i guess because all dependencies are inherently a trade off, it's up to anyone to find adecuate balance depending on the situation, and publicly stating that one is systematically way unblanced on either side isn't interesting info at all. particularly, if this anonymous poster had to be coherent, he would have to be coding on cpus built with his own hands, not to mention having written his own compiler and os from scratch. that would be quite a rave party in house!
-"justifying one dubious or illegal act by bringing up another"
i don't hink the comment is justifying anything, it just draws a comparison. (n.b.: only saw the quote, smart folks at beta seem convinced that i can't mentally handle posts below -1)
-"The US, I think, has come to deeply regret the Iraq invasion, which happened a decade ago under an entirely different Administration."
so gitmo is still run by that former, entirely different administration.
and this other entirely different current administration has absolutely nothing to do with the power shift in ukraine.
... a qualitatively signifficant (although maybe not quantitatively) part of protesters were indeed self declared fascist extremists, most of them openly nazi-sympathetic, so that's not a comparison at all, and it has nothing to do with godwin's rule. however unfortunate, it just reflects facts. check your sources.
"over licensing issues"
free or not free, that's not a "licensing issue". it's all or nothing.
YOU miss the point.
while the idea of such an "easily usable knowledge repository" is interesting, the issue of who governs this repository is determinant. if open and transparent such a system would be revolutionary. since it is not, it is just another product to avoid like pest. inspirational? sure! anyone?
sadly, i'm afraid (near) future humans will indeed be very dependent on asking such AIs for much of their lives, and that those will not be accountable. but no hurry at all to get to that, seriously.
it might be a good way of prototyping and get an early set of working, testable specs. i don't like the approach, though, seems awkward, but that's maybe just me
Waiting for the day when an object database or something like it is at the heart of a modern popular OS.
been around for nearly 2 decades now: look up os/400 and os/2, two very fine and different implementations of what you just asked for.
both got trampled into oblivion so, ok, you could argue about the "popular" thing. i'd say you really are asking to much.
... aliases are not new. you must come up with something newish to hit the headlines.
erm, sorry, the subject was task-switching, in the context of a window manager. that's pretty trivial and in my opinion none of the above applies to this discussion, which has nothing to do with file system representations, heat maps, physiological or cultural issues or the miryad other factors which do play a role in ui design when the tasks are complex. firing up / switching to a program you use every day isn't complex at all, it's so elementary and so frecuent that it's a function that is best completely out of the way of the ui. IF you want to have ui elements for this, then just keep them always at the same place, and out of the attention area. voilà: that's the classic icon on the classic panel. still unbeaten, but be my guest, there are many valid variations possible if you like it fancy.
sir, the first sentence in your post just states an obvious fact.
the rest, however, of your verbose discourse is just empty, based on one single inventend assumption, that "what to do next" thing as being related to a particular desktop metaphor. i see you like to theorize but you should at least attach to reality when doing so. general industry desktop user (from office to cad through programming) does not depend on screen organization for his mental workflow at all. in fact, most use a limited set of tools they switch to over and over again, and that's it. say email + browser + 1-3 domain specific tools, most of their time being spent on those specific tools (which might even run inside the browser). it's not the layout of these tools what prompts a decision to switch, it's their current workflow. so in fact ANY window mgr would do as long as it provides any form of instant switch function. user's don't have to "think" it's time to compose an email, or make a draft, or check a balance. they know, and they also know which is the right tool for that. what they need is just a convenient way to bring it up, instantly, be it a keyboard shorcut, a click on a panel, a console command or a voice command, that is pretty irrelevant and just personal choice.
i have to add that it is precisely this kind of out of the blue theroizing what is producing the ui monstruosities we're seeing nowadays. please get a clue, or do some real work, or at least take your time watching someone doing it.
Yeah, I hate these binary people, the truth is that the world is ternary.
(cross out as appropriate)
You forgot at least one other option: Abstain.
so the truth is that the world is quaternary?
i wondering now why you didn't point it out. duh
no actual NSA employees support him, and these are the absolute smartest people in the world, doing far more insane innovative things than anything in private industry.
there! so it was all a lie and they are not at microsoft!
Let the dev choose how they want others to use their code and don't worry about it.
that's exactly what rs is saying, and that's exactly what gpl aims to avoid. this means you either don't worry about software being free at all, or are simply too shortsighted to see the implications of this. either way you'll get what you are asking for, and eventually you won't like it.
it's easy: the community can build software foundations that no private enterprise can even dream of, but sucks at polishing and marketing those foundations as shiny products. industry, however, does that pretty well and excels in marketing. allowing the industry to apropriate and close that software means that people just will end up using non free software. what's the point?
i'd say, let them do their thing, but let software born free be free forever. it's just the fair thing to do. there is currently only one single license model that qualifies for that, and that's gpl, like it or not. if you are not supporting gpl, you are simply not supporting free software, for whatever reasons (i for once can't imagine any honest one).
you would use a RESTful service (such as HTTP) to minimize network traffic
REST services may reduce your server load (by simply not caring about state), and have other nice architectural benefits, but in no way reduce network traffic per se. a poor design can even imply an increase. in fact REST as transport is anything but efficient, it is ridiculously bloated if compared to binary transfer, for example.
i'm guessing you are comparing REST to the overhead of primitive web pages, but that comparision makes no sense, you really don't need REST to build an efficient single page navigation webapp. besides, it's perfectly possible to build a network inefficient webapp with REST, and many of them indeed are. that's because the more technology and resources are available, the less developers do care (or even know) about efficiency, and believe that "RESTful" somehow is some alien magic for efficiency.