If they cannot square their actions with their morals, then they are in the wrong job.
1,329 karma · joined January 31, 2009
If they cannot square their actions with their morals, then they are in the wrong job.
Separately, I personally would have redacted some of that data.
struct twiggle { int t; }
somehow makes patenting the code that uses it a sensible idea?
Whats the problem? name any product and I can find an argument on the side of nobody choosing to use it.
I, for one, have a use for a 300$ house. I have a piece of land on which I would love to be able to place a few smaller cabins. Currently doing so would run me around 15-50k per building.
I read your post and pretty much all I hear is a vaguely undirected bitterness and some jealous whining, and I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY.
Seriously, Dont worry yourself on their behalf.
If Github didn't want to implement that feature, they wouldn't have done it.
Zed has about as much power over them as I do over you.
Whatever other characteristics he may have, Zed certainly has a knack for bringing forth the shrieking sister in a certain type of personality.
Given that you responded in such a dramatic fashion to something that genuinely didn't involve you in any way whatsoever, why are you criticizing Zed for reacting strongly to a far greater provocation?
I would have preferred to be able to get a result without actually applying for the job though...
nope. by the user running an installer when requested by a browser ad popup.
...and to me, that sounded kind of silly...
People clueless enough to run an Installer based on an web ad popup are unlikely to be reading Apple's PR posts.
Aside from OS specific code that refuses to install anything called Mac Defender, Apple has no power over this problem.
Mike Rowe nails it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs61lfhqeNg&feature=playe...
His point is that the interface is a usability loss, and a big one.
For tech people it is not seamless,
For non-tech people it is worse than 'not seamless', it is entirely confusing.
OTOH, it was the early adopters that were driving it, and I dont really have a problem with that. That is what early adopters do.
Votes are not a reliable indication of whether or not a post is correct.
They are a reliable indication of whether or not a post is popular.
It does sometimes happen that a post is both correct and popular, but that is not something it is ever safe to rely on.
'Social Proof' is a fantasy that does not exist.
what process do you suggest for proving that?
Without a court trial, how can your membership in Al Qaeda reasonably be established?
Also, membership of what other clubs or groups also allows the government to imprison you indefinitely without trial and torture you? who decides that?
Joel, news.ycombinator has somewhat higher standards for civilized discussion than you are exhibiting here.
Please either participate in a constructive fashion or confine your postings to the roughnecks in the stack overflow forums.
http://d2o7bfz2il9cb7.cloudfront.net/main-qimg-c18ef2d8f8bd7...
is showing exactly the reason Craigslist is doing well.
Each of the alternatives displayed represents a specialized, vertical solution for just one (or a couple) of the categories offered by Craigslist, There is no way that Craigslist could compete head to head with every one of them anyway, at best they could choose a couple of categories and build new products focused on them.
Instead they are choosing to be a general platform.
Nothing lasts forever, and no doubt Craigslist will fade away over time, as will facebook, myspace and Windows itself, but in the meantime they are pretty well positioned, providing a 'good enough' solution for a wide range of categories is just as reasonable as providing a targetted solution to a specific category.
What they would absolutely fail to do is provide an excellent vertical solution for every category they offer,
Which means those competitors on that graph would still exist even if Craigslist improved its site, and probably they would still be doing well.
If they did, surely they would have been delivered to the reviewer in a usable form?
It makes a heap of assumptions though, and feels kind of like a non-techie person saying "why dont you just whip up a GUI app to trace my IP". Enabling Nitro JIT for UIWebView for some applications without enabling it for every app in the app store is probably more difficult than toggling a switch.
The alternative appears to be that to create Web.app they went to all the trouble of reusing the Mobile Safari code, and then methodically went through and broke things such that it behaves exactly like every other application that uses UIWebView.
This would seem like an unreasonable way to get an application that behaves exactly like an application that uses UIWebView.
Im interested in your thoughts though, how would you allow one arbitarily large set of applications with arbitary names to use the Nitro Javascript engine via UIWebView, and still ensure that no third party developer could enable the ability on their own applications?
The way I would do it for a single application is enable a special case for it in the underlying OS....
The way Apple implemented Home-Screen Web Apps was by placing a thin wrapper around a UIWebView.
Hence, Home-Screen Web Apps are not like Mobile Safari at all in actual implementation.
They are, instead, exactly like an iOS application developed by a third party developer who put a thin wrapper around a UIWebView.
Hence, they do not get the same special privileges as Safari Mobile.
That is a fact of their implementation.
"Web apps that are saved to the home screen do not run within Mobile Safari. They’re effectively saved as discrete apps — thin wrappers around the UIWebView control."
"Web apps that are saved to the home screen do not run within Mobile Safari. They’re effectively saved as discrete apps — thin wrappers around the UIWebView control."
Apple clearly believes that there are important security risks associated with their Nitro Javascript Engine.
I have no trouble at all believing that they have been able to mitigate those concerns for Safari Mobile by using a solution that is not appropriate when applied to any arbitary App that may choose to include a UIWebView.
"My only comment is on home-screen web apps, which are 100% equivalent to opening the page on your browser."
From Gruber:
"Web apps that are saved to the home screen do not run within Mobile Safari. They’re effectively saved as discrete apps — thin wrappers around the UIWebView control."
"I'm just telling it like it is when people make nonsensical arguments."
Your failure to read and understand his arguments have made them sound nonsensical to you. This is not his fault.