dmbass

17 ms·

121.
by dmbass 15y ago
In my estimation, if their system was decently designed, instead of granting anyone access to everything, nobody should have been granted access to anything if there is an authentication problem. Can you possibly imagine a worse system than
122.
by dmbass 15y ago
So the A-Team dox were a bunch of rubbish? (or perhaps that was already confirmed and I missed it). http://pastebin.com/iVujX4TR
123.
by dmbass 15y ago
Yes and the chef should consider adding mangos during mango season. Do you know how many things sucked until we had the knowledge and/or technology to make them better? A lot, I reckon. It wouldn't be unreasonable to complain that cars suck
124.
by dmbass 15y ago
Using the actual Wikipedia search involves an extra step where I google for "wikipedia". I can skip this step if I just google for the thing I want directly on Google. I think that says more about how good Google is than how bad Wikipedia i
125.
by dmbass 15y ago
The headline for this article is wrong. The numbers include dumbphones as well as smartphones.
126.
by dmbass 15y ago
Can someone explain why they would choose a name like Putty which is already a well established and completely different software?
127.
by dmbass 15y ago
The image in that link appears to be broken. I thought you were referring to the launcher style in general as "bad design," not in the context of an in-app sub-launcher which is why it made no sense to me.
128.
by dmbass 15y ago
If you scroll down, you will see links to iOS and Android apps.
129.
by dmbass 15y ago
"it's explicitly regarded as bad UI design by Apple" I find that hard to believe considering that launcher concept is implemented by Apple in the iOS home screen.
130.
by dmbass 15y ago
I believe that would be someone who emails a lot of different people that they are not familiar with but wants to appear familiar with the recipient's activity on twitter while using the Gmail web client.
131.
by dmbass 15y ago
Maybe they filter apps by devices connected to your account that can install it?
132.
by dmbass 15y ago
Well it did mentioned that "'Design' is now at Google" and the designs are being unified. All Google products are being +ified.
133.
by dmbass 15y ago
In the new Gmail there is a huge amount of unused space, even in the "Dense" view. This results in less emails on the screen at one time in the Inbox (I use Priority Inbox so maybe it works great in regular mode, but it should work in both)
134.
by dmbass 15y ago
The design looks nice, clean and simple, but it isn't very functional. In that respect, I would consider it a failure. If a layman like me can find glaring weaknesses, why can't the people working on it do so? Budget, deadline or incompeten
135.
by dmbass 15y ago
Just because you can understand someone's line of thinking doesn't mean you think like that. The poster was making a joke based on a period when women were not considered capable of playing sports (among other things). The fact that that is
136.
by dmbass 15y ago
I just want to point out that as we further diminish returns on advertising most internet business models die. The people who click on ads are subsidizing most of the internet for the rest of us. It's easier for me to pay with alleged perso
137.
by dmbass 15y ago
Another classic one is Band-Aid.
138.
by dmbass 15y ago
Most people's social graphs are too small (130 people) to be useful. Well we will use an extended social-graph, you might say, but if you are extending the social-graph, why not include the entire internet? Why would my social-graph contain
139.
by dmbass 15y ago
Those two solve it by encouraging everyone to contribute to the public stream increasing the chance that you will find your gold by looking in the stream. G+ does exactly the opposite and encourages you to not contribute to the public strea
140.
by dmbass 15y ago
The one problem I have with G+ is that sometimes there is gold in the junkstream. Sometimes someone does post something interesting and they would not normally share it with me. How can we balance over-granulated sharing with under-granulat
141.
by dmbass 15y ago
I completely agree with you on that. I find it really annoying and frankly a bit simplistic to debate those types of things. It is one of the biggest turn-offs to being friends with a "geek" for me.
142.
by dmbass 15y ago
I see most of those as "revolutionary" applications of existing technologies/hardware. When I said hardware maybe I meant "technology"?
143.
by dmbass 15y ago
Those are pretty good examples but it basically means that there is no reason to get excited about this now since it is many years away from making any kind of impact.
144.
by dmbass 15y ago
So are we supposed to believe that incumbent tech companies have no investments in new tech? Canon is not working (or already passed) on the same stuff as Lytro? Samsung is not working (or already passed) on the same stuff as Nanosys? Cisco
145.
by dmbass 15y ago
Digitizing an analog stream is probably considered recording.
146.
by dmbass 15y ago
The MBA proved that your netbook form-factor computer didn't have to suck. You didn't have to compromise (acceptable) performance for form-factor.
147.
by dmbass 15y ago
It's definitely going to be sooner than later, though.
148.
by dmbass 15y ago
You are suggesting that the superintelligence created by "Accelerating Change" does not operate with the same parameters as the superintelligence of the "Intelligence Explosion?" The time when "Accelerating Change" no longer applies is the
149.
by dmbass 15y ago
All three of those "major schools" are just different stages of the same theory. Accelerating change leads to the intelligence explosion which leads to the event horizon (the actual singularity).
150.
by dmbass 15y ago
Warm and cold are relative terms.

More ›