topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Wednesday November 12, 2025, 7:55 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 ... 264next
1976
@4wd: Thanks for that.
By the way, I have updated my last comment with a note that I have discovered the cause of the "major performance problems with FF" - and it's not just FF, but anything using the Internet. My daughter was given access to a family member's Steam library and has been downloading several games and playing them, including Fallout Las Vegas (because she already really liked Fallout 3), and Civilisation V - the latter which she describes as her "new addiction".
Some of these game downloads are 7 or 8 gigabytes at a time, and I watched a full-length HD SF movie the other night which probably broke the camel's back and blew the broadband cap. So it's been throttled back to dead slow now...   :(
1977
Screenshot Captor / Re: Screen Rotation
« Last post by IainB on October 14, 2015, 10:36 AM »
@mouser: Many thanks for this info!
I'm glad @dvally mentioned this bug as I had been unaware that SC had "fine rotation" of images. I shall use that now I know it's there! I would otherwise normally have used the fine rotation of images feature in Picasa.

I regard images containing text as being data, and for straightening up images containing text and extracting the data, I would normally use a different approach:
  • ScanTailor: I use this on book/document scans (after reading about it elsewhere in DCF). ST is great for straightening/levelling up text and then OCR scanning it. For example, ST automatically splits up pages of two-page images of a book, straightens them, cleans up any dirt or image noise and then feeds it into an OCR scan. It does a superb job - perfect, in fact. Very good for minimising OCR scanning errors.

  • OfficeLens: (A free smartphone app from Microsoft, for Android and Windows OS.) I have been trialling it in a Nokia Lumia 830 for capturing text from images of documents on a desk, images of whiteboards, images of business cards, and any other images containing text (e.g., advertising text on the sides of a panel van). You feed the image (as captured by the smartphone camera), into the app., which then automatically tidies it up and removes any slanting perspective. The image doesn't have to be taken square-on or anything, as the app figures it out, squares it up and also removes glare on the object (e.g., whiteboard reflection). The app can then save the tidied-up image to MS Office OneNote, which collects and indexes any text (captured by OCR) in the image. In the case of business cards, the app cuts out anything which is beyond the edges of the card, squares it up and passes it to OneNote with an associated panel of OCRed data that is extracted from the card and which is logically slotted into fields - e.g., "email" if it is an email address, or "phone" if it is a phone number, "address" if it is an address, etc. It's pretty smart (or maybe OneNote does those smart bits as post-processing, I don't know).

The reason I mention these things here is that it is an opportunity to urge consideration as to how SC (and CHS) might be able to be configured to (say) automatically and intelligently identify any text in an image and maybe then pass it to something like ScanTailor or OneNote for OCR post-processing. I think that could be a simpler and more doable approach than re-inventing the wheel and trying to build that same post-processing functionality into SC or CHS.
1978
...that 6-1*0+2/2 stuff. It just seemed sad that some people couldn't manage that. ...
_________________________

Yes, well, I did use the word "embarrassing". It was rather ironic as well.
1979
Out of my head are some notes which may be of use, plus I did a bit of hunting around for the software needed.
I knew nothing of Zte "Join Me" software for PC nor Telecom NZ "R1" phones.

However, it reminded me that in about 1998 I used some third party software (I dimly recall that it was developed by a French software house) from Vodafone NZ for a Bosch mobile phone and which enabled the user to do some clever stuff with moving SMS text data and phone number data both ways between phone memory OR phone SIM and a PC (I used a laptop) via an RS232 interface.
This was really handy and I used the Bosch phone as a central device to manage and sync the contents (typically telephone contact numbers) of multiple SIMs taken from non-Bosch phones that could NOT use the software/interface directly. The data was forced onto the SIMs, overwriting all existing data.

The software also enabled the Bosch phone to behave like a modem, and the user could send/receive fax and SMS from the PC through the phone - typing the SMS messages on a keyboard was far better/faster than using a phone keypad.
If you had set up a Vodafone "Data Account", you could also connect to the Internet through the phone - I tried that, but didn't use it much as it was a bit slow - slower than a 56K modem, anyway.
I stopped using this method when I wanted some newer technology in my mobile phone, and anyway RS232 interfaces eventually became became a pretty rare item on laptops.
It was very handy and I have seen nothing quite like it since, but the Zte software described sounded a bit similar.

In 2005/6 I used some software that did something similar to the above, but via a Bluetooth interface. It worked on a range of cellphones, including the Ericsson that I was using at the time. It was called floAt's Mobile Agent, which might be a defunct hyperlink now, but there might be copies of the website (and the software) on Wayback at https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://fma.sourceforge.net/

Wayback is really handy sometimes as their archives often have the downloadable software that was available when a snapshot of the site was archived. Just in case, I tend to make a local copy of these Wayback archived sites when I want them, using the FF Scrapbook extension (just plain standard Scrapbook, not any of its forks), which also saves any related files from a website - if you tell it which file extensions you want it to sweep up as it saves.

Wayback gives the following links for Zte, but I have not been able to investigate them at the moment as I am hard pressed for time and also having major performance problems with FF, for which I am trying to locate the cause.

For http://www.ztedevice.com/  (AXON Elite and Zte devices):

EDIT 2015-10-15 0506hrs:
I have discovered the cause of the "major performance problems with FF" - and it's not just FF, but anything using the Internet. My daughter was given access to a family member's Steam library and has been downloading several games and playing them, including Fallout Las Vegas (because she already really liked Fallout 3), and Civilisation V - the latter which she describes as her "new addiction".
Some of these game downloads are 7 or 8 gigabytes at a time, and I watched a full-length HD SF movie the other night which probably broke the camel's back and blew the broadband cap. So it's been throttled back to dead slow now...   :(
1980
A PC and mobile phone user asked me today if I could help to find some possibly obsolete software. It is not something that I am familiar with, so I am posting this on the offchance that a collective "Brains Trust" of DCF denizens might be able to throw much more useful light on the topic than I might be able to do on my own.

This is the gist of it, as far as I have it at the moment:
  • This person says they have been using a mobile phone "Telecom R1" from TNZ (Telecom NZ) for several years now and had previously downloaded the Zte Join Me PC client software (which had been documented in the user manual as to where it could be downloaded from). The software was very useful in archiving text etc. onto the user's PC.

  • However, due to a recent upgrade and re-installation of WinXP onto their computer, it seems that the Join Me software has inadvertently been lost/deleted.  :(

  • Having recently purchased two more of the R1 (TNZ) phones, this user wishes to upload files and texts to those new phones as well, using Join Me, but cannot find the software now.

  • The user has been in contact with http://www.ztedevice.com/ - makers of the phone - and it seems they do not support the phone with the Join Me software any more. Enquiries made to Telecom and the vendors of the phone get pointed back to Zte, so it seems to be a dead end.

  • Whilst this user can Bluetooth just the contacts across to a PC, they also need to get the texts from colleagues (i.e., text messages that are on the old phone) copied off the phone and saved to a PC and then copied across onto the new phones as well.
    ________________

So what seems to be needed is information about potential sources for an intact archived copy of the Join Me software, or information about any useful forums that might be able to help.
1981
Developer's Corner / Re: Ethics in Technology
« Last post by IainB on October 13, 2015, 07:11 PM »
^^ This all reminds me of what I wrote above:
...However, from experience, I predict that, in common with a great many people, approx. 80% (Pareto Principle) of the people who might read this comment will fail to accept or understand the truth of point 11, primarily because it runs contrary to conventional wisdom, and they will be unlikely to have seen the proof of it in Deming's "Red Beads" teaching experiment. ...
_________________

Told you.
1982
Living Room / Re: Ad Industry Attacks Firefox
« Last post by IainB on October 13, 2015, 09:09 AM »
As I'm typing this I look at the sodding compulsory Read Later (Pocket) dropdown button which is taking up useful space in the URL bar. I've subscribed to RIL/Pocket for years, but most of the time it's a disabled overhead because I don't need the thing ON all the time. Now I can't switch this compulsory thing OFF.
Right-click, "Remove from toolbar", done.
I do wish that Mozilla would stop pushing stuff like that and the chat thingy on us, though. Built-in PDF reader and "Reader View"? Sure, pretty useful. 3rd-party services? Offer via (optional) addons.
_____________________
You say "Right-click, "Remove from toolbar", done.", but no, I already tried that. The menu item Remove from toolbar is greyed-out, and if you switch to "Cusomise, it's still greyed-out. I also tried a hack to disable it in about:config, but it doesn't seem to have worked. That sucker is persistent as all heck, and made deliberately so in the code, by Mozilla.
Oooh! That's odd! I wonder what we might be able to infer from that?    :tellme:
1983
Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« Last post by IainB on October 12, 2015, 09:32 AM »
...What I am curious about is why one would look at a dynamic, fluctuating "exchange rate" and then say that the answer is to do some kind of conversion to a static, unchanging barcode. ...
__________________________
I'm not sure that was what was being intended/proposed, or maybe it's a wrong interpretation (misunderstanding) of what was being proposed. It would seem to be nonsensical.

The necessary BTC software is free, and they all do a dollars to BTC conversion on the fly...which is based on a user configurable exchange.
FOR SMB's CoinBase (and I'd wager other companies like it) offers a web based transaction handling service that will generate a QR code based invoice, send it to the customer, and then automatically sell off the coin and deposit the money in you bank account (at the agreed on/transacted exchange rate).
_______________________
If that is all indeed true, and if it's trusted/reliable/secure, etc., then the hypothesis of the "Wallmart problem" presumably has no validity - i.e., it's not a problem as described. Then Wall mart would probably be implementing - or would be about to implement - BC transactions. Are they, in fact? I wouldn't know - my experience and knowledge is limited to Australasia and what happens in EFT-POS systems and so-called "intelligent networks" used for high volume transaction processing, and the associated Payment Systems and GSS, a lot of which the BC system seems could potentially bypass or make redundant.
That's unlikely to happen without a fight.
1984
Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« Last post by IainB on October 12, 2015, 02:00 AM »
Hmm. Interesting responses there.
My main interest was in how to use Bitcoin as a medium of exchange - the criteria for which I saw as being:
  • (a) the Bitcoin price stablilises sufficiently for it to act as a safe (i.e., secure and risk-free) medium of exchange.
  • (b) Bitcoin transactions can be easily and reliably executed through the existing Payments System.
And I added that:
Looks like neither condition is likely to occur in the near future, judging by this thoughtful post on Bitcoins from the economist Gary North: ..."Bitcoins and the IRS: Walmart's Problem" ...

I could be wrong, of course, but I considered that what he was writing about could convey several implicit and valid points:
  • BCs (Bitcoins) are effectively a kind of foreign currency at the POS (Point-Of-Sale) for retail outlets (the QuickBooks article also refers to this).
  • Retail POS terminals/systems are usually only geared up to operate in a single standard national currency (in the US).
  • BCs are not a stable currency, due to their fluctuating BC-US$ price, which is presumably fluctuating due to intense speculation in a dynamically changing market.
  • BCs in any event have the potential (at least currently) for escaping any form of local/federal Retail Sales Tax or VAT (Value-Added Tax) at the POS - the IRS would presumably object to that.
  • The need to establish the forex (foreign exchange rate) value of the "foreign" BC currency in the local currency (US$) at the POS and at that instant of sale (which is what the BC engine is presumably doing somewhere at that point), would probably be impossible with current Payment Systems technology, as it would necessitate having access to a real-time national database of worldwide BC-to-US$ prices. This seems like it could be a bit of a stumbling-block.
  • In any event, large retailers (such as Walmart, for example) do not currently have the necessary software which, on scanning the barcode of the sale item at the checkout and getting the US$ price, could then look up such a real-time forex database (assuming that it existed and was nationally accessible in real-time in the first place).

I did not quite see why North was so hard on the Jason M. Tyra QuickBooks + BCs article, unless it was maybe that Tyra seemed to be only recommending how SMEs (Small-To-Medium Enterprises) could account in QuickBooks for using BCs for Sales/Purchases, which approach would not be able to contribute overmuch for expanding the use of BCs and certainly couldn't be scaled up for use in large retailers such as Walmart. This approach would be akin to fussing over how to twist and spin wool into yarn by hand, when you actually need to automate the whole thing by using the Mule and the Spinning Jenny.
As far as I could see, Tyra offered what seemed to be a perfectly reasonable workaround (i.e., creating notional Sales or Purchases invoices) to the inherent constraints of not having the forex for a BC "cash" payment, which could then pass  through the books as a legitimate double-entry. Though he does not use that term ("double-entry"), he does warn of the adverse consequences of effectively letting the BC transaction remain as an incomplete single entry transaction in the books.

Two other thoughts occurred to me:
  • I couldn't quite see where the $value of the "foreign currency" BC transactions would best be be classified as part of the domestic money supply. This would presumably be relevant and necessary for federal econometric modelling, and for balancing the National Accounts.

  • If (say) the BC transactions were not treated as a "cash" transaction, then they would presumably need to be tied to a notional "bank" entity in the national GSS (the federal Gross Settlement System) to offset the balances On Them and On US within (say) a 24-hour period, so as to establish the true/accurate levels of interbank indebtedness necessary for monitoring federally-ordained debt-equity ratios.

Added up, there would seem to be several factors here which could delay/frustrate the adoption of BC as a generally legitimate and useful currency within a nation state or between nation states. The difficulty would seem to be in enabling BCs to somehow flow through and be monitored as part of the existing tightly regulated and controlled Payment System(s), GSS (for interbank settlement) and SWIFT (forex) settlement systems. I would not expect the Establishment to be in any hurry to sort the mess out. I mean, why should they assist the development of a new, competitive foreign currency and supply of money - which threatens to compete with or undermine the federally-mandated mythical national currency status quo - and which they don't currently control to boot?

Some people (not me, you understand) might say that it is likely to be - and may well be already being - blocked at every turn, but I couldn't possibly comment.
1985
Living Room / Re: Using Bitcoins - "the Walmart problem".
« Last post by IainB on October 11, 2015, 08:27 AM »
I have long been interested in Bitcoins, but as a medium of exchange rather than as a speculative punt.
However, I have been and shall remain entirely hands-off Bitcoins until the following conditions are established:
  • (a) the Bitcoin price stablilises sufficiently for it to act as a safe (i.e., secure and risk-free) medium of exchange.
  • (b) Bitcoin transactions can be easily and reliably executed through the existing Payments System.

Looks like neither condition is likely to occur in the near future, judging by this thoughtful post on Bitcoins from the economist Gary North:
(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)
Bitcoins and the IRS: Walmart's Problem
Gary North - October 10, 2015

It's time for me to revisit the story of bitcoins. As you may have noticed -- or not have noticed -- you don't hear much about bitcoins these days.

A bitcoin used to be worth about $1100. These days, it is worth $250. The price has settled into this range for most of the year. It's boring. The financial media have dropped the topic. So has the hard money community.

I was an early critic of bitcoins, which earned me the hostility of the bitcoin community, which was small then and remains small.

TAXABLE EVENTS
I want to talk about what should be obvious to anybody. Every time some retailer or wholesaler sells something in exchange for bitcoins, this creates a taxable event. The IRS is highly interested in taxable events.

As you know, the IRS taxes people in United States dollars. It taxes businesses in terms of profits made in United States dollars. This is why every business has to keep an account of whatever it has paid out in United States dollars, which constitutes a deductible business expense. At the same time, every business has to keep a record of how many dollars have come in from sales.

This means that every business that does business in bitcoins must keep a record of the price of the bitcoin in terms of dollars at every point of sale or point of purchase. The IRS wants to know how many dollars came in or went out. It is not interested in bitcoins.

This creates huge problems for any business that wants to use bitcoins. Its computerized point-of-sale software must have a conversion system for bitcoins into United States dollars. When somebody buys something from the retailer, and he uses bitcoins to make the purchase, the retailer's software must instantly convert the value of the bitcoins into the value of United States dollars. The businessman is going to be taxed in terms of the value of the bitcoins in United States dollars.

This is obvious, isn't it? But the implications are not obvious.

If you want to get some estimate of the number of businesses that are using bitcoins as part of their operations, you must find out how many businesses have incorporated a conversion system that records the value of the bitcoins at the point of sale. This means barcode software.

Here is what I have discovered: there is no such barcode conversion software available.

This means that no national retail business sells anything for bitcoins. It also means that no small business does, unless its barcode software is integrated with conversion software that enables the business to find out exactly how many dollars came in when somebody purchased something. In other words, until the small business barcode software has built-in bitcoin conversion, bitcoins will remain a dream in the minds of bitcoin enthusiasts.

Here is an article written by a bitcoin enthusiast for small businesses. It discusses integrating bitcoin purchases with QuickBooks. If you want to read incoherent gibberish, read this. I dare you.

Try to find any small business that uses QuickBooks that has integrated this plan for the business operations. The next one will be the first one.

But QuickBooks is a minor issue. The major issue is barcode software.

We were told from the beginning that bitcoins would soon be used for retail businesses. Try to find a store that has anything visible that says it accepts payments in bitcoins. If you find one, ask the person at the checkout counter how many people are using bitcoins to buy something. He will never have heard of it.

PRIVACY
There is no privacy with respect to bitcoins if you are a retail merchant. All the talk about gaining privacy with bitcoins refers only to consumers. None of it refers to businesses.

A business has to defend every deduction, and the business has to defend every purchase. You don't see Walmart, or Target, or any other national business set up to use bitcoins. That's because their point-of-sale software does not have automatic conversion into bitcoin prices.

I have said from the beginning that the use of bitcoins would be limited to a handful of computer programmers and the Mexican drug cartels. They don't report to the IRS. Any normal business reports to the IRS, and it has to account for its sales and purchases, not in terms of bitcoins, but in terms of United States dollars. This means that there will be no adoption of bitcoins until there is a huge market of consumers who use bitcoins, because of the cost of rewriting all of the point-of-sale software to deal with the problem of the conversion factor. This is the chicken-and-egg problem that the bitcoins movement face. There will not be large numbers of bitcoin users until Walmart and Target and similar national chains make available their products in exchange for bitcoins.

Until you see major national chains adopting point-of-sale software that provides automatic bitcoin conversions, you can safely ignore bitcoins. Still.
1986
General Software Discussion / Re: LogMeIn purchases LastPass
« Last post by IainB on October 10, 2015, 08:42 AM »
... I started with Xmarks, which was saved by LastPass, which got me involved with LastPass, and they've been very reliable.  So it seems like a win-win. ...
______________________

Same here. I was on Xmarks and then tried LastPass, and it is very good, though it doesn't work on IE11 now (keeps crashing IE in Win10) and of course it doesn't work at all for MS Edge.
I hope this is a win-win. If being bought up by LogMeIn turned out to be similar to being touched by the dead hand of acquisition of Google or Microsoft though, it would be a great pity.
(I'm watching Wunderlist with interest...)
1987
Living Room / Re: User mocks Firefox
« Last post by IainB on October 10, 2015, 08:15 AM »
^^ Yes, "if they actually did that" it could be great, however, judging by past performance I'd be non too sanguine. I mean, how many times do they have to be allowed to defecate in one's browser before one says "Hang on a minute!"?
For all we know, that BS post could be Mozilla softening us up with a polite advance warning that they are about to defecate all over us Big Time, and by the way there's nothing we can do about it.

As I'm typing this I look at the sodding compulsory Read Later (Pocket) dropdown button which is taking up useful space in the URL bar. I've subscribed to RIL/Pocket for years, but most of the time it's a disabled overhead because I don't need the thing ON all the time. Now I can't switch this compulsory thing OFF.

I know, I know. I should just shut up and accept it, because Mozilla knows best what is for the greater good, or something. They love me - I know that because Danielle Dixon-Fire tells me they love me, because I am central to their being, or something - I'm one of their cherished suckers Users.
Yeah, right.
1988
Developer's Corner / Re: Ethics in Technology
« Last post by IainB on October 10, 2015, 01:33 AM »
In "fixing" the software/firmware of VW vehicle pollution control systems so that the vehicles could be made to fraudulently pass the emissions tests, did the software developers responsible agree to do something unethical/dishonest?
I'm not the one to judge, but I can't see that they have necessarily done something unethical/immoral. I think that is yet to be proven.

For example, if what Tuxman links to below is true (and it seems to be), and if this is true - 95% of European diesels tested flunk emissions standards - (and it seems to be) - then arguably there has been no wrongoing in the VW case in the first place.
I love how the world discusses Volkswagen's "ethics" while ignoring that everyone cheated before ...  :D
_______________________

The VW fraud would probably never have eventuated if the problem - the setting of artificial "targets" for diesel engine testing - had not been created in error in the first place by a bloated bureaucracy with apparently little or no understanding of processes in statistical control (Shewhart, Deming).
The fact that the targets were also set at evidently infeasible levels (QED) would have merely served to compound the problem.

This looks very much like a textbook example of the sort of thing that W.E.Deming was on about when he published his 14-point philosophy, where point 11 was:
11. [Eliminate targets with no basis in statistical veracity]
   a) Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor.
       Substitute leadership.
   b) Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by
       numbers, numerical goals. Substitute leadership.

(from Chapter 2 of "Out of the Crisis", by W. Edwards Deming).

However, from experience, I predict that, in common with a great many people, approx. 80% (Pareto Principle) of the people who might read this comment will fail to accept or understand the truth of point 11, primarily because it runs contrary to conventional wisdom, and they will be unlikely to have seen the proof of it in Deming's "Red Beads" teaching experiment.

This could seem somewhat ironic, given that amongst his many awards and accolades, Prof. Deming was elected in 1983 to the National Academy of Engineering, and in 1986 to the Science and Technology Hall of Fame in Dayton and he was inducted into the Automotive Hall of Fame in 1991.
Another case of "Pearls before swine" perhaps.
1989
General Software Discussion / Re: Firefox Extensions: Extension List Dumper - FIXED
« Last post by IainB on October 09, 2015, 10:48 PM »
@Curt: I was just now reviewing this thread and noticed your post and it looked as though there may have been no response to it (or I forgot if I made a response, or I missed seeing the response as my browser is playing up today):
I found a C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\nzoysne8.default\extensions\extensionlistdumper(at)sogame.cat.xpi file, but no folder with relevant name, so I can't go any further that route than -default\extensions. So what goes for Win 10, it seems Extension List Dumper really has been dumped...
A lot of people can remember that Jesus' friend Lazarus was raised from the dead. A few people are also aware that he later on was murdered, and this time stayed dead. I tell this because on Win 10 Lazarus: Form Recovery has been murdered and is dead! Now, will Lazarus stay dead, or Recover?
____________
If you have Extension List Dumper installed correctly, and are using Win10, then you will have a file named ELDumperOutput.js somewhere on your disk storage.
Just search for that filename in whatever file search system you use (I use Everything, having previously used Locator) and edit it as described. It worked straight off on my Win10 setup on 2 separate laptops.
1990
Living Room / Re: Ad Industry Attacks Firefox
« Last post by IainB on October 09, 2015, 02:16 PM »
Having done some more thinking and pondering upon what seems likely to be the real causal problem that Mozilla don't seem able to define, I recalled this comment I posted in another thread on the DC Forum. Reading that, the problem seems to be revenue/profit, or more precisely the existing de facto business model that advertisers are connected to by an umbilical cord:
Quite coincidentally, I saw this in my bazqux fee-reader this morning. Looks like a pretty accurate analysis of some of the main problems/issues: Ad Blockers and the Nuisance at the Heart of the Modern Web - The New York Times
...
_______________________

The article at the link would seem to be based on what is arguably a not unreasonable assumption that the existing de facto business models used by ISPs and advertisers will likely continue and/or be reinforced by anticipated potential changes in a pricing regime, and that the ISPs would intend to plan for that because it will be easy "money for nothing" (i.e., they will not have not added any value/service).
However, the art of the possible might have already thwarted such possible plans, by demonstrating that there are alternative business models and pricing regimes that could come into play. This point struck home to me when I posted the comment LINE - the txt chat/audiocall/videocall friend contacts VoIP you always needed?

If you read the Wikipedia info - Line (application) - Wikipeda - you will see that LINE was created as an emergency response to replace a crippled telecommunications infrastructure after the Japanese earthquakes and tsunami in 2011. As such, there would have been little or no thought given to making revenue from it at the time. However, by offering it as a free service to the public, and then getting it subsidised by advertising revenue and with an emphasis on the needs of the user as a user, it has a business model that would seem to be quite different to the de facto business model of other "social networks" where the user is a tool whose demographic data is intentionally collected, copyrighted and then sold as such (monetised).
LINE would seem to be a disruptive technology and a potential existential threat to the business models of the market status quo.
========================

So, it occurred to me that Mozilla might be so locked in to, or might have so bought in to the existing de facto business model and to such an extent that they are unable (or are not allowed) to see or to take advantage of anything else. If that were the case, then Mozilla might literally be "unable to think outside the box". The LINE case study could perhaps point the way to a more relevant and adaptable business model for Mozilla's future.
1991
Living Room / Re: Ad Industry Attacks Firefox
« Last post by IainB on October 09, 2015, 10:38 AM »
Okay, this is not "Devil's Advocate" because I think she is *partly* right. And I think we're at risk here of "glossing over her well tuned language". I'm just gonna put stuff in quotes because I don't feel like scissoring parts of the original.

1. To begin this discussion with respect, *spell her name correctly*. (I like to joke it was 5% of my old job because I have an eye towards these things.) Its *Denelle*. Not "Danielle". And then the last part of you calling her "Dixon-Fire" is just ad hominem. ...

By all means @TaoPhoenix, go half-Devil's-advocate or whatever it is you intend to mean there, but please don't accuse me of ad hominem. Argumentum ad hominem is defined as a logical fallacy - an argument against the person - rather than a reasoned argument against the point being debated. I would never intentionally employ that fallacy, as it is one step towards the abandonment of reason.

I would make four points about your remarks there:
  • 1. You might consider that you know better than I what I was doing, but as far as I was aware I was intending neither debating a point nor putting forward any particular argument. If you think I was, then you are confused. Thus, saying that I was making an argumentum ad hominem would rather seem to be inapplicable and a mistake of relevance.

  • 2. In fact I was very simply mocking the post, having a Yorkshireman's typical zero tolerance for people who utter facile BS and doublespeak (please call a spade "a spade") and for people attempting to tell me what to think. Therefore, if you are unable to see that it was mockery, then you have my sympathies.

  • 3. I also have a Yorkshireman's typical zero tolerance for people who make the mistake of sporting silly, jumped-up or affected or pretentious names or double-barrelled surnames without anticipating potential consequences/mockery of same from schoolboy humourists at least, and who make what seem to be egregiously poor BS and doublespeak posts for all the public to see. They must expect some comment - indeed are inviting comment - and mockery is fair comment and free speech. If one puts oneself in the coconut-shy, then one should be unsurprised if people throw balls at oneself.

  • 4. If someone would seem to take it upon themselves to be the arbiter of free speech in the apparently mistaken belief (QED) that free speech is whatever they decide it is, and then advised me to censor my speech accordingly, regardless, then have I got news for them. The most polite way I can put this just now, and without wishing to offend the reader's finer sensibilities, is in the words of Rhett Butler: "Quite frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

I think you seem to have started off with a couple of wrong premises, so your comments might kind of gone downhill from thereon.
For example, where you write:
"We are trying to get to the root of the problem – but not just through research. We are also working to develop products, features and engagement supporting a great user experience and commercial sustainability."

This is very nearly completely correct!
:tellme:

From experience (see the spoiler), I would suggest that you may have just been suckered.
Spoiler
At one point in my "career" I spent 4 years as a product manager and senior marketing consultant with a large computer company called EDS, where, because I had studied Marketing 101 and was interested in the subject, they gave me 6 months training in the theory and application of something called the Holden VBM Methodology (VBM = Value-Based Marketing), and then let me loose to guide the development of marketing strategy for two of their business units in the Asia-Pacific region - Finance & Banking, and Healthcare. F&B was pretty straightforward, so I trained up a promising junior to deal with that, which released me to focus on Healthcare, which was a relatively new and complex market that EDS was entering.

One of the things I had to do was develop a marketing communications plan, which detailed things like the purpose, medium, audience and feedback collection that we needed for all the communications messages that we needed to put out to develop the market in a planned direction. A fairly complex task. Part of that involved the Healthcare services group feeding me with material for things like press releases and brochures, and I led the team that sorted through all this material and decided on the plan and delivery of marketing communications. We systematically filtered out any redundancy, clichés, buzzwords and other BS, because our target audiences (which included cabinet ministers, the Minister of Public Health, surgeons, hospital CEOs, doctors and nurses) were relatively very sophisticated and would see right through it and that would then devalue the currency of the messaging (what we had to say), in their eyes.
Furthermore, they would not have appreciated being spoken at as though they were gullible idiots. You actually only get one shot at doing this right the first time. Once devalued, restoring the perceived value of our messaging would have been like climbing a vertical sheet of smooth steel greased with butter - i.e., impossible. So we did lots of dry run testing on sample and guinea-pig audience members.

The end result was that we had a Healthcare communications lexicon, and our messaging spoke only of substantive facts - e.g., defined deliverables, quantified, achievable tangible cost-benefits - and did not confuse benefits with features, and used no meaningless value-judgements, clichés/buzzwords/BS.
So the lexicon expressly excluded terms such as, for example,  Agile, better, great, good, bad, best practice, global best practice, thought leadership, white space, excited (and variants), zero-sum, bottom line, responsible (used "accountable" instead), engagement, problem (unless very specific), user experience, sustainable (and variants), opportunity, investment, etc. (and lots more besides).


I say this because because the lexicon (see spoiler) that we used excluded several of the terms used in that sentence that you state is "...very nearly completely correct!". In my view, it is in fact far from being a satisfactorily cohesive statement.

Let's analyse it a bit:
  • "We are trying to get to the root of the problem..." - yet the problem is apparently undefined/unspecified, so good luck with finding the root. This would seem to be BS.
    Is the problem the "...users who choose to block content as a way to control their Web experience" or the debate about them "... and the commercial interests who monetize that content." How can a debate be a problem? Simple. Remove the debate then. Maybe the idiots blocking their content need to be made to see the light of day?

  • "– but not just through research." Eh? So it's not going to be a fully scientific approach with theory matched with observations. That could make for a novel approach. This would seem to be BS.

  • "We are also working to develop products, features and engagement supporting a great user experience and commercial sustainability." What on earth does that mean? "We're going to suck some ideas out of our thumbs and see if anything that tuns up can be helpful?" But oh! Those cliché alerts: "engagement", "great", "user experience", "commercial sustainability". The only one I could suggest a real meaning for is the last one, possibly relating to either revenue, or profit, or both, but it's not clear whether that would be referring to Mozilla revenue/profit or the advertisers, or some other entity. And this would not be any purely accidental string of words, it would seem to have been very deliberate and purposeful.
    Somebody would seem to have gone to great pains to make this BS up in such a way as to be as inoffensive as possible whilst ameliorating the truth of whatever they could actually be intending to mean under the surface. It's called "softening the approach" where there's some bad news about to be (possibly reluctantly) delivered.
    This would seem to be BS and/or deliberate and purposeful obfuscation.
    ____________________________

Now I could be wrong, of course, but if I had thought that the post warranted more serious discussion by me, then rest assured that I would not have mocked it. I couldn't not mock it, given that it was such a gobsmacking LOL moment for me when I read it. Brought tears to me eyes. Absolutely classic.

But I did post it because I thought it might be worth reading or even discussing by others in the forum. So by all means do discuss it, and aim some valid comments at me if you see fit, but please @TaoPhoenix, don't try to teach your grandmother to suck eggs in the process.
1992
Then there is the completely, over the top, utterly and monstrously insane stuff that is just funny no matter how horrific simply due to how unbelievable it is. Like, a cop walking into a donut shop and shooting everyone would be way to nutty not to post here. Mass shooting by cop in a donut shop?!? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA~!
__________________
Yes, but you might be missing the point. He wouldn't even be a potential candidate for a Downhill Selfie Award unless he captured it on his vidcam, and in any event, if he was (say) deemed just bonkers or was doing it as a deliberate public look-at-me! protest act, then he wouldn't necessarily qualify under the Award's vain, moronic or stupid criteria. You might have to put that one to an Award panel of judges to decide upon.
1993
I can see MS missed the boat.  They should have named the successor to Vista Windows 6-1*0+2/2 Ultimate
______________________
Har-de-har-har. Very droll.
1994
There could be two right answers depending on your assumptions - is operation precedence honored or do you want to go left to right? But in any case I am curious how you would get a 42 out of that... anyone?? Unless it's a HHGG reference of course. (No panic here.)
_______________________________
Well, I figured it was just a stupid "teaser" puzzle - an elementary one that is deliberately ambiguous - to generate clicks to advisoruncle.com, which looks like a recruitment agency, or something. Thus getting the answer "right" was likely to be largely irrelevant, and so no particular answer will necessarily be "right".
The caption says "...ANSWER IT", presumably signifying that it is in an IT-related context, so I would presume that, for computation, the operation precedence rule would be followed - and any calculator would be able to confirm the same solution without needing brackets around the * and / operations. Oddly, the HP calculator might be an exception.

If you went step-by-step from L to R (which was what I did first, just to see) then 6-1*0+2/2= can give "1".
However, elementary maths and any calculator that is programmed to correctly obey the standard computational rules would give "7", so I reckoned that, from the context of IT, "7" would be the "correct" answer. Mind you, I didn't bother working it from R to L...   :huh:

You are probably right about the HHGG reference to 42, which I recall was the answer to "Life, The Universe, Everything", or words to that effect. I was never sure but I suspected that Douglas Adams chose 42 for the reason that not only is it the magic constant of the smallest magic cube, composed with numbers 1 to 27, but also (and perhaps more importantly) it is kind of - or part of - "the answer to everything", being the 5th Catalan number, which numbers occur especially in combinatorial problems, where the answers to many/most of them is the sequence of the Catalan numbers. But that's just a guess.
1995
How come no-one commented on the image and comments re the calculation puzzle: 6-1*0+2/2=?
That one quite surprised me.
All you need to do to get the correct answer is pop it in to your calculator.
Unless it's an HP calculator, that is.   :-[
1996
This thread was never meant to be taken seriously. IainB made an ironic comment, but softened it by disguising it as a joke, a funny. Someone didn't get it, maybe someone else did. Move on; Guido Fawkes' blog really is dry... and Renegade probably doesn't need your help anyway. IainB is a peacekeeper, and his silly comments made me smile - you know: "silly humor - post 'em here!"
_______________________

Oh sorry, I see that someone definitely seems to "get" my possibly warped sense of humour.
1997
Sorry, I went to bed and missed the ensuing discussion regarding my post of the tazering policeman selfie. It seems that some people in the forum might have missed the point, though I did wonder at the time whether a lack of explanation on my part (I was in a hurry) might make it a bit of a challenge, so, my apologies for perhaps assuming too much and for any confusion that may have ensued as a result.

I would stress that there was no intention on my part to "Go Basement" on this and tut-tut or foam at the mouth about police brutality, or similar - the fact that it was a cop who was the actor was kinda coincidental, and police brutality is a sorry fact of life for a minority of police officers and a problem for their commanders to address, and something to which we have by now probably become desensitised anyway - so I generally would be disinclined to make passing comment about specific cases of police brutality in this forum (I don't find it funny in and of itself anyway) or anywhere else - e.g., The Basement.

No, what I was posting about is what seems to be a relatively new/emerging and growing phenomenon that is occurring in our society and which is largely enabled by the advent of telecomms and/or computerised "social networks" (e.g., including live video streaming, Twitter, Facebook) combined with the possibilities of the smartphone or video camera and sometimes especially the selfie features therein, resulting in something new that seems to be at one and the same time so seriously vain, moronic and self-destructive in some way that it it beggars belief and it might actually be quite funny and deserving of mockery that a person would do that to themselves in the first place without apparently considering the potential consequences for themselves or how their behaviour might appear to others watching in critical judgement. To do that would seem to require a pathological conceit coupled with a complete absence of self-awareness.

What I would suggest we arguably need is a new award alongside The Darwin Award - we could call it The Downhill Selfies Award. In ski-ing, there is a really fun thing called "the downhill race", where gravity is your friend, and it seems to me that there's a similar race on - a race to the bottom - to see who can do better (read as "be more vain/moronic/stupid") than (say) the more familiar stupid acts of publishing a Facebook selfie of yourself naked, or with the stolen goods from a night out thieving or robbing a bank, or posing for a selfie of yourself with a girl whilst you are two-timing your girlfriend, or whilst staring down a glacier as though daring it to melt at a time when you should be at work in your office doing your job.

So, who is currently achieving real merit in this downhill race? Well, you can spot some easy recent achievers which totally eclipse the selfies described above (good as the latter may be):
  • Tazering cop selfies: You've no doubt by now already been dazzled and entertained (if not shocked) by the originality and electrifying brilliance of the "shocking cop selfies" (from above). Give some credit to this guy for what he has achieved. It has raised the bar. Nobody could deny that this guy surely deserves everything he gets, including a Downhill Selfie Award.

  • - but these next selfies must surely take the biscuit (or is it the BBQ sauce?) for sheer flambé audacity and opportunistic ingenuity in a viral trend which somehow seems may have jumped international territorial boundaries and which looks as though it might be now starting to infect professional state police forces worldwide as the trick catches on:

  • BBQ cop selfies: Again, absolutely no tut-tutting from me about this - "Don't be afraid to see what you see", as POTUS Reagan so adroitly put it. Here we have two actors (who only coincidentally happen to be cops) who decide to publish 'human barbecue' selfies taken at the site of a tragic airplane crash in Shoreham (UK) - and they apparently used a hashtag #human barbecue, or something. Again, nobody could deny that these guys surely deserve everything they get, including a Downhill Selfie Award, for their actions - I mean, "give credit where credit is due", as my mother would say when she saw someone do something particularly stupid.

Is it coincidental that these two latest awards would have been earned by police officers? I think so. The circumstances are quite different in each case - e.g., it could well have been (say) firemen or passers-by in the second case, I suppose. Only time will tell, but some people (not me, you understand) might say that, if this is indeed a newly-emerging and growing trend in the police forces, then it could arguably be a good thing, as it will inevitably lead to a raising of the bar for entry into the police force, in the shape of new entrance qualifications requirements for police recruits - possibly including (say) that of being photogenic - but I couldn't possibly comment.

But back to the Award itself: I would be interested in some assistance regarding the Downhill Selfie Award.
  • Do I have the criteria for making the Award about right?
  • How could the criteria be made more appropriate or specific?
  • Should there be sub-categories for the Award, or what, and why?
  • Do we give the Award posthumously in cases where the actor dies as a consequence, or is that more correctly a Darwin Award? I think it definitely is, and, furthermore, that death should be a factor that invalidates candidacy for the Downhill Selfie Award. Whilst the Award is a way of mocking the actor's surprisingly absurd behaviours, I personally do not feel that it would be at all nice to mock or derive pleasure from a candidate's death, and that to do so could be a sad reflection on ourselves.

Above all, please bear in mind that what I am talking about here is identifying and highlighting where we could give credit for new sources of surprising, original, and completely unintended mixtures of acute irony and/or black humour (in using selfie/camera technology), which aspects of humour have proven to be "healthy", insofar as they have helped us as a species to cope in relatively good-humoured fashion with some of the most horrendous atrocities of mankind in modern history.
1998
Living Room / Re: good Videos [short films] here :) - HUMANS (UK-made TV SF Series)
« Last post by IainB on October 07, 2015, 10:13 AM »
My rating:    :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:
My Recommendation: Quite a good watch for SF fans.

Season 1 Episode 8 (the last one) is here: http://www.tv3.co.nz...at/4668/Default.aspx

It's about human-like androids secretly designed with inbuilt consciousness. What could go wrong?
1999
How embarrassing:

LinkedIn - mathematically challenged 2015-10-08 (750) - edited.jpg
2000
^^ Stop that @Renegade. I know its you. It's becoming tedious.
Pages: prev1 ... 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 ... 264next