I'm considering actually using the Tangle controls for the interactivity. They do a really good job of being accessible and unobtrusive. Right now the controls are just vanilla jQuery UI. I started with native `<input type="range">` for simplicity, but switched to jQuery for quick compatibility.
Also, how does the notation feel? The goal is a balance between functional/useful and simplicity. Ideally, the plaintext version is just as understandable.
Given that the technology in that film was designed by actual interface researchers, based on their research, it's no surprise that it continues to resonate so well. Also, sci-fi does have a tendency to inspire, or at least be inspired by, the leading edge of technology.
Said researchers now have a company, Oblong industries, that's basically making the Minority Report interface a reality: http://oblong.com/
The idea that small font sizes are acceptable because “users can zoom” is fucking ridiculous, and I am extremely disappointed to see it suggested here. That is absolutely the wrong attitude. If a user has to go out of their way to use your interface, you're doing it wrong. No question. Interfaces should bend over backward for their users, not the other way around. Yes, you can't satisfy every edge case, but the default attitude must not be “well, users can just use this workaround”. That thinking is why we have crappy interfaces. If that's your approach for building interfaces, please stop building interfaces, for the sake of the user.
Same. A hint that appears after a wrong attempt at the "before you move on" steps and a full explanation that appears after two would be very helpful, especially with steps 7+. Without those it feels like a puzzle instead of a tutorial.
That's a condition of selling on the Amazon platform. Doctorow also makes his most of his books available on his site, for free even, under a Creative Commons license in basically every format imaginable, eg: http://craphound.com/down/download.php
It's a running joke that Sheldon and others look down on Leonard as a scientist. The claim is often that his work is very "derivative". Even Leonard's own mother criticized the originality of his science fair experiments as a child. Also, the dynamic between Sheldon and Leonard can be seen as theoretical physicist versus experimental physicist. (Not to mention extending the layers of superiority when Howard, the non-PhD mechanical engineer, is included.)
As for Sheldon generally being a douchebag, the article does a good job of explaining his (partially deserved) sense of superiority.
A analogy even more accurate to this case would be: "Let's suppose you let someone store their stuff at your house, and they have previously pointed out a problem with the lock. You come back home and find them picking on your door lock with a lock picking tool. You ask him "what are you doing?" and he says "I'm just checking the lock I said you should fix is safe. I do it for our security."
There are "stories" to the right that are really pro-Scientology ads, but not marked as "advertisement". The whole thing feels slimy, not even considering the subject.
The criticism of drones isn't of the technology, but the attitude of those operating them. The article mentions that it doesn't put the operator's own people at risk, and is trying to point out that this creates a detachment from the consequences. Before, taking out a target required people on the ground in some capacity, actually carrying out the mission or just identifying the target. Drones undoubtably save the lives of troops on a per-engagement basis, but now that there isn't that risk, and without some process or oversight, it's becoming too easy to just pull the trigger and destroy some pixels on a screen.
I think it's actually the other way around. The stress of combat, the instinct to self-preservation, close contact with the horrors of war, and the loss of comrades likely makes troops on the ground more, not less, likely to commit atrocities or act callously towards civilians. Drone strikes are also easier to supervise and review.
I won't speak to the balance, as I have no idea what it is, never the less, I would tend to think that not being in immediate danger would allow for tracking and confirmation, whereas in conventional warfare, one might have acted a lot more on "gut feeling" (ie. that form running across the street is acting suspiciously and indeed seems threatening, it's either me or them.
Also, how does the notation feel? The goal is a balance between functional/useful and simplicity. Ideally, the plaintext version is just as understandable.