Human OS -- preview general public's reaction

[Nancy Folsom]

Talking to a friend today on an unrelated issue, he said this:

"Geez...ok, I think I see what you are talking about. Different
download for different browswers...they hardly make that clear in the
web page. [comany name deleted] sux. They all think they are ultra cool
over there...talk about people who were insufferable since the 3rd
grade. I lived next to one of their programmers, and was not impressed
with the sales people I've dealt with either..."

And this:

"IE and Netscape...about the same difference between Gore and Bush.."

And, we think the general population will thank us for intruding in
their brains, when the general popluation thinks that we pretty much
spend our time trying to figure out how to make their lives _more_
miserable?

We (the software development profession) are in serious need of a
reality check, IMO.

Maybe the McCarthy's could work on selling a nice warm slice of humble
pie.

[Nancy Folsom]

In article <MPG.146dfc508f58ab3798968c@news.devx.com>,
nancy_folsom@hotmail.com says...
> Talking to a friend today on an unrelated issue, he said this:

Okay. I asked my friend to read the article in question. And I really
really didn't tell him anything about my opinion. Just asked him to give
it a read. I have his permission to quote his initial reply:

*----Begin Quote

The ultimate hubris of computer programmers....they want to control your
mind and your interactions. This article is half written in double-
speak..."or the good of collaboration"(like to whose ends?). Reminds me
of the "Double Click" site which traces your every Web move and matches
it to your identity...for the good of the users.

Of course, I'm not entirely sure I read the article correctly. But if
they want to design software to control the mind, then all of us artists
are out of work (or out of an illusion, since we rarely make money). I
mean, already the programmers exert a big impact on our thought
processes, and they don't seem to do a very good job about making
things straight forward.

"For the good of collaboration" --- means that someone else gets to
write the rules. Without rules, there is no 'collaboration." I thought
the best thing about being an artist is that you get to write your own
rules.

Which reminds me why I'm never lost. People always look to me and say
"we're lost!" And I say "How can we be lost, when we're not going
anywhere?"

*----End Quote

Unless we put shot guns to heads or commit these folks to education
camps, we've got a rather difficult marketing challenge ahead to
convince them we know better than they do.

[Nancy Folsom]

In article <MPG.146e018fabbc0ca098968d@news.devx.com>,
nancy_folsom@hotmail.com says...
> In article <MPG.146dfc508f58ab3798968c@news.devx.com>,
> nancy_folsom@hotmail.com says...
> > Talking to a friend today on an unrelated issue, he said this:
>
> Okay. I asked my friend to read the article in question. And I really
> really didn't tell him anything about my opinion. Just asked him to give
> it a read. I have his permission to quote his initial reply:
>
And this last shot from him...

> *----Begin Quote

Geez...like any of the computer programmers would ever and agree and
cooperate themselves...

> *----End Quote

ROFLMAO!