lwhi

8 ms·

181.
by lwhi 1y ago
I think they'd find that to be an engaging task, and they'd get a great deal of satisfaction once they had sorted it out themselves. If the mice had to deal with an intermittently disappearing cursor, and erratic hover behaviour o
182.
by lwhi 1y ago
Android can do this with a single gesture. Just sayin' ...
183.
by lwhi 1y ago
I see your point, I really do. We all have the ability to achieve, and there shouldn't be a limit on that potential. However, that's exactly what the class system in the UK does. The potential of oeople born into lower classes of
184.
by lwhi 1y ago
You've lost me on your reasoning, but I would like to state that I wholly disagree with your politics. Describing a family that doesn't have money as 'bad' is outrageous.
185.
by lwhi 1y ago
I understand what you're trying to say, but I think you're making a false equivalence between socio-economic disparity and innate talent. Imagine the same person, cloned. Clone A is born into an economically challenged household;
186.
by lwhi 1y ago
I have a knife sharpener in my drawer that I use to sharpen my Wursthof knives .. and end up with sharp knives as a result. How would this make my life much better?
187.
by lwhi 1y ago
If you replace 'middle class', with 'upper class' .. you get a much more realistic reading of this thread; which is undoubtedly an apologia for upper class paid education. I felt the original thread wasn't recognisi
188.
by lwhi 1y ago
What an appalling point of view. Growing up without privilege is (obviously) markedly more difficult than being provided with the best education money can buy throughout childhood. The students aren't necessarily worse; but they will b
189.
by lwhi 1y ago
A good point, but I still think they're struggling to innovate. Their advertising revenue is over $71B/quarter. As far as I know the majority of the non advertising revenue is from Google Cloud and subscriptions for services. Most
190.
by lwhi 1y ago
Misinformation isn't more or less appropriate depending on the target.
191.
by lwhi 1y ago
I think this is true for all of the big orgs. Main difference is that Google is bad at monitising any (non advertising) service; so free becomes the main proposition. Is Meta much different though?
192.
by lwhi 1y ago
I remember using a DTP on GEM called Finesse around the same time!
193.
by lwhi 1y ago
I had a black and white solid state Sony TV in my bedroom when I was growing up. Aside from dialing into late night TV programmes my parents prohibited, there were two buttons that switched between VHF and UHF. Toggling the UHF button allow
194.
by lwhi 1y ago
What are you going to do with all your Mac hardware? Throw it in the bin?
195.
by lwhi 1y ago
Vista made me jump ship to Linux on 2006, where I remained for a good 17 years. Maybe I'm going to jump back to Linux because of this update.
196.
by lwhi 1y ago
You're being obtuse. Standards aren't the issue here.
197.
by lwhi 1y ago
You haven't answered the question.
198.
by lwhi 1y ago
Are browsers mandated to follow standards?
199.
by lwhi 1y ago
None of this is about mandating or forcing adherence. Open standards allow interoperability by default. Open standards simplify development. Open standards encourage the creation of new markets. Open standards allow competitiveness that pro
200.
by lwhi 1y ago
Which is a process of reverse engineering and guess work.
201.
by lwhi 1y ago
Without open standards, we would likely choose _one browser_, due to the economic cost of development. One manufacturer would call all the shots for the _one browser_. There would be zero competition until something calamitous happened to t
202.
by lwhi 1y ago
It was a literal hellscape before open standards. I imagine there's most likely a subset of the population who believe that open standards are aligned conceptually to regulation, and that any form of regulation in a free market is wron
203.
by lwhi 1y ago
Without open standards, we would need to pick a browser and provide for it. If we needed to support another browser we'd need to provide a new solution built to its specification. Open standards have allowed the possibility of multiple
204.
by lwhi 1y ago
>Once upon a time, Jabber was the messaging protocol. But what killed interoperable instant messaging wasn't a shift away from Jabber: it was a shift away from interoperability. And how is interoperability possible without agreed st
205.
by lwhi 1y ago
But browser engines are entirely functional based on open standards!!!!! This is the core proposition! The benefit of open standards here, is to the consumers of these standards .. not the engines. Open standards allow the consumers (websit
206.
by lwhi 1y ago
No it isn't necessary for progress. Standards can be (and are) developed cooperatively and these still allow and encourage progress.
207.
by lwhi 1y ago
In a world with over 3 billion people we have 'three whole browser engines'. I don't want to be mean, but this isn't a great counterpoint.
208.
by lwhi 1y ago
If we don't think about long term competition we end up in the scenario we are in now. Two main players. No choice.
209.
by lwhi 1y ago
>In software, the problem is closedness, protectionism, and undocumentedness, not proprietary wheel reinvention. Quite simply, the first three problems are actually caused by proprietary wheel reinvention.
210.
by lwhi 1y ago
We're not just talking about hardware here. Any standard that is developed closed-source and is protected or proprietary, can and will prevent consumer choice further down the line. Interoperability of data, choice between vendors, and

More ›