* Posts by Andrew Metzger

3 posts • joined 30 Jan 2009

Can Republicans steal Obama's Web 2.0 mojo?

Andrew Metzger

Re: Genuine curiosity

It's pretty simple, really; politics in America tend to be brutally polarized. There are only two parties, really, so instead of dozens of parties blustering for minor control, there are two parties who stand toe to toe and yell at each other.

Since the two parties are almost always on opposite sides of any issue, voting preference comes down to voting for or against something. If you vote for "cut taxes and limit government spending," then anyone who votes opposite is, obviously, a wasteful big-government socialist, intent on destroying small businesses and the American Dream. If you vote "free healthcare for everyone," anyone who votes opposite you is, again obviously, an inhuman monster who would rather watch grandma die than pay a few measly dollars more in taxes.

If you take that one step further, and give these polarized issues to people who don't understand them (read: the vast majority, on both sides), you end up with a huge crowd of people that believe the other side steals from the poor, eats babies, and drives the wrong way on a one way street. There is no room for logical argument, since few on either side understand their own stance, never mind the opposite stance. The few that do understand are fed up with arguing with idiots and would rather just unfriend you for believing differently than themselves anyway.


Facebook chief explains bear photo bareness

Andrew Metzger

I'm with you.

Years ago, I decided I'd never use any social site, up to and including blogs. Instead, I wrote my own site, which has exactly the privacy controls I like. I don't worry about pictures suddenly being visible to the world, because I just don't share them on the open 'net. It's that easy... let someone else manage your stuff, and you have to deal with their rules. Easy as that.


Conficker Autoplay ruse gets teeth into Windows 7

Andrew Metzger

Simple security measure

I understand the "logic" behind Microsoft not wanting to disable autorun, but there's still a very simple security feature that could be added - don't show the program icon and name. Instead of tiny words that say "Install or run program" and a big, clickable icon of the program, the box should make big, clickable text that reads "Install or run program," and maybe a tiny icon with text underneath it.

If you take control away from the programs that want to run, it takes away their ability to influence the user and other programs. Why should a program be allowed to put its icon in an OS-owned dialog box?



Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017