have a MUCH simpler definition based on what we directly observe IS happening?
Saying that "Push it to the limit" is a sexual statement is patently absurd and shows either a lack of judgment or a lack of cultural context
There is NO violence AT ALL in Pac-Man. There is a circle chasing around ghosts (which do not exist, and if they did, are ALREADY DEAD), and the the circle clamps down on a ghost, they just have to go sit in a box for a while. Pac-Man can be "killed," but seeing a circle geometrically decompose can hardly be considered violence. Donkey Kong? OK, I can see it, through it isn't what you would call "graphic" violence. But Pac-Man is about as violent as Tetris.
Slashdot Mirror
you owe it to yourself to watch this documentary on the Abramoff scandal. It is absolutely amazing, infuriating, and disheartening.
That said, why is Aero so f*****g ugly? Jeez, it's awful. I've seen better-looking FVWM screencaps! It's a real poor attempt at imitating Aqua. And I'm not convinced of the value of imitating Aqua in the first place, at least as far as widgets go.
MS has prolly a whole team of full-time, professional human interface people, and another team of full-time, professional graphic designers. Why do window managers and themes created by decentralized, often unpaid development efforts (i.e., GNOME, KDE, xfce + themes) routinely look better? Or maybe my tastes are just WAY off--I know this is a subjective matter. Perhaps Joe Sixpack likes the ugly mfing Aero look....
Put your pathetic political position aside when you moderate. Parent makes a good point.
It's more a symptom of the 2 party system than anything. It's much easier to carry out operations undermining democracy when you only have two powers among which power is divided. You have more people in the right places, and less oversight.
Secondly, obviously you've never seen programs like Frontline, the McLaughlin Group, or Now, or seen the surveys about how well-informed people who take in different sorts of media are. Take, for example, this survey, which found that viewers of PBS and/or listeners of NPR are less than half as likely as readers of print media to have misconceptions about the Iraq war (and less than a quarter as likely as FoxNews viewers). Newspapers and magazines are usually corporate media, and as Goebbels said, a great propaganda news organization should give viewers less and less of a sense of what is going on the more they engage it. I can't tell you how many times I've seen absolute lies spawned or repeated by supposedly progressive and reliable newspapers such as the NY Times and the Washington Post (to which I subscribe). Occasionally, a retraction is later issued, but by then the damage is done. I also can't tell you how many times those newspapers have been complicit in burying or not following up on important stories.
Public broadcasting is only as good as the government will allow it and fund it to be, so it isn't perfect--but it's a damn sight better than any corporate media, print or otherwise, in the US.
Get your PDF version of the story here
SSIAFNORD!
:P
The difference is that a percentage of people DO watch the commercials, or at least some of the brandings represented in the commercials seep into their subconscious. They wouldn't be putting commercials on TV if they didn't drive sales. Advertisers never expect ALL people to watch, much less, to be influenced by, their commercials. It's more of a scatter approach, like a shotgun instead of a sniper rifle, though they can focus by using gender- or culture-specific cues.
Even here in the US, the minority of people who get their news from public television are better informed than people who get their news from corporate media in any form: newspapers, TV, radio. It is a fundamental injustice to divvy up the airwaves and distribute them to a handful of powerful corporations who have vested interests in presenting a certain viewpoint.
No, it's the reverse. Python and TCL influenced Ruby, not the other way round.
I don't have a problem with downloading and viewing sans commercials (do it myself with DVR and fast-forward, which is legal), I'm just letting you know what I think they would retort with. I happen to think that corporate-owned media is in violation of the spirit of my nation (USA). I believe the airwaves should belong to the public, and that the corporate/advertising model is fundamentally flawed. So even if such activities were illegal, I wouldn't look negatively upon them. Who needs more protection: the broadcaster or the consumer? I think the latter.
Seriously, I think he must have been thinking of OCAML or Eiffel or something.
I mean, whatever happened to digging through trash or stealing skivvies from the laundromat? They are violating the sanctity of a hallowed /. tradition by virtualizing it!
I don't think OS X's kernel is fast enough for Apple to displace Linux on big iron. I guess that could change with revised architectures into the future. Admittedly, I didn't read the article, and it is /. policy to mangle or quote out of context, but this sounds like FUD to me.
There. One line. Why do we need these cosmogonical definitions based on what we think happened at the formation of the solar system when we could have a MUCH simpler definition based on what we directly observe IS happening?
So I can take a bit out of Sony by effecting the recall? I wasn't going to bother, but now I will.
Thanks for t3h 1337 r00tk1+, n00bZ
I know they say our generation is growing up much slower than previous generations, but calling a 31 year-old a child might be a bit excessive:P
Not to be a pedant (and that is a funny post) but I think you mean the Uncertainty Principle
all the fake photos I need are on Myspace!