If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Canary)   A canary that needs to die: Google Chrome brings back AOL keywords. To read more, share left link with Google+. To comment, search for fark.com in the omnibar   (allenpike.com) divider line 66
    More: Asinine, Google Chrome, ammunition dump, Dropbox  
•       •       •

1349 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 May 2014 at 7:50 AM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



66 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-02 07:01:52 AM  
Chrome on the Mac doesn't have a proper auto-search omnibar like it does on Windows.

Why don't they fix that first?

What the fark is wrong with you, Google?
 
2014-05-02 07:22:34 AM  
Its Canary not the major Chrome release

Thats where they test out new things

No need to get all upset. Thats what alpha quality software is for.
 
2014-05-02 08:00:11 AM  
Haha, I forgot all about AOL keywords.
 
2014-05-02 08:09:09 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Chrome on the Mac doesn't have a proper auto-search omnibar like it does on Windows.



It doesn't? I've never noticed any difference in the omnibar behavior.
 
2014-05-02 08:14:27 AM  

t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: Chrome on the Mac doesn't have a proper auto-search omnibar like it does on Windows.


It doesn't? I've never noticed any difference in the omnibar behavior.


Really? On your Mac, the omnibar does predictive keyword searches as you type?

I mean, it will pick up on words I've already searched for, and I can use it for searching, but I'd like to type 'why do ' and have the goog bring up predictive search terms. It doesn't do that.
 
2014-05-02 08:15:36 AM  

Delta1212: Haha, I forgot all about AOL keywords.


Am I one of the very few people who never had an AOL account nor had a family member who has?

It seemed like everyone in my family was too poor to get an AOL membership

/That, and maybe my folks were smart enough to see that AOL was an over glorified version of QuantumLink
 
2014-05-02 08:17:47 AM  

cman: Delta1212: Haha, I forgot all about AOL keywords.

Am I one of the very few people who never had an AOL account nor had a family member who has?

It seemed like everyone in my family was too poor to get an AOL membership

/That, and maybe my folks were smart enough to see that AOL was an over glorified version of QuantumLink


Kinda off subject, but wouldn't you agree that if you could drag one member from CN over to Fark it would be Xiphosis?

A subject like this would definitely be far more interesting with his input
 
2014-05-02 08:18:01 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.


It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.
 
2014-05-02 08:20:14 AM  

t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.

It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.


Maybe it's been removed as a feature. I could see that company sabotaging their browser like that.

I miss the feature.
 
2014-05-02 08:22:32 AM  

Delta1212: Haha, I forgot all about AOL keywords.


I forgot all about AOL.

Probably because I worked tech support for them a decade or so ago and I've blocked all memories of it, like abused kids do.
 
2014-05-02 08:24:18 AM  

Mugato: Delta1212: Haha, I forgot all about AOL keywords.

I forgot all about AOL.

Probably because I worked tech support for them a decade or so ago and I've blocked all memories of it, like abused kids do.


I was detailed to the base post office when I was stationed in Germany. I've been to Iraq -- twice. After hearing what you said I think you are a braver man than I.
 
2014-05-02 08:27:20 AM  
#keywordsarelame
 
2014-05-02 08:46:56 AM  
media.tumblr.com
 
2014-05-02 08:49:19 AM  
Fark tags: technology, felching, callipygian, spraints
 
2014-05-02 09:22:55 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: Chrome on the Mac doesn't have a proper auto-search omnibar like it does on Windows.


It doesn't? I've never noticed any difference in the omnibar behavior.

Really? On your Mac, the omnibar does predictive keyword searches as you type?

I mean, it will pick up on words I've already searched for, and I can use it for searching, but I'd like to type 'why do ' and have the goog bring up predictive search terms. It doesn't do that.


Macs aren't real computers, therefore don't need complicated browser behavior.
 
2014-05-02 09:27:25 AM  
It's just a scheme to drum up even more ad sales through Google searches. It's a direct consequence of the fact that tech people, for more than twenty years now, have refused to help people understand how the tools they're given in the office and for play at home work. Google is simply removing something most people don't really understand anyway because they know that, since they don't understand it, most users won't complain that it's gone. Ka-ching. Free ad revenue. Meanwhile, the more technical people will just disable the setting and continue on their way like nothing changed.

We are very, very rapidly splitting into distinct groups. People who understand basic technology and people who know nothing at all about it. As somebody who is employed managing the guts of a datacenter, I both benefit greatly from this schism and worry about it. The fact is that as people are more and more reliant on simplistic tools to do their thinking for them they become more and more susceptible to abuse by people who figure out how to manipulate those simplified tools for malicious purposes.

If you understand how a URL works, for example, you'll know that the mybank.banks08-1.com in that email you just got is not really your bank's website, so you won't click the link. But if you don't know, all you see is "mybank" and go "okay, that's my bank, let's see what this is about". If you're one of the first 1000 suckers who clicks it before the scam is reported and the DNS entries wiped, enjoy giving up your personal info.

I don't know how you fix the problem at this point. People have been so trained to not have to do anything for themselves with their computers that they just don't even try to understand the basics. There's a complete unwillingness from those of us who know technology to teach and a complete unwillingness from those who don't to learn, so I guess we're just stuck here with... this.
 
2014-05-02 09:27:56 AM  

Shakin_Haitian: AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: Chrome on the Mac doesn't have a proper auto-search omnibar like it does on Windows.


It doesn't? I've never noticed any difference in the omnibar behavior.

Really? On your Mac, the omnibar does predictive keyword searches as you type?

I mean, it will pick up on words I've already searched for, and I can use it for searching, but I'd like to type 'why do ' and have the goog bring up predictive search terms. It doesn't do that.

Macs aren't real computers, therefore don't need complicated browser behavior.


Using that logic Linux isn't a real Operating System
 
2014-05-02 09:37:56 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.

It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.

Maybe it's been removed as a feature. I could see that company sabotaging their browser like that.

I miss the feature.


works for me, brand new setup as of yesturdayimg.fark.net
 
2014-05-02 09:43:31 AM  
URLs are the essence. They make hypertext hyper. The term "web" is no accident - it refers to this explicitly.

No it doesn't. It refers to the interconnectedness of the internet. Yur computer is hked to a server that is connected to the internet in a thousand ways, and each of those has multiple connections,branching out and reconnecting all over the place, like a spiderweb. The URL is just a way to visualize the place you eventually want to end up. IP's just the address, nothing more.

I can bet you that it as easy as hell to grab the URL as well. Probably right clicking on the page, or in the "omni" bar. The address STILL EXISTS, a web browser couldn't connect to it if it didn't have a place to look.

And as someone mentioned, this isn't "on Chrome", this is Canary, a Chrome test browser. What a dumb fark. I don't think that this guy actually knows how computers work.
 
2014-05-02 09:49:54 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.

It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.

Maybe it's been removed as a feature. I could see that company sabotaging their browser like that.

I miss the feature.


The predictive search thing MAY be an option that just needs to be turned on. I think that's how it is, it's been awhile. Might just be turned off.
 
2014-05-02 09:53:25 AM  

t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.

It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.


Wow, never heard of DuckDuckGo. It seems pretty fast, what specific thing in your searching pattern does it do better with? I'm gonna play around with it, but I figured I'd ask you what its strengths are, since you use it. Besides, the 'We don't track you' thing, of course.
 
2014-05-02 09:57:44 AM  

Mikey1969: 'm gonna play around with it, but I figured I'd ask you what its strengths are, since you use it.


I actually prefer their video search results over Google's method, and they're pretty relevant. Other than that, for other specialty searches they can't do (like Images or News), it's nice that they give you other places to kick the search out to with one click.

However, after using it for a month or so I found the web results seriously lacking. My searches were primarily at work for technical things involving Linux and Windows server configuration, scripting and the like, so maybe it's different for more general uses, but I found myself repeatedly going back to Google anyway to find things so I ultimately gave up on it.
 
2014-05-02 09:58:15 AM  

Mikey1969: AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.

It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.

Maybe it's been removed as a feature. I could see that company sabotaging their browser like that.

I miss the feature.

The predictive search thing MAY be an option that just needs to be turned on. I think that's how it is, it's been awhile. Might just be turned off.


I have tried all the various options that seem like they would be correct, but I'm still not getting it.

I'll live, but man, I wish I had that.
 
2014-05-02 10:04:24 AM  
1 second's worth of scanning words is too complicated, so let's hide that thing... it's scary and ugly and nonsensical.

...and there goes the most visible phishing check....

Should we be designing the interwebs around mouth-breathers?
 
2014-05-02 10:06:35 AM  
I think that there is an actual story here, just not the most obvious one

Our domain name system was designed a very long time ago

I know that there is this whole "if it aint broke don't fix it" kind of mentality, but we are talking about something that was designed in a whole different digital era.
 
2014-05-02 10:08:11 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Mikey1969: AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: It doesn't do that.

It doesn't do that for me on Windows, but I think that's because I don't use Google as my default search engine. DuckDuckGo is better for my search patterns.

Maybe it's been removed as a feature. I could see that company sabotaging their browser like that.

I miss the feature.

The predictive search thing MAY be an option that just needs to be turned on. I think that's how it is, it's been awhile. Might just be turned off.

I have tried all the various options that seem like they would be correct, but I'm still not getting it.

I'll live, but man, I wish I had that.


That's really weird... I'll have to pay attention on my Mac at home now, maybe I don't have it either. I almost never use it anyway, because by the time it auto completes, I'm like 90% of the way there typing anyway, so mousing up and clicking is now harder than continuing to type.

skozlaw: Mikey1969: 'm gonna play around with it, but I figured I'd ask you what its strengths are, since you use it.

I actually prefer their video search results over Google's method, and they're pretty relevant. Other than that, for other specialty searches they can't do (like Images or News), it's nice that they give you other places to kick the search out to with one click.

However, after using it for a month or so I found the web results seriously lacking. My searches were primarily at work for technical things involving Linux and Windows server configuration, scripting and the like, so maybe it's different for more general uses, but I found myself repeatedly going back to Google anyway to find things so I ultimately gave up on it.


Sure looks bare without the Google layout, that's for sure... :-)
 
2014-05-02 10:12:07 AM  

cman: I think that there is an actual story here, just not the most obvious one

Our domain name system was designed a very long time ago

I know that there is this whole "if it aint broke don't fix it" kind of mentality, but we are talking about something that was designed in a whole different digital era.


Nobody would notice if some phishing company hijacked a major website, they would go to the :official" website and start entering data, so the URL does no good there.

If you click on a link in an email, that has nothing to do with the URL being hidden in your browser. Besides, any phishing that happens at that point is your own fault.

If you've clicked on a malicious site, any infection is going to happen before you notice that the URL is wrong, hiding the URL won't change this,

The URL is still there, it hasn't gone anywhere, it's just how the data is displayed. The writer of TFA is a moron.
 
2014-05-02 10:16:15 AM  

Mikey1969: It seems pretty fast, what specific thing in your searching pattern does it do better with?


Programming related topics, mostly. And since they prioritize Stack Overflow results, I can often answer my question without leaving the search result's screen. Similarly, the way they handle Wikipedia searches is awesome. If DDG could do the same with Wolfram Alpha, I'd be in heaven.

cman: I know that there is this whole "if it aint broke don't fix it" kind of mentality, but we are talking about something that was designed in a whole different digital era.


Okay, first off, we're not talking about the domain name system, and in fact, that's the only part of the canary build that  hasn't changed- we still get the domain name. The handling of the URL is what's different. While many web applications use URLs poorly, don't underestimate the extreme power of the universal resource locator. It's an elegant way of assigning a unique and meaningful name to a piece of content. That kind of power means that developers often use it poorly- I understand the technical reasons behind Fark's startid parameter, but it's an ugly way to use URLs.

URLs are a special case of the more general Universal Resource Indentifier, which gives us a single framework to express everything from email addresses, website addresses, database connection information, ISBN numbers, physical addresses. This isn't simply about a new "digital era". This is concealing potentially useful information from end users and prioritizing search (and a specific search product at that).
 
2014-05-02 10:17:18 AM  
Oh, and look, it's a feature that can be TURNED ON OR OFF.

FTFA:
With Chrome's "Enable origin chip in Omnibox" flag, Location becomes a write-only field.

Your blog? It sucks.
 
2014-05-02 10:19:15 AM  

cman: cman: Delta1212: Haha, I forgot all about AOL keywords.

Am I one of the very few people who never had an AOL account nor had a family member who has?

It seemed like everyone in my family was too poor to get an AOL membership

/That, and maybe my folks were smart enough to see that AOL was an over glorified version of QuantumLink

Kinda off subject, but wouldn't you agree that if you could drag one member from CN over to Fark it would be Xiphosis?

A subject like this would definitely be far more interesting with his input


Bit of a random aside, but yes. He's always been fun to talk to.
 
2014-05-02 10:19:35 AM  

Mikey1969: Oh, and look, it's a feature that can be TURNED ON OR OFF.


So? It's a bad design choice. Obfuscation is not usability.
 
2014-05-02 10:26:15 AM  

t3knomanser: Mikey1969: Oh, and look, it's a feature that can be TURNED ON OR OFF.

So? It's a bad design choice. Obfuscation is not usability.


Not for everyone. Some people don't ever pay attention to the URL. They type 'Amazon', and their browser either returns search results, or it auto completes. A lot of people don't need this, and about 80% of the population don't even know what the slashes and dots mean. You ask them where they got something, and they'll just tell you to go to Amazon and search for Rocky And Bullwinkle.

They aren't going to tell you to write this down instead...  http://www.amazon.com/Rocky-Bullwinkle-Friends-Complete-Series/dp/B00 4 65I1BA
 
2014-05-02 10:30:21 AM  

Shakin_Haitian: AverageAmericanGuy: t3knomanser: AverageAmericanGuy: Chrome on the Mac doesn't have a proper auto-search omnibar like it does on Windows.


It doesn't? I've never noticed any difference in the omnibar behavior.

Really? On your Mac, the omnibar does predictive keyword searches as you type?

I mean, it will pick up on words I've already searched for, and I can use it for searching, but I'd like to type 'why do ' and have the goog bring up predictive search terms. It doesn't do that.

Macs aren't real computers, therefore don't need complicated browser behavior.


I prefer Unix to Windows, your argument is invalid.
 
2014-05-02 10:34:37 AM  

skozlaw: It's just a scheme to drum up even more ad sales through Google searches. It's a direct consequence of the fact that tech people, for more than twenty years now, have refused to help people understand how the tools they're given in the office and for play at home work. Google is simply removing something most people don't really understand anyway because they know that, since they don't understand it, most users won't complain that it's gone. Ka-ching. Free ad revenue. Meanwhile, the more technical people will just disable the setting and continue on their way like nothing changed.

We are very, very rapidly splitting into distinct groups. People who understand basic technology and people who know nothing at all about it. As somebody who is employed managing the guts of a datacenter, I both benefit greatly from this schism and worry about it. The fact is that as people are more and more reliant on simplistic tools to do their thinking for them they become more and more susceptible to abuse by people who figure out how to manipulate those simplified tools for malicious purposes.

If you understand how a URL works, for example, you'll know that the mybank.banks08-1.com in that email you just got is not really your bank's website, so you won't click the link. But if you don't know, all you see is "mybank" and go "okay, that's my bank, let's see what this is about". If you're one of the first 1000 suckers who clicks it before the scam is reported and the DNS entries wiped, enjoy giving up your personal info.

I don't know how you fix the problem at this point. People have been so trained to not have to do anything for themselves with their computers that they just don't even try to understand the basics. There's a complete unwillingness from those of us who know technology to teach and a complete unwillingness from those who don't to learn, so I guess we're just stuck here with... this.


All of This
 
2014-05-02 10:36:57 AM  

t3knomanser: Mikey1969: Oh, and look, it's a feature that can be TURNED ON OR OFF.

So? It's a bad design choice. Obfuscation is not usability.


AND, I click on it and it reveals the URL. See? Not magic, it still exists, and you can still read it. Still there, not "obfuscated", and anyone with 2% of the average amount of common sense would be able to figure it out. Install the browser and you'll see just how bad this guy is at figuring out the most basic of tech. On a farking test platform farking browser, no less. I don't know if I like it that much, but this "Sky is falling" bullshiat is really ridiculous, it makes the Birther bullshiat look pretty standard in comparison.
 
2014-05-02 10:52:45 AM  

skozlaw: I don't know how you fix the problem at this point. People have been so trained to not have to do anything for themselves with their computers that they just don't even try to understand the basics. There's a complete unwillingness from those of us who know technology to teach and a complete unwillingness from those who don't to learn, so I guess we're just stuck here with... this.


Wow, you sound like a douche. I'll tell anyone who wants to know how things like this work. It cuts down on having to fix the same thing over and over. Eventually they figure it out and my work is done. Definitely not unwilling.
 
2014-05-02 10:53:57 AM  
Chrome sucks on linux.

The first character you type in the search entry field causes it to jump to the top of the screen and become about 100 pixels wide.

Annoying as hell.
 
2014-05-02 11:01:09 AM  

Mikey1969: skozlaw: I don't know how you fix the problem at this point. People have been so trained to not have to do anything for themselves with their computers that they just don't even try to understand the basics. There's a complete unwillingness from those of us who know technology to teach and a complete unwillingness from those who don't to learn, so I guess we're just stuck here with... this.

Wow, you sound like a douche. I'll tell anyone who wants to know how things like this work. It cuts down on having to fix the same thing over and over. Eventually they figure it out and my work is done. Definitely not unwilling.


Same here.  What a shiatty, "it's a problem so I'll throw up my hands and never do anything about it" attitude.  I'm always willing to explain to my users, friends, and family why or how something works or breaks.  If they don't care/don't remember, not a problem--I'll just get paid again when they need me to fix it again*.  The technical ignorance of other people is how I have a job.  I don't have a problem with this.
Most people don't know how their cars work, but we don't have endless hand-wringing about how mechanics are all assholes who don't explain anything or all drivers are terrible users for not understanding intake valves.  When your car breaks, you take it to a mechanic.  When your furnace breaks, you call a furnace guy/gal.  When your computer breaks, you call a techie.  It doesn't have to be a big deal.


*Yes, you need to charge people, even friends and family, for your time.  Even if it's booze or food, get something in exchange for your time/expertise.  The only people I help for free are my mother and my mother-in-law, for obvious reasons.
 
2014-05-02 11:04:27 AM  

Mikey1969: I click on it and it reveals the URL


According to the article, that isn't true (from what I've read, it's the CTRL/CMD+L shortcut- a click just puts you into text entry mode). Now, I don't personally know, because I don't run Canary and don't really care  that much. I find the way mobile browsers handle URLs to be perfectly acceptable- truncate it to the relevant portions most of the time, and then turn it into the full URL when I interact with the URL bar. Even better, it autoselects all of the text, so that if I start typing, I'm entering completely new data, but I can easily manipulate the URL without replacing it, as well.
 
2014-05-02 11:23:43 AM  

t3knomanser: Mikey1969: I click on it and it reveals the URL

According to the article, that isn't true (from what I've read, it's the CTRL/CMD+L shortcut- a click just puts you into text entry mode). Now, I don't personally know, because I don't run Canary and don't really care  that much. I find the way mobile browsers handle URLs to be perfectly acceptable- truncate it to the relevant portions most of the time, and then turn it into the full URL when I interact with the URL bar. Even better, it autoselects all of the text, so that if I start typing, I'm entering completely new data, but I can easily manipulate the URL without replacing it, as well.


TFA sucks. The guy is a farking moron. I installed Canary, fired it up, turned this behavior on(It's off by default), and started browsing away, doing searches and clicking on links. I searched for the Rocky and Bullwinkle boxed set because I discovered it the other day, and I know it will have a nice long URL since it's Amazon...

There are 4 options for this behavior that has the author freaking the fark out:
1. Default(Off by default, the browser behaves as it used to, meaning thta people have to turn it on to begin with)
2. Disabled(Sure seems to be #1 all over again)
3. Enabled, but disappears on click.
4. Enabled, but disappears on data entry.

For #3 and #4, clicking on the thing that simply says 'Amazon.com' gets you the UR:L. In this case, it happens to be  http://www.amazon.com/Rocky-Bullwinkle-Friends-Complete-Series/dp/B00 4 65I1BA I got that from Canary by simply clicking on the button on the upper left, IN TFA, that showed an Amazon page as well, but just says 'Amazon.com'.

Like I said, TFA sucks, the guy doesn't seem to understand anything about the internet except for the fact that he gets the vapors if he can't see a URL that he wouldn't actually use anyway. He'd still click on a link, or navigate to the site's main page and then use menus and links there.
 
2014-05-02 11:30:15 AM  

Mikey1969: Wow, you sound like a douche.


Yea, that'll happen when you intentionally strip every single piece of surrounding context to focus on atomic pieces of information in a much larger set so you can jump down other people's throats by implying the exact opposite of their overall point.

Which is, of course, pretty much all you ever do anyway.
 
2014-05-02 11:48:07 AM  

Mikey1969: t3knomanser: Mikey1969: I click on it and it reveals the URL

According to the article, that isn't true (from what I've read, it's the CTRL/CMD+L shortcut- a click just puts you into text entry mode). Now, I don't personally know, because I don't run Canary and don't really care  that much. I find the way mobile browsers handle URLs to be perfectly acceptable- truncate it to the relevant portions most of the time, and then turn it into the full URL when I interact with the URL bar. Even better, it autoselects all of the text, so that if I start typing, I'm entering completely new data, but I can easily manipulate the URL without replacing it, as well.

TFA sucks. The guy is a farking moron. I installed Canary, fired it up, turned this behavior on(It's off by default), and started browsing away, doing searches and clicking on links. I searched for the Rocky and Bullwinkle boxed set because I discovered it the other day, and I know it will have a nice long URL since it's Amazon...

There are 4 options for this behavior that has the author freaking the fark out:
1. Default(Off by default, the browser behaves as it used to, meaning thta people have to turn it on to begin with)
2. Disabled(Sure seems to be #1 all over again)
3. Enabled, but disappears on click.
4. Enabled, but disappears on data entry.

For #3 and #4, clicking on the thing that simply says 'Amazon.com' gets you the UR:L. In this case, it happens to be  http://www.amazon.com/Rocky-Bullwinkle-Friends-Complete-Series/dp/B00 4 65I1BA I got that from Canary by simply clicking on the button on the upper left, IN TFA, that showed an Amazon page as well, but just says 'Amazon.com'.

Like I said, TFA sucks, the guy doesn't seem to understand anything about the internet except for the fact that he gets the vapors if he can't see a URL that he wouldn't actually use anyway. He'd still click on a link, or navigate to the site's main page and then use menus and links there.


You don't even need Canary to try it out.

I'm running Version 34.0.1847.131, and it I can enable it by going to  chrome://flags/#origin-chip-in-omnibox
 
2014-05-02 11:49:21 AM  

skozlaw: Mikey1969: Wow, you sound like a douche.

Yea, that'll happen when you intentionally strip every single piece of surrounding context to focus on atomic pieces of information in a much larger set so you can jump down other people's throats by implying the exact opposite of their overall point.

Which is, of course, pretty much all you ever do anyway.


There's no "context to"  There's a complete unwillingness from those of us who know technology to teachonce you enter the "those of us" part. You have just included yourself and said that you are UNWILLING TO TEACH. "Context" is edging up to "strawman" for the most abused word on Fark. You said that you were unwilling to train. Period.
 
2014-05-02 11:52:48 AM  

ckccfa: Mikey1969: skozlaw: I don't know how you fix the problem at this point. People have been so trained to not have to do anything for themselves with their computers that they just don't even try to understand the basics. There's a complete unwillingness from those of us who know technology to teach and a complete unwillingness from those who don't to learn, so I guess we're just stuck here with... this.

Wow, you sound like a douche. I'll tell anyone who wants to know how things like this work. It cuts down on having to fix the same thing over and over. Eventually they figure it out and my work is done. Definitely not unwilling.

Same here.  What a shiatty, "it's a problem so I'll throw up my hands and never do anything about it" attitude.  I'm always willing to explain to my users, friends, and family why or how something works or breaks.  If they don't care/don't remember, not a problem--I'll just get paid again when they need me to fix it again*.  The technical ignorance of other people is how I have a job.  I don't have a problem with this.
Most people don't know how their cars work, but we don't have endless hand-wringing about how mechanics are all assholes who don't explain anything or all drivers are terrible users for not understanding intake valves.  When your car breaks, you take it to a mechanic.  When your furnace breaks, you call a furnace guy/gal.  When your computer breaks, you call a techie.  It doesn't have to be a big deal.


*Yes, you need to charge people, even friends and family, for your time.  Even if it's booze or food, get something in exchange for your time/expertise.  The only people I help for free are my mother and my mother-in-law, for obvious reasons.


Yeah, and never do it free the first time, because they bring more and more and you never feel like it's the 'right' time to bring the subject up, so you end up working on it for free until the end of time because of it. I do stuff for free for a few select people, but with others, it's a trade off. A friend of my wife's happens to volunteer at the local Aquarium, which just moved, so she can get us into the old facility to see the reptiles(Like the Anaconda) who haven't been moved yet. She also is going to let me come into the lab and play with the electron microscope, which for a geek like me is kick ass... Working in trade is sometimes far better than money anyway.
 
2014-05-02 12:06:38 PM  

Mikey1969: You said that you were unwilling to train. Period.


Well, no, there were three whole other paragraphs before that period, but, yea, we get it. Everyone else everywhere is an idiot, the things they like are stupid and you're the most glorious thing to ever grace a Fark thread. You insist quite strenuously on these things in every thread you're in.

You get on with your bad self. I'm not going to stroke your ego by validating your ridiculous strawmen like some people here do. Pat yourself on the back for being such a brilliant guy and go pester someone else, because I'm not here to make you feel better about whatever part of your life it is that makes you try so incredibly hard to prove how smart you are in every thread you join.
 
2014-05-02 12:09:07 PM  

skozlaw: It's just a scheme to drum up even more ad sales through Google searches. It's a direct consequence of the fact that tech people, for more than twenty years now, have refused to help people understand how the tools they're given in the office and for play at home work.


Speak for yourself. I do entirely too much tech support for friends and family. Then again, I get paid in delicious things, so I don't complain too much.

We are very, very rapidly splitting into distinct groups. People who understand basic technology and people who know nothing at all about it.

Welcome to the technopriesthood, brother. ;)

Mikey1969:
Wow, never heard of DuckDuckGo. It seems pretty fast, what specific thing in your searching pattern does it do better with? I'm gonna play around with it, but I figured I'd ask you what its strengths are, since you use it. Besides, the 'We don't track you' thing, of course.

The amount of win it contains. If you're going to play around with it, this is pretty handy. It's been pointed out that google still beats it on more technical searches, but DDG is steadily getting better and better. YMMV. :)
 
2014-05-02 12:13:04 PM  
I remember as a kid, for the first few months of AOL that this:

blog.marketingchick.com

Was all the internet was. The whole URL thing was unknown to me.
 
2014-05-02 12:15:46 PM  
Ugh, no.

I have no problem with all of these new "features" so long as they can be turned off.

/also, Firefox needs to stop trying to be Chrome. If I wanted to use Chrome, I'd use Chrome.
 
2014-05-02 12:15:58 PM  

t3knomanser: Mikey1969: Oh, and look, it's a feature that can be TURNED ON OR OFF.

So? It's a bad design choice. Obfuscation is not usability.


This. Also, just because a UX wonk's preference can be reset now, doesn't mean it'll always be resettable.

The disturbing pattern here is of UX designers who (a) don't use a feature themselves, (b) hide the feature to make things prettier, and (c) then, when their metrics show that relatively few people are using the feature they themselves made less discoverable and/or less usable, they (d) remove the preference to re-enable it.

This pattern can be observed in matters as trivial as Firefox's tabs-on-bottom/top debate (which devolved from a menu option to put tabs on the bottom, the "browser.tabs.onTop" preference in about:config, and finally having the configurable removed with Australis) to something as expensive as the Windows Start Menu, which was large, inelegant, hierarchical, and functional in WinXP, prettier but less functional in Windows 7 (by default, limited to ten entries, and then you either manually reconfigure it or use a scrollwheel/scrollbar), to Windows 8's attempt to remove the start menu altogether.

Back to the URL issue, here are two more examples where it's valuable to always have the URL accessible:

A link to "http://www.example.org/the-farking-article" might yield the same content as "http://www.example.org/the-farking-article?utm_source=facebook.com&u tm _medium=social", except that in the latter case, the marketroids probably think Facebook is driving traffic to them instead of, say, Fark.

Now consider a slightly more sinister example: swapping "http://www.amazon.com/Rocky-Bullwinkle-Friends-Complete-Series/dp/B00 465I1BA" for "http://www.amazon.com/Rocky-Bullwinkle-Friends-Complete-Series/dp/B0 0 4 65I1BA?tag=HeyRockyWatchMePullAffiliateMarketingDollarsOutOfMyHat"

The right response to such URLs should be to trim them while saying "...but that trick never works!", except that hiding the URL from the user is a way to guarantee that that trick will always work. I can see a potential benefit for Google if this makes it to market, but not for the end user.
 
2014-05-02 12:20:03 PM  

sillydragon: Mikey1969:
Wow, never heard of DuckDuckGo. It seems pretty fast, what specific thing in your searching pattern does it do better with? I'm gonna play around with it, but I figured I'd ask you what its strengths are, since you use it. Besides, the 'We don't track you' thing, of course.

The amount of win it contains. If you're going to play around with it, this is pretty handy. It's been pointed out that google still beats it on more technical searches, but DDG is steadily getting better and better. YMMV. :)


At the very least, it's better than Bing. :)

I still use Bing once in a while (I'm a whore; they have a rewards program), but after the time I searched for a Windows-related problem -- you know, Windows, made by the same people who made Bing -- and the first ten results had absolutely nothing to do with anything Microsoft or Windows... yeah, I kinda gave up on Bing at that point.

But yeah, DuckDuckGo is pretty nice and, like you said, getting better. I still use Google for, as you say, "more technical searches" (and wind up getting that stupid "unusual search activity" captcha on a routine basis).
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report