I'm not your monkey. If you want to look into it do your own research if you don't you don't. I don't have time to make you give a shit about American politics.
When you say the left you are being inaccurate. Not everyone agrees on one side or another. You should try and stick with the science. As for your last paragraph, engaging in a debate adapting to a changing world while keeping up what we're doing if we're the cause is pretty disturbing. That's like saying we screwed up, it's too late, everyone needs to move to higher ground but keep it up with the oil. If there is something that can be done before someone you know dies wouldn't you do everything you could do prevent it? We know the problem, it is the oil companies. There are alternative sources of energy, all new cars can have requirements to use ethanol or be hybrids starting in two years but we know who is in control of congress right now. Exxon. In addition do you really think if we weren't in this war and had some money and put $100 billion toward developing alternative sources of energy instead of one that we couldn't do it?
Also when you say economists believe adaption is cheaper. What thought are they giving to the human race 200 years for now? There needs to be some priority of importance. If 50000 jobs are lost in the oil industry to ensure that we have enough land to live on 500 years from now and we don't need to start looking for another planet I'm okay with that, I really am. But, it depends on what the science says. I'm a scientist as well (experimental psych) but I try not to characterize one side or another with statements like "they ignore economics." I happen to know a democratic economist.
You're right. Applied experimental psychology doesn't even exist. Microsoft, Canon, Sony, etc. don't have Human Factors departments. There's no science involved. Saddam had WMD's.
If you think it's pseudo-intellectual and not based on hard science I'm afraid you're just not familiar with the field.
MS knows exactly what they are doing. But you keep believing what you believe. People like you are the reason I have successful career. Thank you.
No you little coward. I'm the guy who makes sure people's VCR's don't stay like that. Please have sex with a woman and stop celebrating your own brilliance.
Maybe you're right. It was also suggested in Usability studies when internet advertising was having a lot of trouble. And, come to think of it, it's along similar lines to Amazon's recommendations. Point is it works because it's easier on the user and not so annoying.
Ok buddy, good luck with ignoring human behavior. You've made my point for me. "The option is there, it's not hard." To you.
Since you can figure it out, behavior patterns of everyone else don't exist, right?
Take a fucking sensation and perception class.
Why do you think internet advertising took off with add words. It's because of their positioning after the search.
Why do you think there aren't any more flash intros on websites? It has something to do with user behavior.
People like you are the reason I have to come in and do redesigns with user testing after all the help calls.
You don't build shit for yourself. Your opinion borders on amazing in this day and age.
Well, I can see a few things wrong with your argument. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. Google discovered that plain text ads featured after a search are much better advertising than banner or other ads. Because Microsoft makes a browser doesn't mean they get to dominate search. Did IE invent the integrated search? I don't think they did.
This is a battle for billions in a very small piece of real estate. Most users leave everything at default settings. That needs to enter into this. If you have an accident in your car and go to court, Human Factors experts are called as witnesses because sensation, perception and cognition play a role in driving.
Usability/Human Factors plays a role here as well. MS may own it's browser and OS but it doesn't get to fuck every other business out of money because it feels like it. Yes you can get a PC from Dell with a non MS OS on it. How many average users are going to believe their other software will work with that? How many will be nervous about whether they can work with a new OS or believe it will take too long to do so? The fact that AOL has any users at all should answer that question for you. Do a usability study or two and tell me these things don't matter. Jackass.
I would agree normally, but Google has been the leader for a few years now and the search wars were going on mainly during the beginning of the internet. Most screwed up and went the portal route. Google went with simple usability and a better search technology along with plain text ads to become a household word. I have never seen someone in a movie or television show say "Just Altavista it". I think they have staked a claim like yahoo or ebay. Once you stake a claim, people are notoriously slow at changing.
I have this feeling if you were in front of the President of the United States and a room full of people who you were about to insult you'd crap yourself and run away crying. Armchair douches like you always do.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not your monkey. If you want to look into it do your own research if you don't you don't. I don't have time to make you give a shit about American politics.
When you say the left you are being inaccurate. Not everyone agrees on one side or another. You should try and stick with the science. As for your last paragraph, engaging in a debate adapting to a changing world while keeping up what we're doing if we're the cause is pretty disturbing. That's like saying we screwed up, it's too late, everyone needs to move to higher ground but keep it up with the oil. If there is something that can be done before someone you know dies wouldn't you do everything you could do prevent it? We know the problem, it is the oil companies. There are alternative sources of energy, all new cars can have requirements to use ethanol or be hybrids starting in two years but we know who is in control of congress right now. Exxon. In addition do you really think if we weren't in this war and had some money and put $100 billion toward developing alternative sources of energy instead of one that we couldn't do it?
Also when you say economists believe adaption is cheaper. What thought are they giving to the human race 200 years for now? There needs to be some priority of importance. If 50000 jobs are lost in the oil industry to ensure that we have enough land to live on 500 years from now and we don't need to start looking for another planet I'm okay with that, I really am. But, it depends on what the science says. I'm a scientist as well (experimental psych) but I try not to characterize one side or another with statements like "they ignore economics." I happen to know a democratic economist.
You're right. Applied experimental psychology doesn't even exist. Microsoft, Canon, Sony, etc. don't have Human Factors departments. There's no science involved. Saddam had WMD's. If you think it's pseudo-intellectual and not based on hard science I'm afraid you're just not familiar with the field. MS knows exactly what they are doing. But you keep believing what you believe. People like you are the reason I have successful career. Thank you.
No you little coward. I'm the guy who makes sure people's VCR's don't stay like that. Please have sex with a woman and stop celebrating your own brilliance.
Maybe you're right. It was also suggested in Usability studies when internet advertising was having a lot of trouble. And, come to think of it, it's along similar lines to Amazon's recommendations. Point is it works because it's easier on the user and not so annoying.
Ok buddy, good luck with ignoring human behavior. You've made my point for me. "The option is there, it's not hard." To you. Since you can figure it out, behavior patterns of everyone else don't exist, right? Take a fucking sensation and perception class. Why do you think internet advertising took off with add words. It's because of their positioning after the search. Why do you think there aren't any more flash intros on websites? It has something to do with user behavior. People like you are the reason I have to come in and do redesigns with user testing after all the help calls. You don't build shit for yourself. Your opinion borders on amazing in this day and age.
Well, I can see a few things wrong with your argument. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. Google discovered that plain text ads featured after a search are much better advertising than banner or other ads. Because Microsoft makes a browser doesn't mean they get to dominate search. Did IE invent the integrated search? I don't think they did. This is a battle for billions in a very small piece of real estate. Most users leave everything at default settings. That needs to enter into this. If you have an accident in your car and go to court, Human Factors experts are called as witnesses because sensation, perception and cognition play a role in driving. Usability/Human Factors plays a role here as well. MS may own it's browser and OS but it doesn't get to fuck every other business out of money because it feels like it. Yes you can get a PC from Dell with a non MS OS on it. How many average users are going to believe their other software will work with that? How many will be nervous about whether they can work with a new OS or believe it will take too long to do so? The fact that AOL has any users at all should answer that question for you. Do a usability study or two and tell me these things don't matter. Jackass.
I would agree normally, but Google has been the leader for a few years now and the search wars were going on mainly during the beginning of the internet. Most screwed up and went the portal route. Google went with simple usability and a better search technology along with plain text ads to become a household word. I have never seen someone in a movie or television show say "Just Altavista it". I think they have staked a claim like yahoo or ebay. Once you stake a claim, people are notoriously slow at changing.
I have this feeling if you were in front of the President of the United States and a room full of people who you were about to insult you'd crap yourself and run away crying. Armchair douches like you always do.
Think the difference is, I think he knew he would. He bombed to them and stayed true to himself. Imus was just full of jealousy not moral outrage.
Thankyou.