there is an attitude that anything usable by the mainstream is going to suck for the expert. It doesn't have to be that way
Unfortunately, it does. Your statement would be true if most users didn't shut down their brains at the slightest reference to "command line", "compile", "read the instructions", "click here". All too often I've seen people stare at me with blank eyes after I told them to "click on the start button". Even worse, after the 10th time I tell them to click on something in the "tray" and then remind them what that is, you can bet that next time they will still not know.
So if you ever design a system that makes life easy for this kind of people, well it is so very definitely going to suck for the power user. The only way to make such a system is to dumb it down and I don't want a dumb system.
A last example: when I was learning Linux I went for Mandrake. People were looking at me during the installation and wondering how the heck I was able to understand that stuff - now if you have seen Mandrake's installer you know it's quite straightforward and really walks you through the process holding your hand. After installation I went to the control-panel-like thingie and started tweaking and fiddling and generally getting my head around the system: using that nice GUI you can configure runlevels, mountpoints, bootloader, daemons, firewalls, printing systems, pretty much anything a linux-expert-wannabe would need. So please bear in mind this system is not even designed to please the expert, just the enthusiast-who-needs-to-learn. Guess what? Nobody else of my friends there would touch that control panel if their life depended on it. Even telling them to just open it, then click there-there-and-there would result in blank faces. So that thing is going to be-ok-to-almost-suck for the expert (depending on his mood) while still not being usable by the mainstream! I think you're chasing a dream when you say that it doesn't have to be that way. It won't happen and we don't need it anyway.
Are we sure consolidation is what we want? Isn't diversity better? And are we even sure that the problems that make Linux not widely used on the desktop are solvable by unifying distros? How would that attack MS's monopoly? How would that make Linux more appealing to the unwashed masses? And, WHY SHOULD WE CARE that the masses use it? I wonder.
come on man, why else would you be writing "it's a lot longer and tighter than the original" if you weren't selling the usual snake oil.:) (OMG a smilie on/., i'm a dead man walking now)
If you can setup a non-corrupt, laissez-faire, "we will unequivocally protect your right to free speech, even if it means allowing you to promote hate crimes or other unpopular and 'immoral' speech" international organization...
Yeah right. As if you're doing this at the moment.
Welcome to reality, where this is exactly the kind of things that happen. Police definitely not assisting me when I am robbed, victims of natural disasters definitely not being cared for. About that "fight fot yourself" stuff... that's the reason why you have an MP-5 under your bed if I'm not wrong.
Oh my, I'm definitely not a New Age guy and I don't like them, but they seem to have bitten you real bad! What have they done to you, I wonder. Beside begin wusses, I mean.
For God's sake, why don't you stick that arrogant attitude of yours up there? For your information, I did read TFA. I was trying to be FUNNY. I made what people call "a joke".
And don't worry, you're such an idiot that you simply are not in a position to *waste* your mod points. That would imply their actually being worth something. And, yes, before you even try to be a smart ass, that sentence is correct. Go learn your own language, you fool.
Your line of thinking get the said farmer stabbed and put out of the work-force. Everybody starves.
Actually, it gets everybody to *do* something useful. Nobody starves. Well maybe idiotic whiners like you who just long for free launches will starve.
Economics make sure you are fed, clothed, and shieltered.
Assuming what you mean is that they shelter me, then you're right. I fail to see where I said they don't. I was criticizing the fact that most people seem to ignore the existance of free will and rely on switching their brain off so they can say that it's not their fault. Besides throwing insults at me, you're not attacking my point. Maybe because you can't.
Try live on your so called "Ethics" for a day, see how you earn your bread and butter, then come back.
Easy done, I'm already back. I've lived on these ethics since I was 18 and I have earned my bread and butter. And my education. And my hobbies. My computers. My business, that is just being born. My holidays, my travels. My everything. Now, seeing that you're envious... well actually I don't care about how you feel. Just fuck off and die.
well, it's quite clear we don't agree on our definition of acceptable. that's ok. and of course one can use the gimp or just about anything to play with pictures, but i don't see the need to flame them for a bit of overkill... it's not like they're damaging anyone even though you're right in that they don't need such tools.
what i really find cool is the situation you just made up... i don't think we'll be here to watch such events unfold, but it would make for a lot of... hum... "interesting" stuff!
well, your points are not completely moot, however we have to draw a line to define what kind of profiting is/is not acceptable. most would agree that making money directly out of illegally acquired software is not acceptable (think of a graphics designer who pirated adobe cs), whereas educating oneself/playing with photoshop in your free time to touch up your family pix etc. is acceptable. also, i don't think that Poor Schmuck did "the right thing" as you put it. of course he's behaving quite well but the same can be said of John Doe. so, there is no difference between the two. you're basically saying that if i shop around and pay for a product less than you do because you didn't take your time to check prices, than i'm profiting while you did "the right thing". and *this* is real moot.
If farmers dont grant beggars a small amount of their crop to keep them alive, the beggars will become violent.
yeah, because all beggars behave the same; never has it happened that someone chose differently and did not give in to crime. after all, everyone is doomed. you have no chance to change anything in your life. just look: all the people made the same choice as you did. easy isn't it? i guess you feel so... irresponsible now? hey what the hell, i hear you say, it's not like i can shape my life is it. it's not like i have to go out of my way to actually better myself and do something useful so i can stop stealing. no sirree.
fucking idiot. it's people like you who ruin this world.
While it's certainly true that Opera's share is way underestimated, because it identifies itself as MSIE most of the times and because it does a wonderful job of caching pages in memory (I'd love the fox to perform just as well), I don't really think FF's share is inflated that much because of the preloading mechanism. It's not used as much as to actually skew the numbers either direction. I mean, I've just sniffed my own traffic and it didn't even try to prelink anything from Google; so, I haven't looked deep into the config but it's abviously not a default behaviour on v.1.0.4.
You are free not to agree with me, however I would like to remind you that while you have apparently been lucky and you are now happier than before, this is not always the case.
It's a bit like going out, shooting a few dozen clips, killing lots of people, then singling out the one who was not hit and saying "see, shooting at random is good. this guy was not hurt".
Of course this image is a bit of an exaggeration, however it raises a question: how do we draw the line separating "rightful" from "unrightful" intervention? Because you could say, "i was shooting at bad guys(tm), killed them all and saved the hostage. i'm a hero". Or you could have just been on a mindless shooting spree.
What if next time some foreign government decides that *you* need to be disposed of? It would be best if we all just minded our own business. I, for one, would be happy if nobody interfered with my country's business.
I would like to refer you to the reply to your comment posted by an AC; I would have written exactly the same words. To sum up: people obey the law because otherwise they will be beaten/fined/or somehow hit. Movements (of any kind) simply try to be the next guy with the gun: they try to change society in some ways that give them an advantage over adversaries/the status quo. In fact, most movements for freedom that actually succeeded in freeing a country from tyrants quickly turned into dictatorships. We has big gun. Why was India made independat? Because the UK found it *convenient*. It does not matter whether it actually was or not: they did it because they thought it would be good for the UK. Because it would -- guess what -- give them some advantage.
I don't see how I need to support or enforce something that just happens to be. Do you support or enforce, say, electricity? Rain? Gravity?
Anyway, in case you're not convinced of what I said in my post, you should consider that "beating up some weaklings" is exactly the way most nations were, and still are, made. I would like to remind you that the winners write the rules. That's exactly the way the USA will justify its invasion of Iraq (and other countries before that): we has won. we has big gun. we is teh right ones.
Have a nice life pretending someone/something actually protects you.
What you're saying is basically "a bunch of powerful guys have a right to shut or kill anyone they want to".
I don't know if you have noticed, but this is the way the world has been functioning for the last some thousand years. Or do you really believe that "a right" is something given to your precious self by a benevolent supernatural being? by some pretty fairy maybe?
Guess what, all rights that someone has are only valid as long as he's able to enforce them. Just like your country's right to send you to jail is made valid by enforcing it through *violence*. In the end, it all boils down to who's stronger. Sorry to break such news to you.
While what you describe as the American way is certainly correct (and it's actually the, uhm, World way), I think you're a bit too quick in determining what matters and what doesn't. Certainly social security is an issue, but the fact that illegal immigration is probably used as an excuse to extort some more money or distract the populace does not make said immigration-related problems any less real or worrying.
I fail to see how your post contradicts mine, as you seem to imply.
"Having encryption software can be used as evidence of intent" is exactly the same as my original "you have suspicious stuff -> you are guilty". Well, your sentence is definitely more elegant than mine; you will kindly excuse me for not being a native speaker.
But otherwise, you are just confirming what I said. Thanks for your support.
Oh, and I recommend you look up how to spell "prosecutor" before you correct me in my usage of English.
Slashdot Mirror
there is an attitude that anything usable by the mainstream is going to suck for the expert. It doesn't have to be that way
Unfortunately, it does. Your statement would be true if most users didn't shut down their brains at the slightest reference to "command line", "compile", "read the instructions", "click here". All too often I've seen people stare at me with blank eyes after I told them to "click on the start button". Even worse, after the 10th time I tell them to click on something in the "tray" and then remind them what that is, you can bet that next time they will still not know.
So if you ever design a system that makes life easy for this kind of people, well it is so very definitely going to suck for the power user. The only way to make such a system is to dumb it down and I don't want a dumb system.
A last example: when I was learning Linux I went for Mandrake. People were looking at me during the installation and wondering how the heck I was able to understand that stuff - now if you have seen Mandrake's installer you know it's quite straightforward and really walks you through the process holding your hand. After installation I went to the control-panel-like thingie and started tweaking and fiddling and generally getting my head around the system: using that nice GUI you can configure runlevels, mountpoints, bootloader, daemons, firewalls, printing systems, pretty much anything a linux-expert-wannabe would need. So please bear in mind this system is not even designed to please the expert, just the enthusiast-who-needs-to-learn. Guess what? Nobody else of my friends there would touch that control panel if their life depended on it. Even telling them to just open it, then click there-there-and-there would result in blank faces. So that thing is going to be-ok-to-almost-suck for the expert (depending on his mood) while still not being usable by the mainstream! I think you're chasing a dream when you say that it doesn't have to be that way. It won't happen and we don't need it anyway.
Are we sure consolidation is what we want? Isn't diversity better? And are we even sure that the problems that make Linux not widely used on the desktop are solvable by unifying distros? How would that attack MS's monopoly? How would that make Linux more appealing to the unwashed masses? And, WHY SHOULD WE CARE that the masses use it?
I wonder.
to the idiot who moderated me as troll: CAN YOU SEE THE SMILY FACE AT THE END? it's a marker. it marks irony. if you know what that is.
come on man, why else would you be writing "it's a lot longer and tighter than the original" if you weren't selling the usual snake oil. :) (OMG a smilie on /., i'm a dead man walking now)
If you can setup a non-corrupt, laissez-faire, "we will unequivocally protect your right to free speech, even if it means allowing you to promote hate crimes or other unpopular and 'immoral' speech" international organization...
Yeah right. As if you're doing this at the moment.
Welcome to reality, where this is exactly the kind of things that happen. Police definitely not assisting me when I am robbed, victims of natural disasters definitely not being cared for. About that "fight fot yourself" stuff... that's the reason why you have an MP-5 under your bed if I'm not wrong.
Oh my, I'm definitely not a New Age guy and I don't like them, but they seem to have bitten you real bad! What have they done to you, I wonder. Beside begin wusses, I mean.
For God's sake, why don't you stick that arrogant attitude of yours up there? For your information, I did read TFA. I was trying to be FUNNY. I made what people call "a joke".
And don't worry, you're such an idiot that you simply are not in a position to *waste* your mod points. That would imply their actually being worth something. And, yes, before you even try to be a smart ass, that sentence is correct. Go learn your own language, you fool.
A very clear one. Resistance is futile.
OMG!
/me hugs Google. We loves it. It came to usssssssssss.
OMGWTF!!!
OMGWTFOMFG!!!!!!111one!!!
Really, I love this. Mmmmmmmhhh Google.
There has always been a balance of idiots like you and idiots like me. None of these will ruin the world.
Well, the world has gone through lots of changes. They happened when some idiots tipped the balance. For good or for worse.
Your line of thinking get the said farmer stabbed and put out of the work-force. Everybody starves.
Actually, it gets everybody to *do* something useful. Nobody starves. Well maybe idiotic whiners like you who just long for free launches will starve.
Economics make sure you are fed, clothed, and shieltered.
Assuming what you mean is that they shelter me, then you're right. I fail to see where I said they don't. I was criticizing the fact that most people seem to ignore the existance of free will and rely on switching their brain off so they can say that it's not their fault. Besides throwing insults at me, you're not attacking my point. Maybe because you can't.
Try live on your so called "Ethics" for a day, see how you earn your bread and butter, then come back.
Easy done, I'm already back. I've lived on these ethics since I was 18 and I have earned my bread and butter. And my education. And my hobbies. My computers. My business, that is just being born. My holidays, my travels. My everything. Now, seeing that you're envious... well actually I don't care about how you feel. Just fuck off and die.
well, it's quite clear we don't agree on our definition of acceptable. that's ok. and of course one can use the gimp or just about anything to play with pictures, but i don't see the need to flame them for a bit of overkill... it's not like they're damaging anyone even though you're right in that they don't need such tools.
what i really find cool is the situation you just made up... i don't think we'll be here to watch such events unfold, but it would make for a lot of... hum... "interesting" stuff!
well, your points are not completely moot, however we have to draw a line to define what kind of profiting is/is not acceptable. most would agree that making money directly out of illegally acquired software is not acceptable (think of a graphics designer who pirated adobe cs), whereas educating oneself/playing with photoshop in your free time to touch up your family pix etc. is acceptable. also, i don't think that Poor Schmuck did "the right thing" as you put it. of course he's behaving quite well but the same can be said of John Doe. so, there is no difference between the two. you're basically saying that if i shop around and pay for a product less than you do because you didn't take your time to check prices, than i'm profiting while you did "the right thing". and *this* is real moot.
If farmers dont grant beggars a small amount of their crop to keep them alive, the beggars will become violent.
yeah, because all beggars behave the same; never has it happened that someone chose differently and did not give in to crime. after all, everyone is doomed. you have no chance to change anything in your life. just look: all the people made the same choice as you did. easy isn't it? i guess you feel so... irresponsible now? hey what the hell, i hear you say, it's not like i can shape my life is it. it's not like i have to go out of my way to actually better myself and do something useful so i can stop stealing. no sirree.
fucking idiot. it's people like you who ruin this world.
While it's certainly true that Opera's share is way underestimated, because it identifies itself as MSIE most of the times and because it does a wonderful job of caching pages in memory (I'd love the fox to perform just as well), I don't really think FF's share is inflated that much because of the preloading mechanism. It's not used as much as to actually skew the numbers either direction.
I mean, I've just sniffed my own traffic and it didn't even try to prelink anything from Google; so, I haven't looked deep into the config but it's abviously not a default behaviour on v.1.0.4.
You are free not to agree with me, however I would like to remind you that while you have apparently been lucky and you are now happier than before, this is not always the case.
It's a bit like going out, shooting a few dozen clips, killing lots of people, then singling out the one who was not hit and saying "see, shooting at random is good. this guy was not hurt".
Of course this image is a bit of an exaggeration, however it raises a question: how do we draw the line separating "rightful" from "unrightful" intervention? Because you could say, "i was shooting at bad guys(tm), killed them all and saved the hostage. i'm a hero". Or you could have just been on a mindless shooting spree.
What if next time some foreign government decides that *you* need to be disposed of? It would be best if we all just minded our own business. I, for one, would be happy if nobody interfered with my country's business.
I would like to refer you to the reply to your comment posted by an AC; I would have written exactly the same words. To sum up: people obey the law because otherwise they will be beaten/fined/or somehow hit. Movements (of any kind) simply try to be the next guy with the gun: they try to change society in some ways that give them an advantage over adversaries/the status quo. In fact, most movements for freedom that actually succeeded in freeing a country from tyrants quickly turned into dictatorships. We has big gun. Why was India made independat? Because the UK found it *convenient*. It does not matter whether it actually was or not: they did it because they thought it would be good for the UK. Because it would -- guess what -- give them some advantage.
I don't see how I need to support or enforce something that just happens to be. Do you support or enforce, say, electricity? Rain? Gravity?
Anyway, in case you're not convinced of what I said in my post, you should consider that "beating up some weaklings" is exactly the way most nations were, and still are, made. I would like to remind you that the winners write the rules. That's exactly the way the USA will justify its invasion of Iraq (and other countries before that): we has won. we has big gun. we is teh right ones.
Have a nice life pretending someone/something actually protects you.
What you're saying is basically "a bunch of powerful guys have a right to shut or kill anyone they want to".
I don't know if you have noticed, but this is the way the world has been functioning for the last some thousand years. Or do you really believe that "a right" is something given to your precious self by a benevolent supernatural being? by some pretty fairy maybe?
Guess what, all rights that someone has are only valid as long as he's able to enforce them. Just like your country's right to send you to jail is made valid by enforcing it through *violence*. In the end, it all boils down to who's stronger. Sorry to break such news to you.
Actually, you're absolutely right. You should have just left them alone and taken care of your business. As if it weren't already worrying enough.
While what you describe as the American way is certainly correct (and it's actually the, uhm, World way), I think you're a bit too quick in determining what matters and what doesn't. Certainly social security is an issue, but the fact that illegal immigration is probably used as an excuse to extort some more money or distract the populace does not make said immigration-related problems any less real or worrying.
Well this troll is creative, isn't he...
You're comparing one of the *worst pieces of bloatware* to OpenOffice.org? How CRUEL of you!
I fail to see how your post contradicts mine, as you seem to imply.
"Having encryption software can be used as evidence of intent" is exactly the same as my original "you have suspicious stuff -> you are guilty". Well, your sentence is definitely more elegant than mine; you will kindly excuse me for not being a native speaker.
But otherwise, you are just confirming what I said. Thanks for your support.
Oh, and I recommend you look up how to spell "prosecutor" before you correct me in my usage of English.