You are immune to logic sadly, but I’ll answer two things, which can be extrapolated to all you’ve said.

Sometimes yes. Usually no, for most people. If you make a word document in an older version of office, it’ll still work fine. If you use LibreOffice with the oldest-looking UI, it’ll still work. 99% of people don’t use the extremely niche features that have been added in recent years.

No, it all won’t work fine at your work where you send documents and spreadsheets and stuff with complex functionality to your colleagues and clients. And they send their documents to you. And versions edited in your old version or LO break.

That aside, WordPerfect 8 doesn’t support MSW document formats, IIRC, and MSW doesn’t support WP8 document formats.

Exactly. And that research has lead to where we are now.

This is factually incorrect and I have already said it’s incorrect. That research has mostly been exhausted, and the conclusions one can make from it are more or less the same as in 40s, 60s and 80s. And 90s’ interfaces were more usable because by habit people tried to follow industrial ergonomics, even though computer displays allow one to cheaply shoot their user in the foot, in the way some device’s panel with switches, buttons and knobs doesn’t.

They almost never were. Seriously. Go back and try some 90s software. Most of it was a cluttered mess, ugly, really weirdly laid out, and had zero considering for anybody with disabilities.

Some of it. But IBM and Apple had human interface guidelines based on actual research about ergonomics, which hasn’t become obsolete despite what you say, because humans did not change as a race in 30 years. UI\UX following those is still good.

Judging by the first quote, you simply haven’t done work requiring heavy usage of productivity software yet.

Also you are arguing like a schoolboy. Exactly in the way schoolboys consider to not look like it. I could give advice, but that usually only results in resistance.

It’s as confusing as those adware and spyware ridden one-purpose tools from no-name Chinese developers.

That’s very funny, of course. But if adaptive design and all that crap are so hot today, could they please limit that to touchscreen-first devices? No sane person would actually write a work document or code on a touchscreen if there’s a keyboard.

Yet do they use ancient copies of the software that broadly still performs the tasks people need of them? No.

This just means that functionality and interoperability criteria are more important than usability. They are - you can’t just exchange docs with a person using a modern office suite, while you are using WordPerfect 8 for Linux.

This is the opposite of confirming your argument about UI\UX, because this means that UI\UX are order of magnitude less important in making the decision.

And it’s obvious, I swear, some people haven’t been taught that arguments are not intended to support their group or hierarchy, you can’t do that with cheating in arguments anyway. They are intended to find out truth, make both participants richer than before.

Do they theme their system to look like the oh-so-superior Win98? No.

That’s simply because they “theme their system” to look as they wish and they don’t have to stop with Win98 or Win2K.

But in a “one size to fit all” situation those are still obviously superior.

Ergonomics is not a matter of opinions, there’s plenty of research since the fscking world war two. Different controls should have different colors, shapes and textures. It’s a scientifically proven statement. Proven with human error stats and time to do a task stats.

Padding controls and indicators with space can be a good thing, but no modern designer is doing it right as far as I’m concerned. Because it’s not about making panels half the screen, it’s about different groups of controls being clearly separated by that space and padded for focus, and space being used proportionally to importance.

They’ve all heard something of it, but haven’t learned the actual thing.

Older UIs were usually (often, but not always) made with respect to ergonomics.

thank god modern UIs aren’t inconsistent, cramped and cluttered like this

Our ideas of all three things seem to be diametrically opposite. For me older UIs seem ordered, compact and correctly accented. In general, it’s not always true - say, I like the appearance of old KDE (2-3), but not sure if I’d use it daily, for example (neither I would modern KDE).

Makes me think of people who want to cut down all trees along streets and replace all grass with concrete. So that all would be empty and similar and “in order”.

By the way! I can see how this (color blocking) may resonate with one’s ADHD and the stereotype that many designers have it.

But if any such a designer is reading this, I want them to understand that using their … creations with ADHD is harder, not easier, than using normal, traditional UIs.

For the designer this may be a distracting and irritating contrast, because they have no use for information conveyed by it. For the user it’s the opposite, they are distracted and irritated because of not being able to quickly find what they need.

Drones randomly dropping anthrax are simpler.

They are openly showing that they can do whatever they want.

All the rest is gaslighting so that you’d not be completely sure that that’s what they are saying, thus not so confident in yourself. Another kind of attacking other’s morale.

They don’t have to, the supply chain is friendlier to them than to Lebanese.

And they whined about a fucking bus exploding.

About some pipe rockets killing a random bloke or two.

And this

against a Lebanese political organization

appears to be wrong since their attack wasn’t at all this targeted. It’s a mass terror campaign against whole Lebanese population in order to saturate its attention and reduce morale before an invasion.

We all got complacent relying on big nations with big militaries for punishing such behavior, and they are all in bed with the criminal.

Despite this not being Hezbollah’s best moment, I think they and similar guerrillas are the exact kind of people we should learn from for solutions to Israel and the rest of the problem.

That’s true. Ancaps love to talk how almost anything government-done can be done by private entities in the right conditions and social consensus. Turns out this is true for censorship too.

I’m completely ideology-agnostic at this point. Whatever works, works. Nothing around seems to work though.

In any case, while this is true, power goes the shortest way and power corrupts. USA is the hegemon of our world and the center of our civilization, which is now united by American English language and American technologies, and what’s the worst, American corporations. Much more power goes its way to corrupt it.

You know how bad people like to grease in shit the right tools for fixing the problem, preventively? That Putinist thing about “multi-polar” world means that they want to be a little hegemon too, and to have free reign in gray zones. But there is a similar sane point.

But really decentralization of tech research and production and standards is something we all need else we vanish. Right now we have one big Internet with one set of protocols, a handful of very complex software stacks everybody uses, and this situation should already be called a centralized one. Due to network effects and other, mostly with fake argument, kinds of pressure it doesn’t make sense for most people to use parallel systems.

A de-facto conglomerate of companies, social groups, interests and ideas can be a monopolist too.

Unless you make a p2p system and search comments by page hash in some way (maybe just over I2P?) making it hard for other nodes to understand from which node it comes and which node downloads those comments.

OK, I agree. Not very good. But in theory it can be better.

All such news make me want to live to the time when our world is interesting again. Real AI research, something new instead of the Web we have, something new instead of the governments we have. It’s just that I’m scared of what’s between now and then. Parasites die hard.

A whole world of fascists.

Not necessarily and only those you comment.

That’s the point, to comment any webpage. It’s clear you visited it if you comment it.

Globalization ruined it.

Not like in politics (though similar), but in the sense that instead of a space of generally sane people where you don’t have to follow any conventions of fashion or social expectations of idiots, like a park where people sit in grass and eat sandwiches, it has turned into something like a mall built in place of that park, with guards, ads, bullshit and shopping apes.

There definitely was trash. You just didn’t have to see it. You’d not go to a central recommendations system, like in social nets or search engines. You’d go to web directories and your friends. Like for many things you still do.

Now there’s the fake social pressure of being on corporate platforms. Why fake? Because you still really need and talk to the same amount people you would back then, even fewer.

That fake social pressure was their killer invention. Human psychology is unprepared for critically evaluating the emotions from being able to scroll through half the world of other people right now. They don’t generally use that seemingly easy ability to reach anyone anywhere, while when it was a bit harder, they would, but the fake feeling of having it is very strong.

It’s a mouse trap.

Why was it a bad idea? Seems like a wonderful idea. Minus Gab.

Some kind of web of trust and inheriting ignored users based on it and weights - and it will work.

Nukes are an option, yes.

But as the recent event with exploding pagers has reminded us, global logistics and also systems’ complexity allow for many funny things.

but for the vast majority of people such limited devices will never be adopted and any business producing them will either be niche expensive or fail.

I don’t think that’s true.

Cause the fish is starting, slowly, to suspect that it’s in a net.

All this is creeping surveillance, and the end goal is not commercial, it’s political.

One commandment parents of many people of my age (28) have failed to imprint is - you shall say “nay” and you shall tell jerks to eat shit and die.

There are many distractions, somehow the computer program processing your unencrypted communications being called “AI” becomes important, somehow the difference between that program and the people controlling it becomes important, somehow them being able to censor you becomes important, and somehow requirements to confirm identity become normal.

I felt hot all-encompassing shame many times in my childhood for not remembering things which were unimportant, but people around would remember those. Only now I understand that something in my childhood was a gift.

Seeing what is happening by most general and vague descriptions might help to judge things more soberly.