Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Desktop (Score 1) 610

by Shark (#47801789) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Old Technology Can't You Give Up?

In a similar vein... I still like to use a GUI that lets me see more than one window at a time.

Despite all the trendy claims to the contrary, I do not get confused from it, even when they overlap! I must be some sort of genius. I've also found myself able to click on icons and buttons that are smaller than 1/16th of the screen, navigate drop-down menus and even read text composed of characters less than 80 pixels high. I also possess the superhuman ability to notice interface elements that aren't surrounded by vast, empty space.

Interface designers nowadays are the large oafs stomping on my LEGO Technic to offer me a box of DUPLO.

Comment: Re:Does this mean no more Gnome desktop? (Score 1) 693

by Shark (#46826815) Attached to: The GNOME Foundation Is Running Out of Money

Well, they sort of did... About as much as Windows did the Start menu. They added a layer of extensions on top of all the crap you don't need to give you back the features they had removed because they decided that you weren't using your computer properly.

What I'm having trouble figuring out is how this thing can be so very sluggish and memory hungry when all they appear to have done is remove stuff the stuff Gnome 2 users were actually using. Of course, you need to spawn all of Webkit and Spidermonkey to have Gnome Shell running so that might have something to do with it. I also have to congratulate them on their ability to waste more screen space by making the interface simpler. One would expect a simpler interface to leave more room for your work, not less.

Oh well, I've decided to spend my efforts adding the few little things missing from LXDE rather than trying to tame Gnome3 back into becoming usable.

Comment: Re:The solution will never happen. (Score 1) 599

On your second point:
You don't need regulation, they already break plenty of existing laws... We'd probably do quite well just *applying the fucking law*. Fraud and theft are already illegal. Ironically, it is the magic of regulations that usually lets them get away with it. The modern definition of regulation is this: A tool that corporations use to have the government protect them from competition. They write the regulations. Clamouring for regulation is like asking for more gasoline to help put out a fire. Here are the only two pieces of regulation you need: Fraud = Jail. Theft = Jail. You apply these rules, you close down Wall Street and most other large corporations even at one minute of hard time per dollar.

Comment: Re:Window manager? (Score 1) 520

by Shark (#45924309) Attached to: 4K Is For Programmers

Hah, give the current trend a moment to catch up. 4k displays just means that in a year or two, menus and icons are going to be forced at a minimal height of 512 pixels and interface elements are going to eat up all that real estate. It is a great sin to assume that people want more pixels because they want more information on the screen and the Gnome3/Windows8 designers are hard at work driving away the last few heretics to the confines of obscurity.

The desktop must become a tablet. The interface must free you from the horrors of having more than one window on the screen. Fonts must be large. If an interface element cannot be used by a quadriplegic banging his head on the monitor, you have failed as a holy enforcer of the lowest common denominator. Choice is the enemy of your user and you must protect him from it at all cost. Amen.

Comment: Re:How about NEW cars? (Score 4, Interesting) 487

by Shark (#45464413) Attached to: Musk Lashes Back Over Tesla Fire Controversy

I have no special love for Tesla or Musk but I think I have to agree with him there. Looking at the facts, these fires are not a very big deal, especially given the age of the (mainstream) electric car market. Sure, efforts should be made to aleviate the issue but obviously, if an accident punctures a battery there's a chance of fire just as there is one if you puncture a gas tank.

Comment: Re:I read this on Techdirt: (Score 1) 510

For the record, I wasn't the AC you replied to though he appears to share my opinion.

To clarify, I may have been using more personal a form of 'you' than generalization calls for, but it really is what I meant. Take 'you' in my post as 'whoever happens to come across this', not s.petry specifically. Assumptions I made are just that and based on what little information this communication channel allowed me to gather, they weren't judgement. I'm sure I could have written that better as you've pointed out, so I won't try to dodge the blame there either. On the topic of excuses, english isn't my first language ;)

While my position is to personally take my share of the blame for the population's inability to keep government in check (happens in my country too), I find your opinion that the people aren't to blame understandable and I can genuinely respect your position.

My perspective is that we all share responsibility and blame for the government we put in power, how much crap we let them get away with and who that power ends up serving. I take blame (hopefully) as much as I take action. The fact that we disagree on where the blame lies doesn't prevent you from taking action and you earn that much more respect from me in doing so. As far as I'm concerned, we're on the same side.

The powers lying behind the scenes pulling strings are still only able to do so through our compliance and lack of action. It's tempting to blame them but they do it because they can and they can because we let them.

Comment: Re:I read this on Techdirt: (Score 1) 510

by Shark (#45358769) Attached to: Edward Snowden Leaks Could Help Paedophiles Escape Police, Says UK Government

The answer goes back in time and requires us to cut the strings tying all of these agencies together. Media monopolies need to be broken up, and journalism needs to once again become journalism. With an informed public we have a chance for reform.

If you say the population isn't to blame, you imply that someone else should do something about it... Which only leaves the 'benevolent dictator' option. It's still up to the population to organize and fix things. The government isn't going to give up its control of the media and educational systems. It won't break up monopolies that serve it so well in any meaningful way.

The population still let all of that happen without much resistance. Ignorance and naiveté are convenient excuses but excuses aren't a shield from responsibility, merely a balm of sympathy to spread over the soreness of blame. It's up to *you* to educate whoever will listen to you about those things and teach them to do the same. You're part of the population, you're partly responsible for its progress or demise. To think of yourself as powerless is mostly a symptom of poor understanding of exponential spread.

Comment: Re:I read this on Techdirt: (Score 4, Insightful) 510

by Shark (#45356205) Attached to: Edward Snowden Leaks Could Help Paedophiles Escape Police, Says UK Government

If they were exercising responsible, firm, intrusive oversight - with absolute, immediate, and unremitting punishment for the people involved (firing certainly, prosecution as required

While in theory, you're right, in practice, that is unsustainable. You *can* have someone principled and just in power but that is largely an exception to the norm. That position will always devolve and attract the lying cheats who will do anything to attain that power. The reason is pretty simple, the honest man typically has no real desire or need for power and will typically be at a great disadvantage for their unwillingness to cheat to maintain it.

The blame here I place (as usual) on Congress.

That's disingenuous. Best you can do is blame the population for not offering principled people who run for office, or in the rare cases where this happens, blame the population for not supporting those guys in favor of the typical establishment stooges.

Even that isn't fair though... Would you risk of life-destroying consequences that rocking the boat too much in congress will most likely bring down upon you? Would you go head-up against the intelligence agency that can pull out or simply fabricate information to publicly humiliate and destroy you if you so much as threaten them? And even if none of that would stick, are you game to find out what other tricks those guys have to take you out of the picture? Would you wish it on someone else?

The bottom line is this: You didn't follow - or hold your politicians to - the constitution (that thing meant to limit the power of government). You now have a government with so much power that it can destroy anyone or anything threatening to take it away. And by 'you' I mean the population of the US.

Don't feel too bad about it though... You at least *have* a pretty good constitution to return to, hard as that goal may be to reach. The rest of the world isn't so lucky.

"The value of marriage is not that adults produce children, but that children produce adults." -- Peter De Vries