I used Geocities fairly often back then, and I don't remember such. If such existed, it was not well-publicized, and/or sucked so bad that I quickly ignored and forgot it.
There were desktop products from other vendors for producing static pages: Dreamweaver precursors. There were also 3rd-party HTML templates for static sites that could be uploaded to Geocities. I vaguely remember Geocities offering templates, but you still had to edit the HTML yourself to change anything: it wasn't a CMS, just a "getting started" kit. Kind of a "enter title and synopsis" to create a landing page. But once it was HTML, editing was on your own. Now they did have an online HTML raw text editor IIRC.
Indeed. One can print the PDF manual if they really want a paper copy, but the majority of users probably don't want to pay extra for having the product shipped with a paper manual.
The demand is not there and the minority who want it do have a way to get a paper version on their own.
I suppose the vendor could offer a version of the product with a paper manual, but carrying and managing two products (packaging types) instead of one has overhead and may confuse shoppers and retailers. I don't see the economics favoring it.
Steve Jobs said Woz was a lack-luster coder. He'd procrastinate and get distracted by some gee-whiz side project. For example, he never finished the floating point version of Apple BASIC he promised Jobs.
Why don't conservatives simply admit they don't like much of civilization. Non-trivial civilizations need taxes, gov't, personal weapon control, and tolerance of multiculturalism to run smoothly. But a good many conservatives think those are either evil, or way over-done.
One doesn't have to put a value judgment on it, just say, "I personally would prefer a corporate Mad-Max style world. It better fits me and my kind". Science/math/logic cannot prove that such a world is "bad". If you like that kind of world, then you just do. Say so and wear it as a badge of honor. It's not objectively bad.
I don't want it myself, but I accept that some will. Just build it (or unbuild it) somewhere else, please, not near us. Find an unoccupied island or planet. I'll even donate do your transportation fund, but only one way.
Geocities was once a well-known name, Internet-wise. They could have offered a simple CMS interface in addition to raw HTML, and been what Facebook is, or at least what Blogger is (now owned by Google).
Context-sensitive banner ads at the top or bottom could have paid for it because Geocities was already divided by topic categories, simplifying targeted ads, which advertisers love.
But Yahoo purchased it and ruined it like everything else they ruined. Yahoo had their long fingers in almost every category*: search, social media, blogging, self-hosting, email, shopping (Amazon-esque), discussion groups, and others. Then fucked up each and every one. Their train of fuckups is so long, one thinks it may have been intentional: somebody at the top must have been afraid of success.
Yahoo was handed the Golden Keys to the Kingdom on a red pillow, but swallowed them and then shitted out of the back of the jet on the way to The Gate To The Internet.
It's comparable to the record company who turned down the early Beatles because "guitars are falling out of style"; except Yahoo turned down the Beatles, the Who, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Three Dog Night, and Aretha Franklin.
Indeed. If you think the orange guy is merely a fluke, just remember how close Mrs. Palin came to being in power, considering McCain's uncertain health.
As I mentioned before on slashdot, roughly 40% of the country are Yosemite Sams who put fellow Sams in office. If enough voters sit out an election over email drama or the like, then the Sams rule.
I'd rather have somebody in power who screws up emails than who screws up everything because they personally enjoy chaos (T) and/or hate civilization (Palin).
I've said it before, we only have true equality when we have an equal mix of male and female garbage collectors.
Our trash collectors are robots connected to garbage trucks. The human "collector" mostly sits in a comfy seat watching the screen and pushing buttons. True, bleep happens and they sometimes have to get out and do it manually. But, it's much less physical than the old way.
Yes, but cultural, gender, and ethnic issues also are a factor. I've been on hiring panels myself. They usually don't outright state such, but the hints and patterns are there.
What happened to simply choosing the best candidate for the job
You actually think board selection is a meritocracy? The further one goes from doing measurable tasks, the more social issues play into selection. The office is chock full of politics and social maneuvering. I can tell you boatloads of stories.
It does seem there are more moderate Democrats than moderate Republicans in DC. GOP is better at gerrymandering, for one. (Or at least more willing to push it to embarrassing limits.)
Remember, ACA was mostly invented by a conservative think-tank. Republicans only "hated" it when a Democrat implemented it nation-wide. Anthropomorphic climate change is also a mostly centrist position. That 90%+ of climatologists would lie is a silly mass conspiratorial claim.
The original statement was "...get things done". It didn't define "things", so I assumed it was about general coding-related tasks, which on average has maintenance involved. If your shop/task/situation doesn't need maintenance, then it should go without saying that it doesn't need maintenance. If they meant only hacking and not general, they should not have used "things".
I suppose I should have been clearer, but a perfectly clear statement, including all interpretation assumptions made, would probably require writing 100 times more, and put people to sleep. Whenever I tried to be as clear as possible; readers complained it was "too wordy" and ignored it. Thus, one has to balance brevity and clarity.
There is no such thing as "no political bias". Every stance and non-stance influences or reflects political issues. For example, having a 100% non-censorship position, such as allowing admitted Nazi's, pedophiles, terrorists, and Stalinists to say whatever they want, is a libertarian position, and thus a political decision. (There are different types and degrees of libertarianism, I should point out.)
"Politics" is just organized behavioral and social norms & rules. I suppose you could say you are against any organized enforcement of norms, but then you are an anarchist or stone-age-ist*, which are also political positions.
Being "centrist" is what's commonly considered "non-biased" or "non-partisan". However, centrism is also a political position. (We need more of them; too bad they get no attention because they can't create drama. When was the last time you've seen a mob of "angry centrists"?)
* Barney Rubble for President! Make stones great again! Metal is for cowards! Chuck the Internet and bring back ParrotNet! It's greener!"
Technically Google would not be violating any laws even if they were intentionally politically biased. They are a private company, and private entities can publish any bias they want (barring direct causes of violence or defamation of non-celebrities). We see this with Fox News, for example.
As a hypothetical, what if the CEO directly admitted to having a biased service? What would GOP then do? Anti-trust is about the only remedy in the existing legal bag. But outside of that, GOP's most likely prize would just be in "outing" them.
I suspect, instead, we'll get a more nuanced answer similar to:
Because we grew so fast, early on, Google didn't monitor many of our services very well and thus political bias from individual employees may have indeed slipped in. I apologize to the American people for this.
We've since been creating, tuning, and enforcing ever-clearer public guidelines and are holding all our units accountable for following them.
Extreme and repeat offenders will be fired, and minor offenders will be given further training and mentoring. Any political censorship or filtering outside of the guidelines will also be subject to discipline or termination.
Now, these guidelines may have what some call a political angle to them, such as banning ethnically or gender-related offensive comments in discussion services and social networks. As a private organization, we have a legal right to create and enforce such guidelines, and I stand behind them.
In summary, I cannot promise our published guidelines are free of politically-related decisions, but I do promise we will enforce our guidelines as fairly and consistently as is practically possible so that if you use a Google service, you know what you are getting and know what to expect.
Slashdot Mirror
I used Geocities fairly often back then, and I don't remember such. If such existed, it was not well-publicized, and/or sucked so bad that I quickly ignored and forgot it.
There were desktop products from other vendors for producing static pages: Dreamweaver precursors. There were also 3rd-party HTML templates for static sites that could be uploaded to Geocities. I vaguely remember Geocities offering templates, but you still had to edit the HTML yourself to change anything: it wasn't a CMS, just a "getting started" kit. Kind of a "enter title and synopsis" to create a landing page. But once it was HTML, editing was on your own. Now they did have an online HTML raw text editor IIRC.
Person X being lazy doesn't preclude Person Y from also being lazy. Overall, Woz seemed more motivated with hardware than software, though.
"Welcome to Live Eclipse Watch online. The event will start in 3...2...1... ^ ~#m ` [NO CARRIER]
Indeed. One can print the PDF manual if they really want a paper copy, but the majority of users probably don't want to pay extra for having the product shipped with a paper manual.
The demand is not there and the minority who want it do have a way to get a paper version on their own.
I suppose the vendor could offer a version of the product with a paper manual, but carrying and managing two products (packaging types) instead of one has overhead and may confuse shoppers and retailers. I don't see the economics favoring it.
Steve Jobs said Woz was a lack-luster coder. He'd procrastinate and get distracted by some gee-whiz side project. For example, he never finished the floating point version of Apple BASIC he promised Jobs.
Why don't conservatives simply admit they don't like much of civilization. Non-trivial civilizations need taxes, gov't, personal weapon control, and tolerance of multiculturalism to run smoothly. But a good many conservatives think those are either evil, or way over-done.
One doesn't have to put a value judgment on it, just say, "I personally would prefer a corporate Mad-Max style world. It better fits me and my kind". Science/math/logic cannot prove that such a world is "bad". If you like that kind of world, then you just do. Say so and wear it as a badge of honor. It's not objectively bad.
I don't want it myself, but I accept that some will. Just build it (or unbuild it) somewhere else, please, not near us. Find an unoccupied island or planet. I'll even donate do your transportation fund, but only one way.
Geocities was once a well-known name, Internet-wise. They could have offered a simple CMS interface in addition to raw HTML, and been what Facebook is, or at least what Blogger is (now owned by Google).
Context-sensitive banner ads at the top or bottom could have paid for it because Geocities was already divided by topic categories, simplifying targeted ads, which advertisers love.
But Yahoo purchased it and ruined it like everything else they ruined. Yahoo had their long fingers in almost every category*: search, social media, blogging, self-hosting, email, shopping (Amazon-esque), discussion groups, and others. Then fucked up each and every one. Their train of fuckups is so long, one thinks it may have been intentional: somebody at the top must have been afraid of success.
Yahoo was handed the Golden Keys to the Kingdom on a red pillow, but swallowed them and then shitted out of the back of the jet on the way to The Gate To The Internet.
It's comparable to the record company who turned down the early Beatles because "guitars are falling out of style"; except Yahoo turned down the Beatles, the Who, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Three Dog Night, and Aretha Franklin.
* or at least early versions of them
Certain celebrity politicians have made assholery in style, at least for some.
Indeed. If you think the orange guy is merely a fluke, just remember how close Mrs. Palin came to being in power, considering McCain's uncertain health.
As I mentioned before on slashdot, roughly 40% of the country are Yosemite Sams who put fellow Sams in office. If enough voters sit out an election over email drama or the like, then the Sams rule.
I'd rather have somebody in power who screws up emails than who screws up everything because they personally enjoy chaos (T) and/or hate civilization (Palin).
Our trash collectors are robots connected to garbage trucks. The human "collector" mostly sits in a comfy seat watching the screen and pushing buttons. True, bleep happens and they sometimes have to get out and do it manually. But, it's much less physical than the old way.
Possibly favoritism and/or an attempt to gain political influence. It happens all the time all over.
Yes, but cultural, gender, and ethnic issues also are a factor. I've been on hiring panels myself. They usually don't outright state such, but the hints and patterns are there.
You actually think board selection is a meritocracy? The further one goes from doing measurable tasks, the more social issues play into selection. The office is chock full of politics and social maneuvering. I can tell you boatloads of stories.
Like AOL and Compuserve all over again. Consumers preferred the Internet, though.
But they shave their balls to compensate weight
God uses Intel floating point numbers.
It does seem there are more moderate Democrats than moderate Republicans in DC. GOP is better at gerrymandering, for one. (Or at least more willing to push it to embarrassing limits.)
Remember, ACA was mostly invented by a conservative think-tank. Republicans only "hated" it when a Democrat implemented it nation-wide. Anthropomorphic climate change is also a mostly centrist position. That 90%+ of climatologists would lie is a silly mass conspiratorial claim.
Trollbot set to 11. Cool!
Mars: "Psst, Earthie, you realize you have funny particles spewing out of your ice hole? See a doctor, 'kay?"
That's an unpatriotic French word. How about "Freedom Shades".
Polymorphism is gender fiddling, bannit!
The original statement was "...get things done". It didn't define "things", so I assumed it was about general coding-related tasks, which on average has maintenance involved. If your shop/task/situation doesn't need maintenance, then it should go without saying that it doesn't need maintenance. If they meant only hacking and not general, they should not have used "things".
I suppose I should have been clearer, but a perfectly clear statement, including all interpretation assumptions made, would probably require writing 100 times more, and put people to sleep. Whenever I tried to be as clear as possible; readers complained it was "too wordy" and ignored it. Thus, one has to balance brevity and clarity.
There is no such thing as "no political bias". Every stance and non-stance influences or reflects political issues. For example, having a 100% non-censorship position, such as allowing admitted Nazi's, pedophiles, terrorists, and Stalinists to say whatever they want, is a libertarian position, and thus a political decision. (There are different types and degrees of libertarianism, I should point out.)
"Politics" is just organized behavioral and social norms & rules. I suppose you could say you are against any organized enforcement of norms, but then you are an anarchist or stone-age-ist*, which are also political positions.
Being "centrist" is what's commonly considered "non-biased" or "non-partisan". However, centrism is also a political position. (We need more of them; too bad they get no attention because they can't create drama. When was the last time you've seen a mob of "angry centrists"?)
* Barney Rubble for President! Make stones great again! Metal is for cowards! Chuck the Internet and bring back ParrotNet! It's greener!"
Technically Google would not be violating any laws even if they were intentionally politically biased. They are a private company, and private entities can publish any bias they want (barring direct causes of violence or defamation of non-celebrities). We see this with Fox News, for example.
As a hypothetical, what if the CEO directly admitted to having a biased service? What would GOP then do? Anti-trust is about the only remedy in the existing legal bag. But outside of that, GOP's most likely prize would just be in "outing" them.
I suspect, instead, we'll get a more nuanced answer similar to:
I'm not really sure what your point is, but remember that there is something called "VBscript" that is interpreted and was common for a while.