I dont disagree that there have been regressions in interface design, not at all. But that is an entirely different issue from an 'intuitive' interface. Good interfaces are no more intuitive than bad ones, because none of them are. But good interfaces are different from bad ones in many other ways.
"Babies naturally try to put everything in their mouth and we naturally hold babies near our nipples."
Exactly. That's an intuitive interface. No explanation is needed, there is no paradigm to grasp, no special sensory skills to develop, it just works.
Sure, you have to train them not to bite/chew too hard, but really you are picking a tiny nit with that. It's still far, far closer to 'intuitive' than anything that involves a display screen will ever be.
"Mint wasn't very intuitive to me... granted I only ran it for a few hours"
The nipple is the only intuitive interface. All others are learned.
If people would quit chasing an impossible goal of an intuitive interface and focus on making functional interfaces instead, it would be a huge improvement.
"If you've been in congress since 1981 and nobody wants you near any important committee regarding intelligence or foreign affairs, maybe there's a reason, you know?"
Considering the crowd that WP:OWNs those committees, this comment actually leads me to think Rep. Wolf might not be a waste of oxygen.
"Most singular" does not mean anything. It's gratuitous gibberish.
Most is a superlative, it only makes sense when comparing 3 or more things (plural.) No comparing was being done here, and "singular" is a word whose meaning allows no opportunity to augment it with a superlative. There is no more or less singular, no least or most singular, singular is simply singular.
It's not exactly shocking to see poor English in a slashdot writeup, but this one manages to be even worse than expected.
It *wont* be enough, but it's not because the technology isnt sufficient.
See the fiber to the home is sold as a panacea for problems that it wont actually address. If your uplink is throttled back to nearly nothing it doesnt matter a bit how wide your pipe is otherwise, it's still inadequate. A simple 1gb symmetrical dsl link over copper wire is something the ISPs have the ability to offer but absolutely refuse to. So what will they offer over fibre? 40mbps!!!! (But read the fine print, it's 256k up, and absolutely worthless except for 'consuming' their 'premium' offerings.)
Those people dont buy electric cars to begin with man.
These are expensive status-symbols for spoiled rich kids. The same people who voluntarily pay more for 'green' electricity. If they have to purchase twice as much juice because their fancy wireless charger is less efficient, I really dont think that will bother them. It might even be a plus.
"Tranny" is not just a label that implies transsexual, it specifically implies a transsexual *prostitute* which is why most transsexuals would be offended to be so labeled. Just as most women do not like to be called whores. Of course there are exceptions to every rule, but your post does seem rather hard to believe. Either you know several transexual friends who are all either prostitutes or do not mind being called such, or you just made this all up. Occam's razor is gently calling...
"No, because if it really turns out that what set of genitals you have play a major role in such a huge financial decision as what career you choose, even in the absence of outside coercion, then that instantly invalidates any economic theory that assumes people generally make rational (from purely economic perspective) choices - which would be all of them."
Not at all. Try to follow along.
The genitals you have, along with many other factors, shape you and what you desire.
'Rational choices' only acquires meaning here after desires are established. People chase their desires and in doing so tend to be more rational about it than they realize.
But if you really believe what you are posting then you should give equal time to recruiting more male nurses, and child development specialists, and also we need more female sanitation workers and firemen btw. Lots more.
The only reliable and straightforward defense may well be an older car.
Alternatively, since this thing appears to target the CAN bus, you might get results from shielding it. That should be relatively straightforward and I would expect something as simple as wrapping it carefully in foil might give you significant shielding, which would reduce the effective range, and it sounds like they dont have much range to begin with. BUT, there really isnt any way to know whether/how effective your shielding is without fabricating a transmitter of your own and testing it out.
I couldnt say it fails to be English. However after perusing every link I am left without any information about what this 'organic visualization' thing actually is, and how it's supposed to work.
Leaving me only to comment more generally that it is not the search engines job to read the users mind, and shouldnt be, if only because it is impossible to do that with any amount of computing power. It's one of those disastrously attractive ideas that may take us another decade to finally start getting over.
"How many people will actually apply this firmware update? 90% of people plug their router in, hook their equipment up to it and leave it that way until it breaks, then they replace it."
This has broader applicability as well. No matter how much software people may wish otherwise, people treat their hardware like a black box and it makes no sense to them for it to be changing after the fact.
So you have massive vulnerabilities in just about anything ever shipped, because of the way software is developed. (There are other ways to develop, but essentially no one wants to hear about them, because they are slower.) Security depends on updates being applied quickly, yet this is always going to be problematic. Relying on the customer to apply an update (particularly one that has warnings about bricking your box on it) on time is ludicrous in most cases, yet any sort of automatic update system that does not rely on the user to make judgements is just another huge surface for vulnerabilities as well.
Put it all together and security is usually a bad joke.
"Evolution relies on the fact that better chromosomes would be lost from the genepool at a slower rate because they would lead to greater fitness and worse chromosomes would be lost at a faster rate because they would lead to a lesser fitness."
Because selection does not operate on Y-DNA (or MtDNA.) These genes are passed on directly with no mixing, so the only source of entropy in the signal is mutation. Most, if not all, of these chromosomes actually perform no role and are never activated, so they are doubly insulated from selection.
While in some cases you can spot such visual clues, in others you cannot. For instance, most people would assume that Australian aborigines are closely related to some African people. In fact their closest relatives are native Americans and east Asians.
Fair complexion was heavily selected for in certain climates before the advent of cheap and reliable supplies of vitamin D.