And posted here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1051809
231 karma · joined December 24, 2009
2) As long as I'm criticizing, I also use quotes in about half my searches, but Google's type ahead feature strips them out rendering the function useless.
3) OK, a rave about Google's search tools...being able to search in past 24 hours, week, month, year, etc is wonderful when trying to find an answer to a specific technical problem.
But Instand? I turned it off within a couple hours. It's too distracting.
Especially if that "discount" is appearing on the bill.
Jonathan Haidt's work in this regard is fascinating.
As long as we're quibbling/clarifying, it seems we're mixing up natural selection and evolution here.
Try it.
1) Put a dialog popup in your MS desktop app that says, "Clicking OK below will destroy the chair beneath you. Clicking Cancel will make a box of chocolates appear on your desk."
2) Observe when a user performs a task that produces the pop up.
3)Ask the user if they were disappointed that no chocolate appeared.
The user will look at you with incomprehension.
To clarify, I am not criticizing users. Users are users, we're not going to change their behavior with training or help manuals. We need to design around them.
I disagree.
How does my car work? I press on the gas and it goes. I press on the brakes and it stops. Drive shaft? Carburetor? What's those things?
That users can't use a computer is usually, not always, the fault of developers and designers.
For example, if backing up is so crucial, why don't computers come with that functionality built in?
Why _is_ data storage separate from the application? In the iPad, it's not. And that's a brilliant improvement in computing!
Sadly, that's not what the article was about.
Give each one $50K, what happens?
You don't go to a specialized HS (Hunter, Stuy, Bronx Sci) in NYC and graduate low in your class and get a scholarship.
You're lucky to get into a school. MIT isn't looking for 12 people from the same HS, even if they're all geniuses...they want diversity.
There are plenty of alternatives.
My MIL didn't understand that the interface represented a physical top of a desk. My mom double clicks on web links. My uncle does all his contractor company accounting with a pencil, in a ledger book.
That is a huge market for the iPad.
The desktop was a wonderful metaphor with its files and folders, for what it was replacing. But its time is coming to an end and the iPad is riding and creating that wave.
After the iPad 3G drops below $300, it will do more to bring that demographic online than any other device to date.
"agreed to build Deliso's app for about $5,000." "sold more than 5,500 copies. A year after its release, the 99-cent app still sells about 200 copies a month on Apple Inc.'s iTunes store. Apple takes a 30% cut of the revenue, leaving Deliso and his children with a nice little bit of pocket money."
Deliso won't break even on his initial $5k for another 8 months.
I don't think this meets the standard of a continuing relationship. Couldn't you have them refilled at Wal-Green's? Or buy a lifetime supply?
The linked page goes to one particular world: msernst which allows you to enter coordinates to scroll to (as well as drop links to those coordinates).
Looks like you can create your own text world or explore others.
Can this be used for useful collaboration?
Kahneman says that at $60K a year your direct experience of happiness flatlines. But our perception of how happy we are increases with the amount of money we make, far beyond the $60K.
There's two types of happiness, how happy we are and how happy we think we are and the two correlate only at a .5.
The flatlining question is "How happy are you right now?" The question that increases with wealth is "How happy are you?"
Which is a fairer representation of how people understand happiness?