topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

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

Login with username, password and session length
  • Tuesday June 24, 2025, 12:01 am
  • 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 ... 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 40 ... 76next
851
Soft Problem/Hard Problem = Cultural Feasibility/Systematically Desirable

Victims/Beneficiaries - Who are the beneficiaries or victims of this particular system? (Who would benefit or suffer from its operations?)

Producers – Who are responsible for implementing this system? (Who would carry out the activities which make this system work?)

Transformation – What transformation does this system bring about? (What are the inputs and what transformation do they go through to become the outputs?)

Weltanschauung (or Worldview) – What particular worldview justifies the completion of this task? (What point of view makes this system meaningful?)

Destroyer - Who has the capacity to abolish this system or change its measures of performance?

Environmental constraints – Which external constraints does this system take as a given?

Modified from: http://en.wikipedia...._systems_methodology
852
Hi Armando,

In IQ I was able to set my priority system exactly how I wanted it. It's pretty straight forward, but with a few twists and complexities most people wouldn't care about.

I'm only one person but I can guarantee you, I do care to know about these "twists and complexities".

Could you be bothered to make a screen recorded video? Man, the more I hear about your process, the more I think it would help substantially if it can be viewed in action.

I could even try to provide you with a messy list to churn out if you're concerned about the privacy of your tasks list.
853
Honestly I think all this talk of politics and 'image in the public's eye' is frankly irrelevant. The employ here acted extremely irresponsibly, that much is a fact and therefore 'siding' with Google is a nonsense stance to take.

As for MS not putting the right PR spin on it all, well I see MS calling out the guy for the carelessness of his actions, remember this is all that was actually said

This issue was reported to us on June 5th, 2010 by a Google security researcher and then made public less than four days later, on June 9th, 2010.  Public disclosure of the details of this vulnerability and how to exploit it, without giving us time to resolve the issue for our potentially affected customers, makes broad attacks more likely and puts customers at risk

and damn right I say, that quote sets the records straight. Frankly I can't even follow the politics slant that's being dragged into this discussion.

But the thing is, you already made this clear in your previous posts of how much you perceive end users and that's why it's easy to ignore the issue because it's easy to side with what you've already concluded and how much the article affects you initially.

I don't mean to make you sound closed-minded but people don't find politics in politics relevant either as contradictory as this may seem.

The majority of those political bashers of the Iraq War didn't find the "image in the public eye" politics issue that relevant either but in that same context even if they can narrow down and make fun of the change of wording into Weapons of Mass Destruction, they themselves failed to communicate their concern because many of them too could not separate the cultural impact beyond the surface level from the rational points that they possess.

The greatest thing about politics is it's ability to confuse what politics is. For example, the constant analogy of a gun or a whistle blower is akin to the initial "knowledgeable" protest of how the American government should approach their "retaliation of the terrorists".

And then later on when the problem builds up or becomes serious enough, then we get back to the stupidity of the masses for getting tricked or how the end users are not techies therefore we techies have a right to have our say but the majority of them are irrelevant because they don't even know how to provide a workaround.

Like I said, this issue has already been hijacked and at this point, this topic is old news by Internet terms but I just want to use this past examples to at least emphasize the point on why politics is just as much a relevant issue in a frank straight shooter manner.

You techies (I can't include myself because I don't have this knowledge. I just understood the urgency because of lurking at forums like this) You techies are not immune to politics. I don't mean to lump you all into one or claim you ever stated you were immune but because of the focus of your knowledge, it's easier to claim your outcries as relevant but as history showed, you guys were neither able to stop FUD or EEE. You were just able to understand it more and popularize perhaps the acronyms.

But regardless of your knowledge, you were no different in the clog of culture. Sometimes you even show that hint of your helplessness by resorting to how Windows taught/promoted end-users to be dumb and yet as a group, you couldn't penetrate through end-users beyond a guide because you too pushed them away as irrelevant when things were easier to set aside.

The idea that some if not many of you think the politics is irrelevant is not new. Again, I want to emphasize that I don't know better than techies or that I'm writing this to convince anyone that my stance is the correct one.

I write this because sometimes the pattern is covered in cultural difference. Sometimes you even provide the key word:

Frankly I can't even follow the politics slant that's being dragged into this discussion.


In the end, it's not like I've stated anything new. If I did, I'd have been able to do a much better job at relating my concern. What I just wanted to emphasize about this reply is that techies does not immediately equal higher resistance to being swept by PR. You can even remove politics in that. I originally just used that as an extreme analogy. If there's a word I'd rather focus it's cultural gap.

Cultural gap at least implies two or more sides are affected by each other and it's not an issue of just one side affecting another side. It is only analogous to the public eye image in the sense that it's out there online. However techies are still no different from the public in this case because unless you're directly involved in the incident, in the end your reactions are really no different from some end user reacting only you both may have possibly different perspectives on the issue because of your difference in knowledge but even if you end up with the same perspective, that's not really the point unless you can re-focus on what it means for Microsoft to be sincere about improving their security image beyond just those that would satisfy either or more party.
854
Content, Relationship, Information, Process

Source: http://en.wikipedia....iki/CRIP_Methodology

855
The disclosure is only the more serious one in my opinion in the sense that it's the more obvious one. (the one that will fundamentally irk those in the know)

The weapon analogy doesn't fit in the context of the linked politics because it's a two way street. That's why for me it's easier to use politics as an example.

If I were to emulate the vitriole and style of all the previous analogies used by some posters, it would be like 9/11 turning into the Iraq War out of changing the severity of the words into Weapons of Mass Destructions.

It's a big jump from this situation but often times, it's easier to see the pattern from a big issue rather than little issues like this that end up contributing later on to a bigger one. In there too, it's not that the outcriers do not have a point especially the knowledgeable outcriers.

...but before that shift or rather during that shift in press conference terms, the whole issue got hijacked and it's not because people were too stupid to not point out how Osama has been replaced with Saddam. The truth is still in there.

But the focus, the importance, the one society needs to hear more or hear less...it's been shifted and once it has shifted because of the right terms, it's over and the only difference is magnitude and topics.

856
In any case, the thing to remember is that any of these methods, if not incorporated into a very concrete and integrated system, won't work. Whatever makes sense to someone must be integrated into concrete steps to follow (in lists, computer software...) each day/week.

Could you provide a visual or specific task vs. task example?

The way you combined all systems you encountered got me curious as to how long it takes for you to put it all together as well as how much your prioritization improved before and after the whole process took place.

I know you mentioned the systems you used and I apologize if I'm being vague. It's not that I didn't understand your post as much as I didn't catch the part where the concreteness and integration locked in.

One of the most useful things that Agenda could do was to dynamically auto-set a logical attribute called "category" for a task/item, depending on a rule - for example, whether a certain character string was present in the item data. In the Gmail context, this would be like Gmail dynamically setting a label for an email discussion, if (say) the word "frog" was found in that email discussion. I think this sort of capability might be built into mouser's Clipboard Help & Spell - which employs virtual folders and SQL filters - but I haven't had time to play with that to find out for sure.

Hopes this makes sense. I tend to make mistakes when tired, and I am tired now.

Could you provide some examples as to what specific labels and character string you had that gave the feature a much needed place in your priority system?

Descriptions like these often make sense until I try imagining what specific string I would use.
857
Not my own, just dropping it here:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaizen

P.S. Thanks IanB. Yeah, it does. I actually follow/plan to follow the ABC method in a certain subject manner but I haven't experimented on it yet.
858
...err I think you missed the context of that one 40hz. (It's not about competing roughly or smoothly)

It's more to point out the inanity of saying Google has no excuse this time. (which is what that section of my post was replying to)

This entire act is wrong regardless of whether Google has an excuse or not.

The fact that someone can draw a conclusion based on irrelevant drivel like Google's excuse just shows how good such articles are at confusing people with the real issues.

I didn't really get the crusaders and dead heroes bit.
859
Sorry for the confusing title, this is more of a private "add as I get more ideas" thread but I wanted to have this out in the open in case other people have additional topics to add:

  • Big Bang Adoption Malaria - The case of being too boggled down from the mass transferring of your tasks from one system to another.
  • Unstable Capture Environment - A case where you can either be unable to possess a capturing tool or be in a hostile place with no free space to work by yourself.
  • Zero Adrenaline-State Notetaking Experience/Training - Similar to the above except it's not just the environment but you yourself not being able to trust your productivity system because you didn't test yourself under stressful circumstances.
  • Time-crunching Schizophrenia - The case where the taskee has lost all sense of context for why a task needs to be done and merely follows a set of schedules and quotas in order to "be" productive.
  • Morbid Anxiety - The state where you feel overwhelmed as you're setting up your system and cramp out. Symptoms include looking for a Life Coach to bail your system out by unparalyzing you.
  • Acquired Productivity Encouragement Syndrome - The state of ruining a stable life because the productivity system insists there's a problem or being unable to keep yourself from recommending a system that hasn't helped your own life vastly but since it's new or shiny or good enough for now, it must be sold to the world as a five star quality application.
  • Helpatitis A - The state of becoming productive by helping teach others to be productive while you are still unproductive resulting in a random set of mostly asinine advises where the followers learn as you learn except they ended up paying you as you go along your journey to become a richer guru.
  • Helpatitis B - The state where you end up helping lots of people productively by giving them a place to whine and share their needs transforming the spot into a hang out place without really taking into consideration and adding those advises into improving your system.
  • Syphon List - The state where a user is left constantly sinking his teeth on the quick tasks on his list and being unable to shrug off the habit without breaking the entire system and is forever doomed to suck off the contents of the list or push it away completely in the hopes of getting a temporary reprieve and find a better alternative system to move his tasks out of.
  • Mass Burger Syndrome - The state of only becoming more productive via your system because it annoys you to the point that you eventually keep brute force batching the tasks on your system and then burn out and then repeat the cycle again as soon as your task lists fills up once again.
  • Tourlet Disorder - The state where you become productive from a system not because you follow it through and through but because you allowed the system to help you capture all these stuff to do but because the system still doesn't help you, you cheat and end up creating a skimming list where you drop pick from a set of tasks and only do those regardless of efficiency, growth reward or logistics and then drop off that stack of lists until one day you pick it up again and "tour" the contents of the list. This also includes people who make lists, do some tasks on them, forget about them, re-make a new list and repeat the cycle all over again.
860
Living Room / Narrowing your definition of a word...
« Last post by Paul Keith on June 12, 2010, 03:47 PM »
Narrowing your definition of a word that is ambiguous by definition to a single meaning is tantamount to starting a religious war.

Source: Comment under: http://linuxlock.blo...g-linux-desktop.html

"Non-free is relatively unambiguous: it means you can't modify it and you can't fix it when it breaks."

What an odd statement...perhaps as a specific label, you may be correct; when you are surrounded by people involved with FOSS, you are correct, by the grace of context and predisposition towards a specific meaning. Even Stallman, however, recognized that there is considerable ambiguity in the term "free" vs. "Non-free". Where do you think "Think free as in free speech, not free beer" came from? In fact, much of his influence comes specifically from his quest to differentiate between the two meanings of "free".

I read this and wonder how "non-free" with no context may be interpreted; I have paid for shareware to whose source I was granted access. That was "non-free", because I paid. I have not paid to use drivers distributed and developed by ATI whose source was a constant mystery. The ATI drivers are "freeware" that is not "Free Software (or open source)", while the other program was "Shareware" that was "Free (or open source)".

Of course, your definition of "Free" may also change depending on what organization you are following. After all, each of GPL, BSD, MPL, and FOSS, just to name a few, have slightly different viewpoints. Some give you source, but don't allow you to fork the source, or distribute the code you tweak. Some allow you to everything.

Narrowing your definition of a word that is ambiguous by definition to a single meaning is tantamount to starting a religious war. You may want to be careful with those kinds of statements. Context will define many aspects of "Free".
861
Microsoft had a good opportunity of fixing their image

Actually the point repeated here over and over is that MS wasn't given an opportunity, 4 days is not enough. Or are you proposing an alternative approach to MS improving their security image other than by regularly and responsibly patching holes?

Yes, I am proposing one. A subtle but important alternative.

Fixing holes ISN'T an opportunity, it's a necessity. Microsoft would be worse if they're slow at fixing security holes but they are not better for doing what everyone expects of them to do in the first place.

If MS wants to truly improve their security image then focus on security and not mudslinging even if the other side is wrong this time. Let the commentors, the public outcriers, the techies...let them provide the "dim views".

If the media insists on a comment, just point it out from a security perspective.

This shouldn't be an "also", this should be what's it all about:

Reavey also criticized Ormandy for not being thorough in his analysis: “It turns out that the analysis is incomplete and the actual workaround Google suggested is easily circumvented.”

The other issue. The one with the obvious "Oh, doing it like this makes it dangerous for our customer." Take that out or at the very least, it should be the one included as an "also" for why the exploit should have been given ample enough time to fix.

Emphasize the security risk, not that you're butt hurt. In the context of details, sure it's sounds like I'm asking for a PC repairman to talk to me about the broken processor before the burnt out motherboard first but in the context of reducing sensationalism, magnetizing views on your new found focus for security and inciting techies to worry more about the security exploit rather than how wrong your competitor is now, that's the needed approach especially if you have a historical reputation as having poor security but more importantly engaging in FUD and EEE!
862
I'm not a GTD user but what I've discovered primarily over using GTD is that the list is not the most efficient way of making everyone productive.

This may not seem ground breaking but I think a lot of unproductive people with no background who come into GTD get swept by the allure of lists and the way GTD over-stress lists reveals perspectives that few other productive systems eventually lead up to because they don't try to scratch the idea of what a "system" is and often use system just as a way to refer to "sets of exercises" or "sets of non-interconnected actions".

For people who aren't productive with lists including GTD's, this is as good as learning GTD because it allows you to appreciate and search for more ways to dissect a list and in that sense people end up being able to create their own @context system using things like index cards, sticky notes and habit trackers and mold them into something that increases the creation of much more unorthodox productivity hypotheses and the list makers meanwhile are able to work on streamlining GTD and using GTD as the benchmark for how to effectively improve upon a simpler list system by looking at GTD and getting the conclusion that the simpler system makes them more effective than big ole complicated GTD.

From the complexity side, time has revealled that GTD is not as much complicated as it is confusing and vague.

Many people often feel that GTD is complicated because they fail to grasp what @context's value really means and even long term GTD users often settle on the idea that it is just there to separate a long list or categorize a section of your to-do list when contexts' greatest value comes from developing a unified set of folders "from your own needs" rather than a standardized set of folders. (From a computer file system analogy, context is more like your MP3 player's playlist and what you name them rather than Home, My Documents, Downloads, Music, etc.)

Similarly people are confused with Someday/Maybe lists because GTD relies on a process per process basis. Something many productivity-passioned people still find a time to cheat on and skip a step sometimes (like skipping past a to-do list entry to do something you feel like) but this particular category is "complicated" because it's a concept that leans on every other system of GTD from in-basket to task entry insertion to inbox's of Next Actions. Someday/Maybe lists on one side feels like the odd man out of a GTD system. Almost as if it's there just so David Allen can say "here's where you put whatever item I can't think of putting in any of the other system I've described" and yet at the same time, it's a meta-step that raises the question of...What if I can't deal with this? in a time when many people focus too much on what task they can do and forget that elephant in the room when your whole life goes down.

Finally, I love the fact that now some sites like yours are willing to admit some roadblocks of GTD.

To quote your review of GTD Implementation Guide:

"Tip: Setting Up Your Workspace

Don’t share your work area with family members or colleagues."

Finally it's now much more easier to admit that GTD requires a workspace of your own. I know David Allen didn't exactly hide this but it's almost the bane of many unproductive people who tried to fit GTD into their life because they bought the idea that GTD will work for everyone and make them productive at all cost as long as they follow the concepts but it's nice to know such things are now more often emphasized and left out in the open.

Another reality is that GTD is no longer revolutionary as much as evolutionary. In a way it's like Web 2.0. The sheen has rubbed off a bit and the awe is now much more centralized towards how GTD works rather than how "awesome" GTD is that you should make it work for you.

In the context of capture, people understand more why this is an important process and why software is flawed in that regards. Some applications like EverNote even managed to reach mainstream despite reducing their features and alienating their loyal community by going head long and recruiting a new loyal fanbase whose interests are centered on capture.

In the area of thought process, it's much nicer now to see more people "really" think about why their list or system isn't working rather than just extending this step as another "dead" list taking step in order for GTD to work.

In the area of inbox's and next actions, it still has a long way to go before software design can truly portray the severity of displaying this not only correctly but urgently but it's also nice that this has at least ushered in some new software ideas in the area of capture and display.

Notably the two main camps are tag-based notetakers/search-based notetakers and mindmaps.

Unfortunately what has remained is that GTD didn't inspire people to look and alert people more into more complicated systems of making someone productive and in fact it's complexity has caused people to find ways to "over-simplify" the concepts of the system and spread it out as lackluster replacements for things that are in the book and the only one that has benefitted are those who are not necessarily looking to be productive but who wants to become more productive but already possess a previous working/semi-working/just in need of motivation system.
863
http://www.gtdreview...nges-over-the-years/

“Okay, how can I help?”  For starters, we’ve included a simple poll below.  Let us know how long you’ve been using GTD in your workflow.  Secondly, post in the comments, sharing what you’ve seen change since you first started implementing it.  How has technology changed things?  What has remained the same?  What has time taught you?

GTD Reviews.com err... Review:

First off I've only found the site now but they sold me on this one review of GTD Implementation Guide.

First off, any site that has a large "Talk to Us" button rather than a Twitter button or Facebook button earns an instant plus from me.

I didn't try it and I know it's not the most traffic rewarding thing to add to a site but as a first time surfer who encountered this button...WOW... I know this is nothing to get giddy about from an innovation side but the whole button blew my mind off and that's why I'm reviewing this site. The fact that it's in big bold button shape while still being at the beginning of a sidebar...wow...such things instantly generate trust and respect from me.

Lay-out and design is something I'm ignorant of and while my initial impressions were good, I can't help but get frustrated that I needed to click a link from another blog article just to spot that GTD Implementation Guide review. I'm not sure if it's the dating or that it's due to being a featured article but in some ways, the mild frustration came from how clear and zen-like everything looks initially.

Assuming the above link is the default reviewing template, it gets a plus from me which you'll see in my copy-paste reply to the survey topic below.

However just to walk over why I have a high opinion of the template.

What it Does - +1, everything should start with this if you have a vast knowledge of what you're reviewing.

What it Doesn’t Do - +1000, this is what sold me to the article. If every self-proclaimed knowledgeable reviewer could add this to their reviews, things would be much easier understood by casual curious readers.

Who Should Purchase This Guide -  :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup: It's not going to be popular with many review sites because it's about a reviewer potentially turning customers away from a good product and they often botch up this section anyways but the way it's written gave me a good feeling of trusting this person's reviews. It helps that he had the audacity to bold the key contents of this sub-heading which can be a double edged sword in that it can look like you're focusing on the negative aspects of a product.

What's bad

The app comparison link on the bar is easily spottable and it has just a good balance of not so known and well known apps that it works but the whole vertical check list doesn't work.

It just isn't skimmable. Applications are not antivirus software first of all but this also isn't Wikipedia.

People are not looking for in-depth interpretations of what software has what.

People want to understand as easily as possible how each application stack up relative to their needs of GTD.

They don't want to first memorize which application has e-mail and then scroll down just to see which one has printable lists and then scroll up again. A table like this would be better served as a questionnaire that asks what the needs of the GTD searcher are and then show a list of the results at the end of the quiz and then maybe at the end, you show this table with the needs of the searcher highlighted while the other options are grayed out.

Anyways, that's it. The below is just a copy paste of my reply to the survey in case people don't want to click the link to view it.

 




864
Thanks for the help. Glad I could drop Lyx indefinitely thanks to your post.

865
whereas "make new friends" is an enormous, fuzzy task which won't get you anywhere until you develop a more specific strategy for doing so.

I find talking to random strangers work although I've heard you can get some too by joining a forum.  :Thmbsup:

of course, any time you assign any values in any system, your own prejudices are the most unvarying weakness.

True. That's why I opted to make this a survey-ish topic instead of sharing my own prioritization categories. I felt what's more at stake is to have everything out first to contrast and compare rather than stress-testing any prioritizer.

That said, I would love a lightweight cross-platform NANY that allows for auto-sorting for people like me who doesn't know how to use macros.
866
Living Room / Re: What the heck has happened to Google search?
« Last post by Paul Keith on June 12, 2010, 01:12 PM »
My personal interpretation

This is not always true. I don't know how to determine content and what specific categories are being compared to but I personally feel Diigo + Google's sidebar, SocialMentions' Matrix, Mahalo's Article meets Twitter, Diigo's drop down show several contents of highlights and Google with Twitter Search Results on Google greasemonkey script are some of the few things that beat out default Google.

Problem is, Google is very built in. It almost feels like a native app.

To paraphrase an ICarly joke:

What's the default search engine on your browser? Google.com

What does Google Reader remind you of when you check your RSS feeds? Google.com

What does Google Docs remind you of when you browse your documents? Google.com

What does Gmail remind you of when you browse your e-mail? Google.com

What is one of the fastest alternative at getting to a Wikipedia article if you're too lazy to type the full site? Google.com

What do most privacy conscious alternative search engines steal their results from the most? Google.com

Obviously power users can fix this but Google is just shy of Twitter as far as avoiding it's influence.

All other search engines either try to be aggregators or search engines, if you use at least one other non-Google search engine service, it's almost impossible to not just settle for Google on quick searches. It doesn't hurt that the term is ingrained as a verb.

The more you avoid Google, the more you'll just get annoyed at people telling you to Google it. Even if you avoid everything Google, topics like this still make you want to click on Google just to "verify" the claim.

It doesn't hurt that eventually you'll still find quick search results to be much more comfortable on Google and in-depth results too as they have the biggest content and the most active ranking changes.

For the most part, other search engines are only best if it's middle ground filtering. I love the way Clusty's filtering works and Yahoo has a better way of searching for CC'd images. 
867
Be honest, could any of us have resisted Sharon Stone, no matter how evil she was?

Well in fairness to Verhoeven, he did at least try to minimize the Catherine Tramell in her.

Personally, the Wii Tennis she was playing would have probably been a much harder thing to resist for me.

She could be like "Douglas, I know you like this world but can you really live with a world where they didn't program this technology into the system? Come on Douglas, you know you want it. Imagine what games you can play on this if you combined it with Rekall." ~and I would have caved in right then and there.
868
This is a case where I'm for Google hurting the competition because even if it's unprofessional, it's a stress test for Microsoft. You've pleased the techies now let's see how you buy back people's trust. How you react to cases like this.

If this were just Google kicking MS I probably wouldn't care too much myself. But it's not, it's Google putting everyone in danger. And I really mean everyone! Holes like this are how worms spread, how bot-nets grow, and how mal-intentioned individuals can bring whole internet services to their knees, regards of what OS the victims are using. There are no excuses for Google in this one!

As for buying back non-techies trust, well buy is the word, isn't it? Non-techies only believe what they see in ads, Apple has proved that. No amount of actual good deeds or responsible actions really matter these days.

Again, exactly. It's the exploit that needs to be emphasized and how a security engineer can't even picked to disclose a 0-day exploit without first providing a full workaround but instead the focus is how "Google has no excuse."

Who cares if Google has an excuse for kicking MS' butt?

The important issue is the security. Not about lambasting Google. Microsoft had a good opportunity of fixing their image instead they reacted in ways that play a fool of even techies.

...and it's such a disrespect towards both sides and such a disconnect that further destroys the real important issue.

Obviously you're stretching but now look where this article has lead to. Now you're stereotyping non-techies as Apple users and PC ignorants where there are legitimate people who simply don't know the technical depth of the problem but are curious about the real world implication of such act.

Now we're hate-choosing whether Google's actions are comparable to a bomb, a PoS, arson...I mean it's over. This is the damage these types of article does and I know this is just a repeat of what I have said and I apologize for being redundant. I'll stop replying now and I only did so as to emphasize my stance of this topic.
869
Living Room / Re: What the heck has happened to Google search?
« Last post by Paul Keith on June 12, 2010, 08:47 AM »
Sorry if this sounds impolite (not trying to act like an unnoficial mod but this recent topic seems too similar to not refer to):

Has SEO ruined the Web?

Edit: Sorry missed this section of the post: (yes I know there is another thread)

870
Paul, no disrespect, but I think you're really off-base on this one.

Microsoft's bad security days are WAY a thing of the past. In Internet history, it's prehistoric.

Yeah, I understand where I can come off like this but to me, it's not prehistoric. It's just cultural understatement.

Just because Microsoft has improved in such a way that they now please security concerned techies, doesn't somehow mean their reputation has overlapped the in-grained culture their reputation has and to me, these kinds of distractive article of "Oh noes! How dare someone act disillusioned with us and not give us a chance..." counter-reaction just shows to me Microsoft is still mostly playing the PR game.

They could have easily focused on how Google botched up the security fix but instead they sensationalize this whole bad protocol to rile up the techies whom they know would over-react and turn this into a non-security by obscurity issue but instead a Google is bad issue.

Google has shown an utter disregard and disrespect for Windows users with a completely flagrant and irresponsible spit in the face to both Microsoft and all Microsoft customers (which also happen to be Google customers). Google has clearly shown that it is more concerned with hurting its competition than in caring for its customers.

And Microsoft has shown an utter disregard and disrespect for Windows users' security for years in such a way that alot of newbie users developed bad security habits.

This is a case where I'm for Google hurting the competition because even if it's unprofessional, it's a stress test for Microsoft. You've pleased the techies now let's see how you buy back people's trust. How you react to cases like this.

If these type of habits become abused to the point that it endangers Microsoft customers beyond one or two incidents, sure go ahead. Make these kind of comments as a call to action.

But this is a limited incident and the way we're now talking about it: Look! We're no longer talking about the security issue. Microsoft's complaint has now turned this into "Oh...bad bad bad Google...or...oh...MS is right on this one."

Why?!

Proper disclosure of security exploits is there because of security but now even if the "technicality" of why it's wrong is still mentioned, Microsoft has turned this into political mudslinging where the big news is how Google is the evil idol instead of the security issue being at the forefront of the discussion.

4 days is very, very far from reasonable.

The reality of security is that Windows is more secure than most other operating systems by a very wide margin. Literally. (You can't stop idiots from getting hacked no matter what platform, so that's really not a valid complaint about Windows.)

It is a valid complaint because it is a cultural complaint in my opinion.

That's the disconnect though. At the end of the day, this kind of article has done it's job and eventually it's going to be the new type of FUD.

One that passes the buck not necessarily on the issues but one that creates uncertainty in what specific forefront issue needs to be emphasized, discussed and payed attention to.

Still, I'm exaggerating what hasn't happened yet but this is why things like these frustrate me.

Articles written like these are what creates rabid disconnect and prevents non-knowledgeable users to "empathize" and understand why this is a big issue. Meanwhile people with the background and knowledge ends up playing American Idol "who displeases me more on this issue because the right way was done wrong" and true they have a valid point but that point in the long run just reads "I'm siding with Microsoft now" instead of just sticking with the security reason for why it's wrong.

You could almost see it in this thread. Lots of complaints about the reporting but very little acknowledgement of the incomplete analysis and easily circumvented workaround when that is just as much a huge deal if not bigger from a security perspective and a bigger security issue considering who disclosed it.
 
As for this being Microsoft or anyone else -- that's largely irrelevant. The fact is that Google disclosed a security vulnerability without allowing the product vendor the opportunity to fix the problem. This is simply inexcusable and unforgivable. It doesn't matter whether it is Microsoft or anyone else. It is standard to give vendors a couple months to get the problem fixed and rolled out, much less disclose the vulnerability WITH EXPLOIT CODE!!!!!

Actually, I need to take something back. It isn't Google spitting in people's faces. That would be irresponsibly disclosing the vulnerability. They disclosed exploit code. No... Google pissed in everyone's face.

Again, that it was Microsoft only shows that Google is more interested in pissing in people's faces to spite its competition than in acting like a responsible, good corporate citizen.

I seriously doubt that this would happen for ACME Software Inc. because they're not any kind of threat or competition for Google.

Exactly. But look at your post now.

The details, the points, they're all correct. But instead of security, you're more interested in creating analogies of what Google's actions correlate with other rude actions.

At the end of the day, this is what the article has done and that's why I still side with Google on this. Not because it's Google but it's a long time coming and Microsoft's stance needs to be tested further by such acts.

I'm not saying I want the act or I support the act because at the end of the day, it's still a code exploit but there's also issues extending from that.

There's issues with Microsoft's past reputation. There's issues with competition.

...but the main important thing is, this article which was a security issue causes people to react as if it was a political or business issue and it distracts and that's why I'd rather be off-base here if this is how I come off than be satisfied at seeing how things get riled up in the wrong type of sensationalism that has caused issues to be boggled.

If this is confusing, to use politics as an analogy, this is like politicians bringing up a side issue to distract the main issue. It's not that the people suddenly are talking in wrong terms especially the knowledgeable people but the core issue has been turned to a side issue and that's only going to worsen the cultural gap of what the more important issue is eventually whenever similar future incidents gets reported like this.
871
...or it could just be depth...less...ness  :P

Some of this article writers can go overboard with the terminology but it's true in this case.

Arnie's performance wasn't shallow but it can be one sided in the sense that True Lies/Last Action Hero/Predator can be considered as him performing with depth while Conan/Running Man/The 6th Day/Kindergarten Cop and Batman and Robin can be considered as some of Arnie's depthless performance where he gets away with Keanu Reeves acting but replace tortured soul with muscle or bulk.

Arnie plays an interesting depthless character in Total Recall though. Unlike his other movies where it's hit or miss and it's easier to say it's just Arnie's muscles making up for his lack of acting chops, this movie holds both Arnie with depth and Arnie without one which is why it still worked. Plus the depthless Arnie is less action hero and more in the realms of Keanu Reeves' Matrix performance except it's still not tortured lost soul but impatient, semi-horny, semi-looking for his destined lover, semi-unsatisfied successful blue collar construction worker, semi-amnesiac, semi-mid life crisis depth.

I won't spoil the movie for those who haven't watched but let's just say there's two Arnie and when they meet, that's when Arnie's depth shows but in a unique manner because often times when people judge depth, they're focusing on one actor but this time what adds depth to Arnie's performance is the way depthless Arnie interacts with campy Arnie and the two merge as a product of one despite being separated thus resulting in one of the few rare depthful performance in movies where a character comes face to face and interacts with his twin/clone/etc.
872
I'm going to side with Google on this one I guess.

I can understand it from a security standpoint but the thing is, this is Microsoft.

What their intent now doesn't cover up their years and years of failing to secure things.

This is one of those cases where it looks bad because of the proper tradition of why things are done and should be done.

However in this same token, it's Microsoft. Sure it's unprofessional and dangerous but the reputation of Microsoft on security has already sunk into the culture of computing that Microsoft should just man up and fix this instead of turning this into some PR/media complaint. It's not like they couldn't have thrown and put more focus on a more valid complaint as the article showed:

Reavey also criticized Ormandy for not being thorough in his analysis: “It turns out that the analysis is incomplete and the actual workaround Google suggested is easily circumvented.”

But why go so far as to excuse and side Microsoft this time? At the very least, stay neutral and cite why it's bad policy but going so far as to say what one should have or shouldn't have done and why one side is correct while ignoring that side's past. Seems like it's that attitude that has allowed the security by obscurity to continue and it's that kind of support that will eventually make it sometimes security by obscurity sometimes we'll disclose it.

Just fix it and move on. You're Microsoft not some development team with a long history of emphasizing utmost security.
873
Living Room / Re: Has SEO ruined the web?
« Last post by Paul Keith on June 11, 2010, 07:52 PM »
The thing is though, those scraper sites, the ones fitting the article that JavaJones linked to are actually pretty rare nowadays relative to every other things that can be said to be ruining the web via using SEO.

Even the article admits these kinds of sites are being eliminated by search engines.

The thing is though there's the bigger fishes of "aggregators" and whatever the fine line is between aggregators and scraping sites.

I hate to say this but your experience with the internet and technical knowledge may be blinding you a bit but no, to a casual surfer, especially one who doesn't know the de facto popular web sites, the only difference is that your site seems to have less programs than Download.com.

Even if you include experienced internet users at that.

The only difference between experienced internet users and non-experienced ones is that they found out through experience what are the sites to avoid. They don't know what sites are good, they know what sites have a bad reputation.

If experienced internet users truly knew the distinction, search engine ranking would in itself be unnecessary since all everyone needs is to check are the top sites in an aggregator but then it's not that simple.

This is how things like Download.com and freedownloadscenter.com stay afloat. They tow the line but they aren't scraper sites in the context of what JavaJones is referring to because they link the publishing site back.

It's a huge gray area but as far as ruining the web, it still falls into the category that experience teaches one what site to avoid and inexperienced users don't really know the difference and yet still it takes a backstep towards whatever link first appears as scraper sites are often only found nowadays in early search terms if they are extremely niche search terms and that's more because people don't know that aggregators are much better for searching reliable rare software and that everything else should be checked up via several forums rather than a search engine once you go that far unless it's a document search.

As for having twenty different thoughts, I apologize. Maybe it's just my desire to clarify or verify my own lack of knowledge of things but I feel that the only way a better alternative can come is if people discuss these issues to such...I wouldn't say details...but level of clarification especially from an over-simplified philosophical stance that even inexperienced interent surfers can easily pick up if they stumble upon a topic.



874
I wouldn't be surprised if Deathswitch originated as a porn plot.

Then again, the porn plot could be in reference to something earlier too or Deathswitch could also be an early concept. (the site isn't loading for me right now and I can't verify the date)

All I know is that it's not that rare to encounter a superheroine blackmail story where a normal powered villain will hold control over a superheroine by claiming that he has pictures of her identity and at a regular scheduled interval, he needs to input a password every day or her identity will get sent out to all the major villains in whatever city she was in. (Often as insurance to keep the heroine from beating him up and sending them to jail or even murdering them.)

This was prior to the days where Tony Stark would reveal his identity in the movies or Spider-man in the comics.
875
Living Room / Re: Dating Sites for Geeks and Nerds?
« Last post by Paul Keith on June 10, 2010, 08:57 PM »
I don't use dating sites but I apologize for laughing.

The topic reminded me of a gk2gk ad that used to be on the Midwest Teen Sex Show Podcast.

I don't know if it's still there since I saw the ad via their Miro shows but if I recall, it used to have a guy tossing around a stuffed animal while the main blonde girl talks about online dating while holding an open book.

Btw the podcast is not really as NSFW as it sounds. It's more sex education humor, see here for a preview:

http://revver.com/vi...-episode-9-syphilis/

Pages: prev1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 40 ... 76next