"but, but, you're not supposed to do that". Yeah, that one still makes my *hair* stand up. Most devs are superb at narrow domain problem solving. Of course, reality and users tend not to accommodate them. I can't tell you how many times I've pushed the limits of a software package to get something done and it fails miserably.
So, yes, they will have 37 instances of the software running at once and yes, they will try and save one or more projects/files with the same name at the same time and yes, no matter how many times dev says it's their fault, they're wrong. Machines are designed to accommodate people, not the other way around.
Minor correction. There are still parts of Yahoo that take recently have begun to take comments. I've noticed the return and it's fairly recent.
"The trouble is, it's not moderated or filtered in any decent way."
Actually, that's what I *liked* about it. As vile, stupid and depressing as all those comments were, they were an honest reflection of homo computeris, not some filtered, sanitized, disney-fied, fluffy-bunny collection of happy-talk.
Yes, you log in once and as long as your browser is up, the next login is faster. Logging in from scratch using slower DSL gets you an empty page. After you start typing, it gives you the next page with a few graphics (deleting your text), and then finally gives you the final graphics laden pages with Yahoo gal or guy who can take 20 seconds to a minute to load depending on connection speed and general internet weather.
The deal is, 3 separate pages aren't *needed* and you can't depend on the fact that everyone in the universe has fast broadband. At my lake house, I've got a satellite system. It's relatively slow and Yahoo mail becomes an exercise in patience/torture.
Yahoo news stories used to universally take comments from readers. They were actually early with this, but then they cut it off. Fear of lawsuits is all I can think of. Now almost every news outlet on the web lets you comment on the stories. The legal staff and management at Yahoo simply hadn't the balls for even the slightest amount of risk.
They've also become the poster child of bad web design. The mail login goes through changes every month. They're not an improvement. Currently, you load 3 pages of noise filled unread ad droppings before you can actually log in and look at your mail. They used to have an easy to use weather and TV Guide. The were changed from simple, usable HTML pages to automated, advertising filled junk that made them almost unusable. Then they didn't measure the amount of use after the changes and modify accordingly. In fact, I doubt if they pay significant attention to users at all.
And they're just *sloppy.* I don't know how else to describe a company of that size that can't even keep its comic pages updated consistently.
Google, in contrast, has a clean look, usability and no ad droppings randomly scattered on pages.
Well, because natural gas fields deplete much, much more rapidly than oil fields (http://depletion.blogspot.com/2009/01/natural-gas-crisis-looming.html). While I agree that we can and should diversify our transportation sector infrastructure to use hydrocarbon gases, it's not a permanent or even a long term answer. It can slow down powerdown though and give us more time to transition. I think that's the greatest value in NG.
Witchcraft, communism and drugs were the older tools government used to get rid of undesirables, now a bit out of fashion. This is just more of the same. As any Russian who survived the Stalinist era just how easily evidence can be manufactured.
What you said: Nihilism in our lower classes leads to much worse situations than a little faith.
What that means: Nihilism in our lower classes leads to much worse situations than a few "harmless" lies told to the little incompetent bastards for their own good, and which coincidentally keepd them from rioting or rebelling against us, the ruling oligarchy.
Fixed that for you.
Re:And thus they fail because...
on
Why Wave Failed
·
· Score: 1
Point taken, aesthetics doesn't trump functionality but above all, an interface must be *usable*, even if it's not pretty. I have no trouble with either AIM or Yahoo messenger in that regard.
I would somewhat disagree about Apple. While their marketing it good, their market share has always been less than that of the Wintel machines of yore. It's their usability, and only that, that's allowed them to hang on and eventually win.
And thus they fail because...
on
Why Wave Failed
·
· Score: 1
1) They couldn't explain what it was easily, and therefore couldn't sell it. 2) It solved problems that were already solved (Collaboration software! Gosh, how original!) 3) Interface was an afterthought, not the product's primary driver, as it MUST be for any consumer software product (Note. Repeat the word "Apple" three times before you flame).
Google is getting more Microsofty by the day, although Microsoft's MO is usually to solve problems you don't have in a way you can't use very easily (e.g. Azure) for big business so that the peons are forced to use it (and hate it) anyway.
Ditto. I'm getting truly sick of these "improvements in solar technology" stories that turn out to be little more than research lab oddities, penny stock scams, or something so expensive that it will never be commercially viable.
When it looks like Joe-Bob can buy a system for under a thousand at Wal-Mart, and the system is so idiot proof, that even Joe-Bob can plug it in and make it work without killing himself or burning down the trailer, you have something.
Until then, even if it works, solar is still just a rich man's toy.
Solar energy. It's NOT just a technical problem. It's an economic problem.
Just last week, some goofball alien teenagers flew into the back pasture, buzzed the place, killed some cows, picked up members of my family, probed them anally and had sex with them. I want COMPENSATION, dang it!
Any programming language is an interface to the computer system. That's all.
APL, was far superior, in that it leveraged prior knowledge of mathematical notation. VB, was far superior, in that it leveraged prior knowledge of English language.
When you first look at C++, it's gobbledygook. Semantically, braces are mush, meaning multiple things. C++ does not leverage prior information, but forces the user to understand an entirely new symbolic vocabulary, rather than using and extending a controlled vocabulary as other languages do.
Christianity spread because the followers borrowed their organizational structure from the roman government. Pope = Emperor. Apostles = Bishops. And so on. This structure allowed for more efficient actions of any sort, including proselytizing innocents.
Buddhism spread without this - they were just groups of travelling monks, talking sensibly. Perhaps they had a message which had to get out.:)
I think you missed my point here and are making an unfounded assumption.
I'm aware that Chernobyl wasn't caused by a bomb. Irrelevant.
Radioactive poison may indeed kill over the course of years, or days if it's nasty enough. I doubt if that would deter any terrorist group from using a dirty bomb if they could.
A million slow agonizing radiation deaths would be quite effectively terrorizing, for quite a while. The psychological impact might even be greater due to the greater duration and inevitability.
Slashdot Mirror
Particularly fatal bike riding.
"but, but, you're not supposed to do that".
Yeah, that one still makes my *hair* stand up. Most devs are superb at narrow domain problem solving. Of course, reality and users tend not to accommodate them. I can't tell you how many times I've pushed the limits of a software package to get something done and it fails miserably.
So, yes, they will have 37 instances of the software running at once and yes, they will try and save one or more projects/files with the same name at the same time and yes, no matter how many times dev says it's their fault, they're wrong. Machines are designed to accommodate people, not the other way around.
Minor correction. There are still parts of Yahoo that take recently have begun to take comments. I've noticed the return and it's fairly recent.
"The trouble is, it's not moderated or filtered in any decent way."
Actually, that's what I *liked* about it. As vile, stupid and depressing as all those comments were, they were an honest reflection of homo computeris, not some filtered, sanitized, disney-fied, fluffy-bunny collection of happy-talk.
Yes, you log in once and as long as your browser is up, the next login is faster. Logging in from scratch using slower DSL gets you an empty page. After you start typing, it gives you the next page with a few graphics (deleting your text), and then finally gives you the final graphics laden pages with Yahoo gal or guy who can take 20 seconds to a minute to load depending on connection speed and general internet weather.
The deal is, 3 separate pages aren't *needed* and you can't depend on the fact that everyone in the universe has fast broadband. At my lake house, I've got a satellite system. It's relatively slow and Yahoo mail becomes an exercise in patience/torture.
Yahoo news stories used to universally take comments from readers. They were actually early with this, but then they cut it off. Fear of lawsuits is all I can think of. Now almost every news outlet on the web lets you comment on the stories. The legal staff and management at Yahoo simply hadn't the balls for even the slightest amount of risk.
They've also become the poster child of bad web design. The mail login goes through changes every month. They're not an improvement. Currently, you load 3 pages of noise filled unread ad droppings before you can actually log in and look at your mail. They used to have an easy to use weather and TV Guide. The were changed from simple, usable HTML pages to automated, advertising filled junk that made them almost unusable. Then they didn't measure the amount of use after the changes and modify accordingly. In fact, I doubt if they pay significant attention to users at all.
And they're just *sloppy.* I don't know how else to describe a company of that size that can't even keep its comic pages updated consistently.
Google, in contrast, has a clean look, usability and no ad droppings randomly scattered on pages.
And they have one more thing. Success.
Too late. I already use Windows.
Anonymous! My name *is* John Doe, you insensitive clod!
Whee. :\
Well, because natural gas fields deplete much, much more rapidly than oil fields (http://depletion.blogspot.com/2009/01/natural-gas-crisis-looming.html). While I agree that we can and should diversify our transportation sector infrastructure to use hydrocarbon gases, it's not a permanent or even a long term answer. It can slow down powerdown though and give us more time to transition. I think that's the greatest value in NG.
Witchcraft, communism and drugs were the older tools government used to get rid of undesirables, now a bit out of fashion. This is just more of the same. As any Russian who survived the Stalinist era just how easily evidence can be manufactured.
What you said: Nihilism in our lower classes leads to much worse situations than a little faith.
What that means: Nihilism in our lower classes leads to much worse situations than a few "harmless" lies told to the little incompetent bastards for their own good, and which coincidentally keepd them from rioting or rebelling against us, the ruling oligarchy.
Fixed that for you.
Point taken, aesthetics doesn't trump functionality but above all, an interface must be *usable*, even if it's not pretty. I have no trouble with either AIM or Yahoo messenger in that regard.
I would somewhat disagree about Apple. While their marketing it good, their market share has always been less than that of the Wintel machines of yore. It's their usability, and only that, that's allowed them to hang on and eventually win.
1) They couldn't explain what it was easily, and therefore couldn't sell it.
2) It solved problems that were already solved (Collaboration software! Gosh, how original!)
3) Interface was an afterthought, not the product's primary driver, as it MUST be for any consumer software product (Note. Repeat the word "Apple" three times before you flame).
Google is getting more Microsofty by the day, although Microsoft's MO is usually to solve problems you don't have in a way you can't use very easily (e.g. Azure) for big business so that the peons are forced to use it (and hate it) anyway.
I hear it all the time, but I don't tell anyone.
Well, maybe not where *you* shop.
That is just *so* uncool.
I *reallly* hope it's all nothing and not this http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/21jan_severespaceweather/
Ditto. I'm getting truly sick of these "improvements in solar technology" stories that turn out to be little more than research lab oddities, penny stock scams, or something so expensive that it will never be commercially viable.
When it looks like Joe-Bob can buy a system for under a thousand at Wal-Mart, and the system is so idiot proof, that even Joe-Bob can plug it in and make it work without killing himself or burning down the trailer, you have something.
Until then, even if it works, solar is still just a rich man's toy.
Solar energy. It's NOT just a technical problem. It's an economic problem.
Just last week, some goofball alien teenagers flew into the back pasture, buzzed the place, killed some cows, picked up members of my family, probed them anally and had sex with them. I want COMPENSATION, dang it!
Any programming language is an interface to the computer system. That's all.
APL, was far superior, in that it leveraged prior knowledge of mathematical notation.
VB, was far superior, in that it leveraged prior knowledge of English language.
When you first look at C++, it's gobbledygook. Semantically, braces are mush, meaning multiple things. C++ does not leverage prior information, but forces the user to understand an entirely new symbolic vocabulary, rather than using and extending a controlled vocabulary as other languages do.
http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/ook.html
Christianity spread because the followers borrowed their organizational structure from the roman government. Pope = Emperor. Apostles = Bishops. And so on. This structure allowed for more efficient actions of any sort, including proselytizing innocents.
Buddhism spread without this - they were just groups of travelling monks, talking sensibly. Perhaps they had a message which had to get out. :)
Both Santa Claus and Jesus may have been based on some real human being in the distant past.
I'm pointing out that:
a)Neither exist now.
b)Based on current evidence, belief in either as magical superbeings is delusional.
P.S.
Sorry if this offends any of your current imaginary friend(s).
I think you missed my point here and are making an unfounded assumption.
I'm aware that Chernobyl wasn't caused by a bomb. Irrelevant.
Radioactive poison may indeed kill over the course of years, or days if it's nasty enough. I doubt if that would deter any terrorist group from using a dirty bomb if they could.
A million slow agonizing radiation deaths would be quite effectively terrorizing, for quite a while. The psychological impact might even be greater due to the greater duration and inevitability.
A pox on both governments and their malcontents.
Moving on, our next topics are Santa Clause, Jesus, the Tooth Fairy, and honesty in government.