Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:It's been dying since KDE3 (Score 1) 505

I didn't want to debate whether Gnome was a failure or a success with GP. That's subjective depending on what exactly you mean. I think had Maemo been a success Gnome would be on a few billion devices. Gnome itself isn't to blame for the failure of Maemo but it certainly contributed. The fact that Android doesn't run Gnome and that Tizen is based on EFL is what the Maemo failure cost them. They are cut out of the market they wanted. Sure they are dominant in the Linux desktop market but during the Gnome 2 days they saw how limited that was and would be.

  Mobile is about 4x the size of desktop. Linux desktop is a tiny share of desktop (about 1%). Getting most of 1% of 1/5 of the market, depends on your point of view.

Comment Re:We're All Dying (Score 1) 505

-- If you want to see responsiveness try gnome2 applications either locally or remotely and compare them to the current ones locally even with a video card accelerating things for you.

Sure. Try your experiment. Have several video streams going in different windows and rapidly move the windows relative to one another. Or try anything else that requires a high framerate and lots of video information.

-- Blaming network transparency is just a distraction from losers who wouldn't know how to get their stuff running well on any platform. It never had anything to do with responsiveness because local applications get to use local sockets.

Network transparency in the proper sense doesn't exist on modern interfaces. If you mean how they fake it then yes that has an impact on performance. We've talked about this before. You can't safely directly render to X11's compositor without a high risk tearing. The application can't tell the compositor how to render and so half rendered content gets displayed. That's not ignorance it is deep design. To solve this applications render to a buffer and then do a memory copy. The speed of the memory bus is going up, but much more slowly than resolutions so this problem has gotten worse not better since Wayland started.

High performing applications need to control the rendering process cheaply.

Comment Re:How to advocate for desktop dev in a phone worl (Score 1) 505

The foisting of mobile on everybody was a solution to how to leverage network advantages over a huge range of physical typographies. Whole classes of problems like maintaining phone contact lists (what's Bill's mother's phone number since he goes over to her place every other Wednesday night) are simply gone. Literally billions of new people have a programable high powered digital device in the last decade who did not before. Among the 1st world who had computers they not only have a computer somewhere in the house but they have a fully internet capable device with them 24x7.

Newer in this case is vastly better. Its not even remotely close. Mobile is the source of the massive performance gain. Now desktop now has to adapt to mobile. That's not some pointless quest for shiny but rather trying to keep desktop relevant.

Comment Re:It's been dying since KDE3 (Score 1) 505

Gnome transition was a different thing. Gnome foundation made a clear choice after Maemo's failure that flexibility for mobile not parity with Windows was the top priority. You may not agree with the choice but that wasn't just bells and whistles. Gnome 3 may be a failure. But the success of iOS shows that their idea could have worked were it better executed.

Comment Re:We're All Dying (Score 1) 505

Users like systemd its old school admins who are throwing a fit. Users mostly want graphical responsiveness it is old school Unix guys that don't think responsiveness is worth losing network transparency (which they don't really have anymore even with X). Users want mobile integration it is old school Linux guys (hey you are old school now) that want a more classic desktop.

The problem isn't users but a small subset of users that are disproportionately on /.

Comment Re:We're All Dying (Score 1) 505

The canonical hacker breed if fine. The kids are doing all sorts of exciting web based stuff. They grew up in an environment where windows was stagnant, and the desktop apps on it were cumbersome and deeply entrenched. Web was vibrant, mobile is vibrant and the gaming platforms are vibrant. Same way our generation doesn't have a bunch of the mainframe / mini hackers who loved to reconfigure the OS directly because well by the time we came up mainframes and minis were dying and no one was letting a 12 year old play with one.

Comment Re:It's not sabotage (Score 1) 85

Yeah, I don't know that I 100% agree with that breakdown, but I do think it's something like that.

For one thing, I think "flow" is a little crammed in there. I think there's reason to connect the idea of "flow" (as I understand it) to a sense of contentment, but it's probably not really about achieving the state of flow itself. At least in my thinking, I'd sooner say that regularly achieving a state of flow implies that you're good at something that you derive some pleasure and satisfaction from, and it may be the pleasure and satisfaction that is providing the psychological benefits rather than the state of flow itself. I could be wrong-- maybe he's done some studies that show my thinking is backward, but it feels like it's artificially shoe-horned in there. I do think that some form of engagement is extremely important to a healthy mental state, so I wouldn't argue with him too strenuously about it.

Similarly, I think using the word "meaning" may be conflating a couple of different things that I would tend to separate. I think that there's a kind of happiness that comes from "doing what you're supposed to" or "living the life you think you should", but not necessarily because it's extremely meaningful in the sense most people would use the word "meaning". Instead, I think a big component is something like "an absence of extreme cognitive dissonance" paired with "not hating yourself". What I intend to point out here is that "meaning" might imply things like, "saving poor starving children in the 3rd world", but many people would skip over ideas like, "I think I spent my day in an appropriate way, and I have no conflicted feelings about that." You could call both of them "meaning", but the latter is not what most people would think of.

I guess my point here is just that I think there may be quite a lot of subtly different positive emotions and beneficial psychological states of being that we don't necessarily think of when we say the word "happiness". Seligman has chosen a few, and you could argue that the others can be somehow grouped in with the few that he's chosen. If it provides a workable theory that improves psychological treatment, I'm all in favor of that. Still, my sense is that he hasn't quite hit the bullseye.

For various reasons, I would tend to favor a model that at least contained separate ideas for pleasure, joy, satisfaction, alignment (that feeling of "I am unconflicted about the appropriateness of my actions"), and meaning. I'd be open to an alternate breakdown, but positive emotions, flow, and meaningfulness don't seem to capture the range of what I experience.

Comment Re:It's not sabotage (Score 4, Insightful) 85

Yes, my immediate thought when reading this:

Specifically, people were more likely to engage in mood-increasing activities (e.g., play sports) when they felt bad, and to engage in useful but mood-decreasing activities (e.g., housework) when they felt good.

is that it makes perfect sense if you think of happiness not as "something that must be maximized at every moment," but a resource that needs to be rationed or even grown when it's in short supply, but can be expended more freely when it's available. People engage in mood-expending activities when they have extra "mood" to expend.

However, I still think that this misses my point a bit when it says, "They may explain how humans overcome the allure of short-term gains in happiness to maximize long-term welfare." The implication there, it seems to me, is that maximizing hedonism is still the end-goal, but that it's a simple trade-off between short-term happiness and long-term. I don't want to take much time in arguing the point right now, but I suspect it's not that simple. After a lot of thought, I've ended up thinking of the emotion "happiness" as more of a expression of something deeper that we don't quite have a word for, and that deeper thing is what we're all really after.

To keep things simpler, I might instead say it this way: There are different kinds of happiness. One is simple pleasure-seeking and hedonism, another is a more deep-souled immediate sense of "joy" that goes beyond normal pleasure, and yet another is something more like a longer lasting "overall contentment and satisfaction". So anyway, what I suspect this research is really showing is that... well... Imagine you're playing a RPG, and the goal is to build a magic sword that lets you save the kingdom. You have a stamina bar, and when it runs out, you can't do very much. You can't run, you can't fight, you can't craft. The point of the game isn't to keep the stamina bar full, or even to keep it as high as possible as much as possible. It's just a means to an end.

So I would argue that what we normally call "happiness" as an immediate emotional state is like that stamina bar. When your mood is low, you're not very functional, so we find ways to boost it by pleasure seeking. When it's high, we make use of it. But what you're after is not maximizing that immediate emotional state of "happiness". That's just what you do when you don't have enough. I believe our willingness to expend that resource is not necessarily a sign that we are engaging in long-term planning to maximize happiness, but instead a sign that there is some other larger thing, the equivalent of "building a magic sword and saving the kingdom", that we are willing to expend that resource to gain.

I think I have an idea of what that thing is, but it's hard to describe succinctly in a Slashdot post.

Comment It's not sabotage (Score 4, Insightful) 85

It's a bit silly to say that people are sabotaging their own good mood. I think it instead suggests an alternate viewpoint: What we call "happiness" is not simply an end-goal, but also a resource. When we lack it, we conserve it and try to generate more. When we have enough, we expend the resource to accomplish other goals.

This in turn suggests some other ideas that some of us may have already suspected. Hedonists may be extremely unhappy people. Various behaviors that can be described as "addiction to pleasure-seeking" may be a response to suffering some kind of happiness deficiency. Depression may make people unproductive. People who are a mess may benefit from receiving some kind of help, rather than piling on various kinds of punishments.

Comment Re:A sign of things to come. (Score 5, Insightful) 396

I think this is simple a smart move. You don't really have Linux admins saying, "Man, I wish I had Powershell!" as much as you have Windows admins saying, "I spent all this time making Powershell scripts. I wish I could run the same scripts on Linux." They're servicing their own users, and providing extra value in learning to use Microsoft technology.

This is the sort of thing that I used to think Microsoft was stupid for not doing.

Comment Re:That's an easy one. (Score 1) 124

There are just way too many of them

And some of them are fake. There are a lot of ads and malware that mimic a security alert in some way, which only trains users to ignore them faster.

Also, not only do users not know how to evaluate the risk, they don't know how to fix the problem. If an alert pops up and says, "You may have a virus", the user can't tell if that's a scam, a false alarm, or a real problem. Regardless of whether it's real, false, or fraudulent, they don't have any idea what to do about it.

Slashdot Top Deals

There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.