I can't think of a single good reason that I want my TV talking back to my cable company. Do you have a digital cable converter to get channels beyond the basic 99? If so, then you already are. And probably paying %$10/mo for the privilege. This just eliminates the fee they charge to spy on you, which is good. It's like they're giving free lube before they... well, you get the picture.
Maybe you should, you know, check out a techonology before you bash it. Silverlight 2.0 will still be in a sandbox. I'm not even sure there will be an OPTION to allow access to local files.. But please, bash on! Oh, sorry. Forgot to add the [/humor] and [/touch of irony] tags. Does that make it a bit easier?
Quality products = better reputation = more customers = more profits. Even good customer service equates directly to more customers and more profits. It has nothing to do with caring about customers. I work for a large credit card company, that before it was bought out, had a horrible reputation and customers were leaving in droves. Then the first buyout occurred, and our call center advisors were told all about how they had to start being sympathetic to the customers and make good impressions. And lo! customers started coming back, once the customer service reputation improved.
While there are some/employees/ in the large corporations who actually care about the customers, the ones making the executive decisions literally care only insofar as it affects the bottom line. If it was more profitable to sell crappy products and give shit service, Sears would be first in line to start doing that.
There's a difference though. Immunizations against disease serve to protect the well-being of everyone you work with and happens to include the well-being of the place you work for. Drug immunizations would server to protect the well-being of the place you work for, and nobody else. Because of this, I suspect there would be a much harder time justifying such a requirement.
As a developer, I'm waiting for Silverlight 2.0 so that I can use.Net languages instead of that heap of crap which is Javascript. Ah, yes. Giving access to the full.net framework on the client side of an application intended for use on the web. There's a terrific idea. If that were a movie, it could be a slasher flick called "ActiveX 2.0 - The Nightmare Returns"!
0) Be Consistent Users like to see the same thing in the same place, every time. And when the interface is inconsistent with itself (OK button above cancel on screen A, below cancel on screen B, in the center bottom for screen C), it makes it a lot harder for the user to become familiar and comfortable with it -- because they have to give/thought/ to what they're doing every time. This basically means that using your software is a constant irritation to your user. A prime example of what not to do is MS Office's "smart menus", which hide the most unused menu items; essentially making it possible to change the interface on a daily basis. (I understand why they made that design choice -- presenting too many options is almost as bad -- but IMO it was the wrong solution.)
An extension of this is: Don't get creative. While it may be great that you have a round traffic light showing green as your OK button, that's unfamiliar in this context. Present users with what they know -- you don't want to make them/think/ about using your application.
And Americans have very little right to talk about sovereignty since they have little to no respect for the sovereignty of others. I have great respect for the sovereignty of others; so did the people I tried to vote into office. On the other hand, I have little respect for any who apply generalizations liberally.
I doubt it. Remember, we are talking hardcore control freaks here, true blue sociopaths. This is more likely part of some strategy to topple Apple from the driver's seat, and have us back under their collective thumb again. Because that would be so logical, given Apple's stance on DRM
a good majority of them require a human presence to manipulate, and then the comment about taking them out of the picture negating them. Yep, that's rather the funny part. Though if you don't see it, I strongly suspect I won't be able to explain it any further. It's ok, most people don't have the capacity to enjoy all forms of humor. I probably dont either; no worries.
Dude, let it go. Seriously. Just let it go. You missed the joke, trying to plow ahead and cover that up isn't making it any better. For further discussion, reference Humor, definition of.
I've seen no less than six posters stating some variation of "such and such a study proved this X many years ago". I know this is going to earn me a troll rating, but: is the average slashdotter so reliant on mathematical models and scientific studies that he can't just look at the evidence in front of him? [There's a free +5 Funny mod to the first person who snips out that line and makes a one-liner like "Yes."]
You can literally/see/ this wave of traffic back-propagating from any road that isn't a sharp curve to the inside. And I do mean see it -- one person makes a brief tap, the next person taps for an instant longer; the next person is on the brake for a second, then two seconds, in a exponential increase of duration. [Some people even see this coming and slow down without using their brakes, in an attempt to reduce the effects of the inevitable.]
There's a lot to be said for proving something mathematically, and for scientific studies. But sometimes, one can learn things by looking at the road ahead -- literally, in this situation. In this particular case, it's rather disturbing to see that so many folks are/not/ looking past the end of their bumpers to see this for themselves -- because failing to do so usually means that they're a contributor to this specific problem.
May sound a bit utopian... and yes it is, in the sense that currently less than 1% of musicians and audience members understand these issues in this or similar ways... but it could work if more people were willing to think like this.
Eugenics 'could work' if everyone agreed on it, that doesn't make it the right way to do things. Your comments are just asinine. I apologize, I'm usually more polite when I disagree; but seriously. I can't think of another way to describe it. Your viewpoint seems to be either publish your music exactly as you envision it, or it can't possibly be real music/art. What, then, of someone who has a friend critique his work, and the friend says "It sounds ok, but it would be better if..." Is it no longer music? Or is/that/ ok -- just not what a person experienced in the industry makes those requests. What if an author's wife tells her husband that the book is great, but it would be better if he made just a couple of changes? What if instead of his wife, it was his editor? His publisher? Is it still a book then, or just a random heap of words between two covers?
Me, I'm of a simpler viewpoint. Art has two parts -- what the performer brings to it and what the listener does. In your case, I can almost pity you - with such narrow beliefs as yours, you are missing out on a lot of fine music. As you say, to you such a modified performance would only be sound -- for you bring nothing else to the table. But don't state your stunted views as a universal truth. We get enough of that from the politicians.
I have Linux and OpenBSD machines with... no users... These machines are almost perfectly secure Erm, aren't all machines perfectly secure when you take the users out of the equation?
$250,000 and 20 years. Definitely an issue cruel and unusual punishment if they got that, imho. At best I can see them being hit with some negligence suit from the pilot from the damage caused. Unless their is a law in place preventing members of the public from illuminating aircraft in operation. If they can prove though, that the couple had the intention of causing the aircraft to crash, they may have a good reason to pursue trial.
Let's put aside for a moment the risk of blindness, and the monetary value of your vision. Let's say the pilot of the aircraft gets disoriented and crashes in spite of the fact that the couple had no intention of harming him at all. (Funny how stupid actions have consequences despite the best intentions of the idiot who fails to think of them.) Maybe in a case like this, it's a cop at low altitude, in pursuit -- and his crash not only kills him, but the traffic he lands in. Suddenly, 25 years seems like a light sentence, doesn't it?
The idea behind harsh sentences for seemingly "harmless" crimes like that is to discourage it from becoming a fatal situation.
I'm not sure why your comment was modded 'funny' as opposed to 'insightful' -- because if it isn't stopped early, that/will/ be what happens in a few years or sooner. Best of all is the way the spokesperson justifies it: The sound isn't rattling your skull, it's not penetrating you, it's not doing anything nefarious at all. It's just like having a flashlight vs. a light bulb," he said.
In my area (eastern PA) there is discussion in some counties about banning the new LED type billboards as they believe they will distract motorists.
As they believe they will? I suggest they drive up I-95N between the Delaware border and rt 476 during any time in which there is a medium level of traffic. There is a very large, active LED that changes advertisements every few seconds. On several occasions, I have watch traffic drop suddenly in speed from 55-70 down to 40-55, depending on the time of day (with accompanying panicked tromps on the brake pedal that is most people's first response to confusion). Now I guess that there's no proof, but the only thing in the location immediately prior to the speed drop has been that obnoxious billboard.
Hell, it distracted me the first time (though I didn't pant my foot on the brake or even slow down) because when I saw something that was in motion as part of a sign, I thought that clearly something that was actively trying to get my attention was probably a message from DOT or something, warning of construction or traffic. Alas, no. It was an advertisement for a local radio station.
But once a few people are dead, I'm sure they'll consider that the ridiculous thing may have been a contributing factor. Politicians are quick that way.
Similar story. I was in a motorcycle accident a few years back. I was driving at about 30 mph, wet roads. Guy pulls out in front of me from a parking lot then/stops/, and suddenly it was like everything went down to super-slow. I start thinking about the odds, and whether it would be best for me to lay the bike down, or if I had a chance of stopping before I hit the guy.
After what felt like a minute or so and I saw that I wasn't going to be able to make the stop, I decided to lay the bike down -- then proceeded to do so, all the while in the same dream-like state. Continued to stay on the bike, timed my 'jump' to when the bike was as far down as it would go without trapping my leg -- I wanted as much drag as possible to prevent the bike from sliding into the car if it could be done. This entire time, I was completely calm and clear-headed, thinking out every single move.
Finally I hopped off the bike, took one step, another step -- and suddenly time returned to normal, my body realized that it could/not/ run at 15 mph and I went down. Someone coming out of the store attached to the parking lot came over to check on me; as I was trying to get over a serious case of 'the shakes' she said the whole thing took maybe one or two seconds at most.
The bike missed the car by about two feet in the end -- and as I was getting to my feet, the fucker drove off and left. I suspect he never even realized I was there.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoosh!
I can pack my virtual dog into it and send them to the bark park together.
It goes a step beyond that -- these rules seem to be built with the design goal of having them be easily portable to computer-based platforms.
Quality products = better reputation = more customers = more profits. Even good customer service equates directly to more customers and more profits. It has nothing to do with caring about customers. I work for a large credit card company, that before it was bought out, had a horrible reputation and customers were leaving in droves. Then the first buyout occurred, and our call center advisors were told all about how they had to start being sympathetic to the customers and make good impressions. And lo! customers started coming back, once the customer service reputation improved.
While there are some /employees/ in the large corporations who actually care about the customers, the ones making the executive decisions literally care only insofar as it affects the bottom line. If it was more profitable to sell crappy products and give shit service, Sears would be first in line to start doing that.
There's a difference though. Immunizations against disease serve to protect the well-being of everyone you work with and happens to include the well-being of the place you work for. Drug immunizations would server to protect the well-being of the place you work for, and nobody else. Because of this, I suspect there would be a much harder time justifying such a requirement.
0) Be Consistent Users like to see the same thing in the same place, every time. And when the interface is inconsistent with itself (OK button above cancel on screen A, below cancel on screen B, in the center bottom for screen C), it makes it a lot harder for the user to become familiar and comfortable with it -- because they have to give /thought/ to what they're doing every time. This basically means that using your software is a constant irritation to your user. A prime example of what not to do is MS Office's "smart menus", which hide the most unused menu items; essentially making it possible to change the interface on a daily basis. (I understand why they made that design choice -- presenting too many options is almost as bad -- but IMO it was the wrong solution.)
An extension of this is: Don't get creative. While it may be great that you have a round traffic light showing green as your OK button, that's unfamiliar in this context. Present users with what they know -- you don't want to make them /think/ about using your application.
I'm sure someone else will or already has mentioned it, but User Interface Design for Programmers is well worth the short time it takes to read it.
Dude, let it go. Seriously. Just let it go. You missed the joke, trying to plow ahead and cover that up isn't making it any better. For further discussion, reference Humor, definition of.
I've seen no less than six posters stating some variation of "such and such a study proved this X many years ago". I know this is going to earn me a troll rating, but: is the average slashdotter so reliant on mathematical models and scientific studies that he can't just look at the evidence in front of him? [There's a free +5 Funny mod to the first person who snips out that line and makes a one-liner like "Yes."]
You can literally /see/ this wave of traffic back-propagating from any road that isn't a sharp curve to the inside. And I do mean see it -- one person makes a brief tap, the next person taps for an instant longer; the next person is on the brake for a second, then two seconds, in a exponential increase of duration. [Some people even see this coming and slow down without using their brakes, in an attempt to reduce the effects of the inevitable.]
There's a lot to be said for proving something mathematically, and for scientific studies. But sometimes, one can learn things by looking at the road ahead -- literally, in this situation. In this particular case, it's rather disturbing to see that so many folks are /not/ looking past the end of their bumpers to see this for themselves -- because failing to do so usually means that they're a contributor to this specific problem.
Eugenics 'could work' if everyone agreed on it, that doesn't make it the right way to do things. Your comments are just asinine. I apologize, I'm usually more polite when I disagree; but seriously. I can't think of another way to describe it. Your viewpoint seems to be either publish your music exactly as you envision it, or it can't possibly be real music/art. What, then, of someone who has a friend critique his work, and the friend says "It sounds ok, but it would be better if..." Is it no longer music? Or is /that/ ok -- just not what a person experienced in the industry makes those requests. What if an author's wife tells her husband that the book is great, but it would be better if he made just a couple of changes? What if instead of his wife, it was his editor? His publisher? Is it still a book then, or just a random heap of words between two covers?
Me, I'm of a simpler viewpoint. Art has two parts -- what the performer brings to it and what the listener does. In your case, I can almost pity you - with such narrow beliefs as yours, you are missing out on a lot of fine music. As you say, to you such a modified performance would only be sound -- for you bring nothing else to the table. But don't state your stunted views as a universal truth. We get enough of that from the politicians.
Hint: without a user, the machine doesn't get turned on ;)
Let's put aside for a moment the risk of blindness, and the monetary value of your vision. Let's say the pilot of the aircraft gets disoriented and crashes in spite of the fact that the couple had no intention of harming him at all. (Funny how stupid actions have consequences despite the best intentions of the idiot who fails to think of them.) Maybe in a case like this, it's a cop at low altitude, in pursuit -- and his crash not only kills him, but the traffic he lands in. Suddenly, 25 years seems like a light sentence, doesn't it?
The idea behind harsh sentences for seemingly "harmless" crimes like that is to discourage it from becoming a fatal situation.
I'm not sure why your comment was modded 'funny' as opposed to 'insightful' -- because if it isn't stopped early, that /will/ be what happens in a few years or sooner. Best of all is the way the spokesperson justifies it: The sound isn't rattling your skull, it's not penetrating you, it's not doing anything nefarious at all. It's just like having a flashlight vs. a light bulb," he said.
Yeah. Right. A 28,000 candlepower halogen flashlight, shined right in my fucking eyes in the middle of a moonless night.
As they believe they will? I suggest they drive up I-95N between the Delaware border and rt 476 during any time in which there is a medium level of traffic. There is a very large, active LED that changes advertisements every few seconds. On several occasions, I have watch traffic drop suddenly in speed from 55-70 down to 40-55, depending on the time of day (with accompanying panicked tromps on the brake pedal that is most people's first response to confusion). Now I guess that there's no proof, but the only thing in the location immediately prior to the speed drop has been that obnoxious billboard.
Hell, it distracted me the first time (though I didn't pant my foot on the brake or even slow down) because when I saw something that was in motion as part of a sign, I thought that clearly something that was actively trying to get my attention was probably a message from DOT or something, warning of construction or traffic. Alas, no. It was an advertisement for a local radio station.
But once a few people are dead, I'm sure they'll consider that the ridiculous thing may have been a contributing factor. Politicians are quick that way.
Similar story. I was in a motorcycle accident a few years back. I was driving at about 30 mph, wet roads. Guy pulls out in front of me from a parking lot then /stops/, and suddenly it was like everything went down to super-slow. I start thinking about the odds, and whether it would be best for me to lay the bike down, or if I had a chance of stopping before I hit the guy.
After what felt like a minute or so and I saw that I wasn't going to be able to make the stop, I decided to lay the bike down -- then proceeded to do so, all the while in the same dream-like state. Continued to stay on the bike, timed my 'jump' to when the bike was as far down as it would go without trapping my leg -- I wanted as much drag as possible to prevent the bike from sliding into the car if it could be done. This entire time, I was completely calm and clear-headed, thinking out every single move.
Finally I hopped off the bike, took one step, another step -- and suddenly time returned to normal, my body realized that it could /not/ run at 15 mph and I went down. Someone coming out of the store attached to the parking lot came over to check on me; as I was trying to get over a serious case of 'the shakes' she said the whole thing took maybe one or two seconds at most.
The bike missed the car by about two feet in the end -- and as I was getting to my feet, the fucker drove off and left. I suspect he never even realized I was there.
Again, I wasn't making my comment in context of receiving injected data into received html...