Comment Ooh! Pick Me! (Score 1) 196
The answer is two.
The person quoted in the summary appears to have a relatively solid grasp on how to go about being safe on the internet. By that same metric, a large percentage of Slashdot could also be just fine using XP. The problem is that everyone _else_ keeps using XP, and they _don't_ have that same skillset.
I'm happy that Microsoft finally pulled the plug. My goal is that things get bad enough for the small office that I provide support to on a volunteer basis requires them to upgrade. I've had to re-image a bunch of computers already this year because people click things, and companies are taking XP drivers away. Soon enough, I'll be able to say "Too bad, you have to upgrade this time".
If this is a serious commercial adjustment to the organism then I would be working on increasing alcohol tolerance.
If that is a thing you can adjust, I think there are organisms other than the yeast that would be better served by that improvement.
So, no super speed, or strength, or other abilities, no synthesizer music.
For our $6,000,000, all we get is a "yeast endowed with special properties other yeasts don't have"? This will not make a compelling television drama. Perhaps a bland sitcom, but not much more.
Her executives are tutored in techniques like “responsibility transfer” [...] and “rewriting reality,” which involves undoing the anguish of a painful experience by coming up with alternative scenarios that transform the event from distressing to excusable.
When this happens, think of the convenience! All you'll need to do is look at the nearest camera and give a thumbs up, and Facebook will automatically mark that you Liked [whatever you're standing near].
Two people could become friends by finding the nearest Big Brother station and doing a thumbs up together.
One of (many) problems will be how they contextualize all that data. You know, this started as a joke, but seriously, if Facebook had a feed of this kind of data, it would be interesting to see the hypothetical profile they build based on what they would see an individual near vs. what they claim to like on their public page.
If your children hasn't seen enough porn already, I pity both you and your offspring
I've considered all kinds of snarky ways to respond to this, but I have this sinking feeling that the context would be lost, and all people would remember is my comment about how much pornography I force my kids to watch while educating them about quality and relevance.
Oh, crap.
I will be interested to see if the next CEO is so arrogantly out of touch with what people want, or will continue with the standard party line of "we can do no wrong and people really want these things" even when nobody is buying them.
Just so we're clear - the only choices for a successor are those who are either misguided or ignorant?
What about other wholly valid choices, like malicious, insane, or sadistic? I mean, I understand that "brilliant grasp of what consumers desire and need" is probably right out, but we shouldn't limit the field where unsuitable choices are concerned.
I've done this as well - but I don't like effectively misleading management by saying that we need to do X in order to achieve what is only a loosely related Y. Yes, X would make Y easier, or improve Z and W, but it isn't truly essential.
That's not to say things are entirely bad. I've also had management see the true value of some stuff that isn't technically being requested at that very moment, and push things upwards by tying the work to something else in just this manner.
I guess the moral is that I don't want to mislead project owners, but I'm okay if my boss does it for me?
This.
And not just bug hunts. I have a laundry list of things that need to be refactored, but every time we think we might have a chance to do so, project management decides something else is more important. We have people complaining about things being slow, but when told that we need to spend time to make it faster, we instead get directed at new features or, worse, tweaks for the sake of a single non-representative customer that happens to have the ear of the project owner.
This Google insider obviously doesn't understand the problem.
I did a Google search for "google", and the Google homepage showed up 7th on the list (under some news articles and links to Maps and Analytics). Clearly Google doesn't know what they're doing, and needs to use better SEO so that Google will rank them higher.
The bottom line is - if Google showed up higher in the Google search results, more people would use Google.
The following statement is not true. The previous statement is true.
