Gaffaweb >
Love & Anger >
1996-33 >
[ Date Index |
Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
From: "Stuart M. Castergine" <scasterg@dispatch.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 00:01:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Deeper Understanding
To: Love-Hounds <love-hounds@gryphon.com>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19960801032409.006a5c40@relay.starnet.net.ar>
Sender: owner-love-hounds
Hay, one of the systems I support has an execute key. Because of that I digitized Kate saying "Press Execute" for a beep sound on my Mac. WE have had a running joke for years in our department that has been reduced to the shorthand punchline "Hit Execute!" so it was very appropriate. Basically, we had this one technophobic user whom we'd goen to great lengths to accomodate so that everythign she had to do was autmoated, adn she still go scared of the computer. She'd call up and start explaining the problem to us and invariably the solution would be US: "Hit execute." HER: "But it says..." US: "I know what it says. Hit execute." HER: "But..." US: "Hit execute!" HER: "...Oh. That worked. You're so smart. Bye." BTW, the "Press Execute" clip is available on my web site (see my sig). On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Gonzalo Balerdi wrote: > > Hi all, > > C'on guys... don't try to defend the undefendable. IMHO, DU is by far her > worst song. The melody is quite good, but she spoiled it with all the beeps > beeps and the silly lyrics. It's the one Kate song I just can't listen to. > > Again, that's IMHO. Obviously. There's no such thing as an undefendable Kate song! I happen to think Between a Man and a Woman is her worst song, but plenty of people manage to defend that. Geez, now there's a song with a high cliche count. ACtually, several songs on TSW seem high on the cliche meter, which is one of the things that keep me from rating the album higher. > > > > >Hmmm, I say "loading a new program" too, is that wrong? > > :-/ > Keep in mind, as someone else pointed out. This song was written an eternity ago in computer years. The terminology was far less standardized and developed back then. People referred to software and software installation in many, many different ways. And even now, Mac users, unix users and Windows users use different terms for similar things. Because I work on so many systems, I find myself stumbling over the nearly synonymous terms "directory" (dos, unix), "folder" (MacOS, some other guis), "queue" (Atex. Yeah, I know you never heard of it), "job and page" (Scitex. Yeah, you never heard of that either). And that's just one example. I also have to deal with at least four completely different styles of keyboard more than five differnt kinds of mouse/pointing device. I'm constantly amazed at how well my fingers find their way to the proper keys even if they are on opposite sides of the keyboard from the last keyboard I was using. Long practice. > >hung again, or is still working on something. The Thinking Machine > >displayed in Jurassic Park has lots of LEDs, and it IS a real machine, > > > ** What ??? ** When the girl is trying to hack it's UNIX ( if my memory > serves me correctly, she says "oh, good, its unix" ) she just wanders > through some rendered mazes, kind of a VRML world. It's more like Doom than > an OS. Is *that* a real machine? . Same thing happens here: IMHO, they > spoiled the movie with this scene. Unfortunately, you hit upon it. Most people can't relate to computers on any level deeper than video games. but, heck, games, specifically the old Colossal Cave Adventure (if you haven't heard of it, you're too young in computer years. You haven't really played it until you've played it on an old decwriter terminal hooked into a mainframe. Say XYZZY! :-) ) are how I got drawn into computers myself, so I can't knock it. Thinking Machines don't use unix, do they? I don't know much about them, but I thought they required some custom operating system. Or is it just a custom version of unix? Anyway, I can't name a single interesting movie that features computers prominently and treats them realistically. Most people are too clueless to understand or even care. In fact, I find that almost anytime entertainment-oriented movies (as opposed to documentaries or informational films) touch upon an area I know a lot about (computer networks, fencing, roleplaying games, guns, what-have-you), they seem very clueless. It should be a good hint to all of you about how much you can trust any movie you watch for providing accurate information about a subject you do *not* know much about. Scary thing is a lot of people believe what they see in the movies/TV about computers, religion, politics, guns, the environment, etc. I'd rather trust Kate and go press execute. :-) mailto:scasterg@dispatch.com == Stuart M. Castergine | --- All young gentle dreams drowning | "Mmm, yes." |/ In life's grief | |\ Can you hang on to me? --Kate Bush, _Big Stripey Lie_| PGP Public key finger Ptcd@dialup.oar.net or http://systems1.dispatch.com/pgp.html