I don't think what we need most is pills for intelligence per se. More like... pills for critical thinking. That's not so much a matter of intelligence, as it is one of education.
So, back when Windows had lame numbered version numbers (Win95, NT 4.0) it had jazzy codenames like Chicago, Cairo and whatnot. Now, that the official releases have jazzy official names (Vista, XP, whatnot) codenames have turned into... WINDOWS 7? so what gives?
I've had no formal training in GUI design either, but I've found that making a few useful scenarios works pretty good (although it takes a bit of time).
To do so, try to imagine a few "typical" users for your application, and go down to enough details about them, until you have a clear image of their personality. It's pretty hard to do first (sounds easy, until you actually start writing stuff down, then you block).
The idea while doing this is to come to different aspects in usability, not in features. That would allow you to (hopefully) come to a good understanding of which tasks are most important and how to prioritize them.
I believe Joel Spolsky described this method at some point but I'm too lazy at the moment to search for the link.
I really do wonder if it's within the scope of today's technology to take one of these asteroids and guide it into earth orbit. For instance using small nuclear devices to prod it carefully to where it should be.
I believe this to be prohibitive, not because of guiding and asteroid would be impossible, but because for a earth orbit you'd have to slow it down a lot.
"What we have here is a failure to communicate.."
What we have here is a marketing failure.
I don't think so; I believe what we have here is - if anything, a failure in education. People are taught what to think, not how to think. The moment you know how to think and see an affirmation that has no support (in infotainment - for example) you can realize that. When you don't know how to think, you'll probably say "I'ts true - I saw that on discovery ( I do that more often than I'd like to:-( ).
Sadly I've learned more about what science is from Hawking's Brief History of Time and an interview series with Feynman on youtube than I learned in 16 years of formal education:(.
So, if you combine their work and our work, the speed at which you can innovate and get things done is just dramatically more rapid. So, it's really about the people there that want to join in and create a better search, better portal for a very broad set of customers.
While I'm sure the people and the innovation speed and all that sound nice, if he'd have said "We want yahoo for the marketshare" it would have been more credible.
That would marry the world's most popular social-networking site, MySpace, with Yahoo's 4 billion page views per month to make a formidable opponent for Google.
I realize they're competing in market share and some products, but would that make them opponents? As far as I'm concerned, I use Google search (and a lot of other Google stuff) and this deal wouldn't make me change anything.
I don't see this as competing with Google's targeted ads at all (except in market share, and it's nowhere near enough to be a serious competition in that).
In a black and white situation, I agree with you: If we're talking about an open declaration of war (pretty black and white as far as I'm concerned), then it may be that you actually have to wage war. Otherwise, while yes, you do have to take action, that doesn't mean necessarily waging war.
I don't see things as black and white as you seem to. Regarding a person that wants to kill you, it is indeed a problem. In your "real world" that seems to mean you have to kill it first. In my view (fantasyland?) you simply have to stop that person (have them detained for example, but don't grab a gun and make your own justice). History is full of examples where non-violent/lethal action has stopped or limited the aggression (Gandhi and Martin Luther King come to my mind).
To conclude, I see war as a last resort, and I believe strongly that you DO have other options, in most (if not all) situations. Also, what I said earlier still stands: you don't necessarily have to react with lethal violence for lethal violence (other options may be available), and if you do, you are probably creating the start of the next violence cycle (the enemy will react violently to your reaction).
I'm all for peace and not war, but it is an unfortunate necessity at some points, in order to save life from those who WANT to destroy it for whatever reasons.
So it's necessary to kill those who think killing others (you in your reasoning here) is justified?
Using the same mindset that created the problem in order to solve it, will not exactly lead to solving the problem.
The other side of that is that while people use applications, the operating system can break that experience. I think more people are starting to get sick of the spyware and virus slowdowns, and your average person doesn't know how to fix that so they buy a new computer when it 'gets slow'.
There is truth in that; still, this applies to linux also, but in a different aspect: the much shorter release cycle of linux distros (and the linux kernel) allows for less testing/maturity time and things tends to break more often.
I'm not sure the two are comparable (apples and oranges sort of thing) but it's what annoyed me the most (stil better than my windows experience though).
I think you're missing the point here. This is not about Java being worse than C# or VB. It's about the fact that if Java (C#, VB python, Ruby or any other managed language for that matter) allows you to write code without understanding memory management, then most teachers will happily ignore memory management and move on to algorithms.
It's not that Java somehow produces stupid programmers, but that you finish the course without having covered some critical areas at all.
A Linux port of Duke Nukem Forever, now that we finally know it isn't just vaporware...
Actually, I'm hoping for Linux ports of ANY commercial games. I've mailed a few game distributors asking why don't they include Linux versions of their games. The same answer: Not enough market share (and how do you expect the market share if the game publishers don't make Linux games? HMPH!)
Don't worry! All popular games will have a Linux version, right after DNF for Linux appears!
I mean... once they see DNF on Linux, they are bound to port their own products (so, expect them right after DNF!)
Slashdot Mirror
So ... any known application that uses this?
I had to look it up on google to fid out what exactly adobe AIR is. How big is this?
... only old people have 40Gbps internet connection.
... why don't we call Nanotubes and superconductors The Microprocessor Killers (TM)?
I don't think what we need most is pills for intelligence per se. More like ... pills for critical thinking. That's not so much a matter of intelligence, as it is one of education.
No no ... it's a series of pressurized tubes ... that's like ... an archive of the internet!
Microsoft: Yeah ... that's what we've been trying to prevent!
I've had no formal training in GUI design either, but I've found that making a few useful scenarios works pretty good (although it takes a bit of time).
To do so, try to imagine a few "typical" users for your application, and go down to enough details about them, until you have a clear image of their personality. It's pretty hard to do first (sounds easy, until you actually start writing stuff down, then you block).
The idea while doing this is to come to different aspects in usability, not in features. That would allow you to (hopefully) come to a good understanding of which tasks are most important and how to prioritize them.
I believe Joel Spolsky described this method at some point but I'm too lazy at the moment to search for the link.
I believe this to be prohibitive, not because of guiding and asteroid would be impossible, but because for a earth orbit you'd have to slow it down a lot.
Ummm ... so how much is that in Volkswagen Beetles?
I don't think so; I believe what we have here is - if anything, a failure in education. People are taught what to think, not how to think. The moment you know how to think and see an affirmation that has no support (in infotainment - for example) you can realize that. When you don't know how to think, you'll probably say "I'ts true - I saw that on discovery ( I do that more often than I'd like to :-( ).
Sadly I've learned more about what science is from Hawking's Brief History of Time and an interview series with Feynman on youtube than I learned in 16 years of formal education :(.
I think it was a bad move on the part of whoever did the attack, if their intention was censorship: it only created more publicity for the documents.
I realize they're competing in market share and some products, but would that make them opponents? As far as I'm concerned, I use Google search (and a lot of other Google stuff) and this deal wouldn't make me change anything.
I don't see this as competing with Google's targeted ads at all (except in market share, and it's nowhere near enough to be a serious competition in that).
Maybe I'm missing something though.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough :(
In a black and white situation, I agree with you:
If we're talking about an open declaration of war (pretty black and white as far as I'm concerned), then it may be that you actually have to wage war. Otherwise, while yes, you do have to take action, that doesn't mean necessarily waging war.
I don't see things as black and white as you seem to. Regarding a person that wants to kill you, it is indeed a problem. In your "real world" that seems to mean you have to kill it first. In my view (fantasyland?) you simply have to stop that person (have them detained for example, but don't grab a gun and make your own justice). History is full of examples where non-violent/lethal action has stopped or limited the aggression (Gandhi and Martin Luther King come to my mind).
To conclude, I see war as a last resort, and I believe strongly that you DO have other options, in most (if not all) situations. Also, what I said earlier still stands: you don't necessarily have to react with lethal violence for lethal violence (other options may be available), and if you do, you are probably creating the start of the next violence cycle (the enemy will react violently to your reaction).
So it's necessary to kill those who think killing others (you in your reasoning here) is justified?
Using the same mindset that created the problem in order to solve it, will not exactly lead to solving the problem.
There is truth in that; still, this applies to linux also, but in a different aspect: the much shorter release cycle of linux distros (and the linux kernel) allows for less testing/maturity time and things tends to break more often.
I'm not sure the two are comparable (apples and oranges sort of thing) but it's what annoyed me the most (stil better than my windows experience though).
This is old news. I mean ... really really old news ... Leonardo DaVinci-type old news.
"Son, every election is between a turd and a douchebag."
That's pretty easy actually: pack a generator and some gasoline with you, and you're all set.
ll it run DNF?
It's not the sharks, it's the freakin' laserbeams on the sharks!
I think you're missing the point here. This is not about Java being worse than C# or VB. It's about the fact that if Java (C#, VB python, Ruby or any other managed language for that matter) allows you to write code without understanding memory management, then most teachers will happily ignore memory management and move on to algorithms.
It's not that Java somehow produces stupid programmers, but that you finish the course without having covered some critical areas at all.
Don't worry! All popular games will have a Linux version, right after DNF for Linux appears!
I mean ... once they see DNF on Linux, they are bound to port their own products (so, expect them right after DNF!)