Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:That's the entire point of GUI over CLI - visib (Score 1) 284 284

If you want ununlimited choices, where you can do anything from anywhere, any time, that's called CLI

This is a fallacious cop-out. You are attacking a straw man of 'wanting ununlimited [sic] choices' (nobody said they want that), and are implying a false dichotomy (there is something in between 'no choice' and 'unlimited choice') of which the choice you present is absurd in itself ('unlimited' is technically physically impossible).

We weren't talking about CLIs and we're not going to.

The entire point of a GUI is to present the user with the most relevant and common choices for the current task at hand, in an easy-to-use way, so they don't have to KNOW all of the choices available, they can SEE the choices available at the present time.

Which says NOTHING about what number of choices is appropriate and thus NOTHING about the subject at hand.

If you want to memorize arbitrary key strokes to get things done quickly

Straw man again.

A GUI is the alternative, for people who want to visibly SEE the choices, not LEARN them.

Which only SPEAKS FOR showing many choices early instead of HIDING them somewhere deep in the UI.
(is the caps-emphasis annoying you yet?)

Learning hundreds of arbitrary keystrokes and using them in a gui is like using a motorcycle to move furniture- precisely the wrong tool for the purpose you wish to achieve.

Nobody was talking about keyboard shortcuts, but as long as they are optional they do not complicate the UI for anyone, but do make it more powerful for everybody. But again, you seem to be arguing in favor of showing users many choices in a UI. Is that correct?

Comment: Re:iOS is toys, OS X is Unix. Learn the difference (Score 1) 284 284

Your brain works the same way as everyone else's.

On some levels: yes. On many others: no. It would be a fairly boring world if all (human) brains would work in exactly the same way.

I understand what you're trying to say, but it's wrong and reveals the fundamental misunderstanding of choice paralysis and such phenomena and how that leads to their abuse in defending poor UIs.

Let me begin by saying that there are indeed biological factors that influence the effectiveness of having a certain number of choices (for instance, the famed 7 +/- 2 items rule, related to working memory), but these are not the subject of The Paradox of Choice. The Paradox of Choice revolves around concepts as 'being afraid of making a suboptimal choice' and 'avoiding responsibility'. The behavior that leads to lower satisfaction when presented with (many) more choices is actually very high-level behavior. As such, it can be trained away.

I like taking responsibility for my choices. I like looking for the optimal choice and am perfectly happy with and capable of stopping that process at any point I desire and picking what I deem the best one at that point.
I'm pretty sure there are many people like this. If that makes us 'special cornflakes' (I'm sure you meant snow flake), then so be it.

Finally, on this topic: 'choices' in a UI are generally quite far from the types of choices where choice paralysis etc. occur. 'Choosing' path x over path y to perform the same function in a UI doesn't really incur regret of not having chosen path y. Even if it does, you just choose path y the next time. In other words: pretty much all 'choices' in a UI can be reverted or remade almost instantly. In addition to that, they are usually very, very minor choices.

You could go as far as to say that UI design is an area where The Paradox of Choice is completely inapplicable.

When you think this is about "dumbing down" you're being quite dumb about UI design yourself.

I said it leads to that, not that it is about that. The 'less is more'-team strips away everything, shits on power users, measures that 80% of consumers 'love the new interface' and calls it a day. Things as simple as having an 'advanced options' button deal with the 'so many options!'-anxiety, yet still allow those capable to handle them to increase their own effectiveness that extra bit.

There is nothing wrong with complex interfaces. There is nothing wrong with simple interfaces.
There is something wrong with needlessly complex interfaces and with needlessly simple interfaces.

Comment: Re:iOS is toys, OS X is Unix. Learn the difference (Score 1) 284 284

Remember that when you refer to 'The Paradox of Choice', you are pointing out mental weakness in some people. The 'paradox' doesn't hold for everybody: a sizable group of people deals perfectly well with having many choices.

The nuance-free 'less is more'-thinking that has become so pervasive is a detriment to the world of software as it just leads to dumbing down the products and catering to their least capable users.

Comment: Re:Drone It (Score 1) 831 831

"perversely"? Really?

Are you calling their conscience kicking in a bad thing? What you call 'coping' I call 'being morally numbed by life threatening situations'.

War is a bitch. If people are shooting at you, a lot of morality goes out the door (and a large part of the population won't blame you for that). Clearly, these drone pilots do not have such an excuse.

Comment: Re:Not All Fats are Equal (Score 1) 244 244

Quote from a better article than TFA:
"Prof. Magnusson and colleagues reached their findings using 2-month-old male mice, which were randomized to be fed either a high-fat diet (42% fat, 43% carbohydrate), a high-sugar diet (12% fat, 70% carbohydrate - mainly from sugars) or normal chow."
( )

Note that both could also be called low-protein (less than 18%) and that the second could be called low-fat.
But "Low-Fat, Low-Protein Diet Can Lead To Cognitive Decline" doesn't quite ring the bell that has been rung a thousand times before. A bell that sounds familiar, safe and doesn't cause cognitive dissonance.

Comment: Re:Can they compile from source? (Score 1) 143 143

Wow, the most popular attacks of 2013 were pretty much all about exploiting the quirks of C.

Not trying to start a fight here, but the attacks I'm seeing would not be possible in Java (for instance). I'm also not implying that an OS should be written in Java (obviously). I was and am interested to what extent such underhanded code can be written in 'modern' higher-level languages. I found this when Googling:

Comment: Re:albeit costing three times as much (Score 1) 126 126

5.5 years ago, I bought an Intel i7 860 and accompanying mid-range motherboard for 350 EUR. That means I've paid ~65 EUR/year, ~5 EUR/month for that combination, which is _still_ serving me ridiculously well (so much so that I really really really need to convince myself that I want to upgrade it -- it's far from necessary, but it 'feels' like it is time).

Taking into account that I work from home, for me it is pretty simple: I just can't be bothered to skimp by going AMD and shave off maybe 3 EUR/month on what is hands down the most important device in my life.

Comment: Re:females operate on emotion, not logic (Score 1) 446 446

Huh? An irrational goal is irrational by definition because it's defined as an irrational one.

Which was not under contention. The chasing of an irrational goal is rational, whether or not the goal is irrational. Which was what that was about.

Now that I disagree with. Goals are the result of emotion which is pretty much the epitome of irrationality.

Don't be silly. You haven't even tried to read or in the slightest address the argumentation for my claim (which you are disagreeing with).

Which is exactly what I meant by 'ignoring my points'.

"I disagree with this. This is my opinion." is not an acceptable reply to a set of arguments. You can't just pretend they were never presented. You can't just ignore them.

Well, technically you can, but it makes for a terrible, terrible discussion. If your next reply doesn't show you making an effort, I am done here.

Comment: Re:your UID is too high to call it favorite (Score 1) 246 246

your UID is too high for it to 'always have been your favorite place'

That doesn't make any sense. I obviously didn't mean 'since the inception of /.', but rather 'since I discovered Slashdot'. The latter was many years before I made an account here, btw.

I think you should have tried harder and made some funny 'get off my lawn'-joke instead of childishly waving your UID-dick.

+ - Journalist fools media into publishing chocolate weight loss story->

dinfinity writes: "“Slim by Chocolate!” the headlines blared. A team of German researchers had found that people on a low-carb diet lost weight 10 percent faster if they ate a chocolate bar every day. [...] It was discussed on television news shows. [...] My colleagues and I recruited actual human subjects in Germany. We ran an actual clinical trial, with subjects randomly assigned to different diet regimes. And the statistically significant benefits of chocolate that we reported are based on the actual data. It was, in fact, a fairly typical study for the field of diet research. Which is to say: It was terrible science. The results are meaningless, and the health claims that the media blasted out to millions of people around the world are utterly unfounded."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:negativity (Score 3, Insightful) 246 246

guys, can we cut down the negativity?


Slashdot has been one of the bastions of the internet where rock-hard unemotional honesty and rationality are valued and made salient (through the moderations system and its community). This has always made it my favorite place on the internet by far: getting away from cat pictures, stupid 12-things-that-lists, regurgitated shallow clickbait news reports, endlessly shortsighted comments and stupid fucking polls.

Lately, Slashdot has been sinking. It is still my favorite place, with so much of the internet having devolved into the crap I just mentioned, but the vocal and unabridged resistance against the sinking is imho our only hope for Slashdot not going to shit completely.

So no, we can't cut down the negativity. We must increase it.

Fuck beta.
Fuck stupid headlines.
Fuck clickbait and flamebait articles.
Fuck Slashvertisements.
And fuck polls.

Murphy's Law, that brash proletarian restatement of Godel's Theorem. -- Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"