"Looks like shit" is subjective. Personally I feel like Chrome "looks like shit" on Linux compared to Windows and Mac OSX where it has a consistent look. I am looking very much forward to this move. Like many nowadays I live in the browser and spend 95% of my time there. The more it is consistent across platforms the better. It doesn't matter nearly as much that my browser on Linux looks like my Eclipse as it does that my browser on Linux looks and behaves like my browser on Android or Windows or Mac.
Repeat after me.
The problem IS NOT PASSWORDS. Fighting for "better passwords" is a never-ending, stupid, foolish waste of time.
What is the point of a password? It is to prove who you are. Nothing more, nothing less. A password is not used as a key to look up information for a retailer, or blog, or anything else - that is keyed off your user name. All a password is is an identifier showing WHO YOU ARE.
It is unrealistic to expect a human to remember dozens of complex passwords and change them monthly. It is also unrealistic to preach "password managers" as a solution because they don't work in all situations and on the go.
So then, why is it then that I need a username and password FOR EVERY OF Amazon, Tesco, Virgin, and every other company listed in the OP, and Facebook, and Yahoo, and Google, and Slashdot, and every other site? Why can't I just have ONE complex, known, secure identification mechanism?
And even more pointedly - WHY IS IT that the technology ALREADY EXISTS to answer every point I raised - namely, the combination OpenID and OAuth - to solve this problem?
If every webmaster would stop thinking they live in their own universe, and SIMPLY STOP storing their own passwords and instead REQUIRE AND ONLY SUPPORT OpenID and OAuth authentication, this whole problem would be nearly entirely eliminated from the internet. People would have ONLY ONE password to remember, for all sites. They could be FORCED to change it monthly, and it would not be a huge burden since it is their ONLY password.
But no, every site in existence thinks they are THE ONE and should be able to exist in their own walled garden independent of everyone else.
Short comment, nothing to respond to other than yes people should. But nice to have you here when these sorts of topics arise.
You sound like you would consider it wasteful. Reactive programming is a paradigm for when views dominate and uses an more sophisticated variant of lazy evaluation to allow for mutable variables that are only fully evaluated when needed, rather than when defined. Lazy is really useful for being able to manipulate indefinite or even infinite data structures without introducing elements of implementation into algorithms. So it makes your code vastly more maintainable but often at the cost of quadratic memory usage.
Apple has consistently been opposed to long term legacy use. Anyone pissed off by this is completely irrational. iPad 1 was an April 2010 device, which Apple had an expected life for of 2-3 years.
You don't like rapid upgrades Microsoft will be happy for your tablet business.
One of the key purposes of Windows 8 was to start raising hardware requirements. Laptops under $250 shouldn't be part of the Windows ecosystem, they shouldn't exist. Microsoft should be glad to lose them. This price cut is going to give a huge advantage to devices under $250 and create a void between $250-400. Bad, bad inconsistent.... If anything they should be doing the opposite. Make Window 8 $150 on cheap devices and maybe free or even subsidize expensive devices. They need to drive their customers up market after almost two decades of driving them downmarket.
Fits law only makes sense when using a mouse on the desktop.
When using a laptop trackpad it makes no sense at all because of how the motion tracking works.
It makes even less sense when using a touch interface, where there is no "throw" action at all. With a touch interface, the controls should be as close to the object they are manipulating as possible so your eyes don't need to move.
With BitCoin, not only is there a log of every transaction, but everyone on earth has access to it. You can actually trace a coin from when it was created through every single wallet it touched! And all one needs to tie a wallet to a physical person is some IP logging data which is fairly easy to acquire.
I don't know how BitCoin and anonymity got tied together. It is pretty much the LEAST anonymous currency that exists on earth. At least with Amazon coins, one would need to get access to Amazon's servers to find out who bought what, or issue a court order of some kind - random joe down the street can't tell what I bought.
CEO pay in general is too high I agree.
But I find it easier to stomach Silicon Valley CEO pay for a reason - they are producing an actual product whereas investment banks do not - they actually harm the economy, they don't help it.
Furthermore, most Silicon Valley CEOs are either founders of the companies or were involved from an early phase. They put a lot of blood and sweat into these companies over the years. They are not just MBAs flown in for a couple of years to later on bail with golden parachutes when things get rough.
If that is truely all one needs then this cutout would not be expensive would it? And it would be paid for from the increased revenues. This is the way all necessities should be costed. Equal opportunity over equal outcomes.
The problem is not a "market failure", it is that the market is distorted. If the true laws of supply and demand were allowed to work on the water market in California, then water would be a lot more expensive right now because of how rare it is due to drought.
If the people are using too much water then raise the price. Define what consitutes a "drought" in strict terms (average rainfall below some amount for X days in a row), and raise the price per gallon of water an extra 50% during these drought conditions. Add in a credit for people below the poverty line so that they don't have issues.
Usage problems will be solved overnight. Charge people more and they will use less. Wallet pressure works a lot better than "peer pressure".
They only have to follow the rules for ROMs they ship the Google apps in.