Does too. Blank page, “loading,” then has the white slide upwards to show the page. Sliding animation is pain/animation.
That is a very helpful clarification. I would never have thought of that as animation.
2 Likes
Action begins at 1:30. Wait for it…
11 Likes
Me with a margarita glass…
8 Likes
Counting coup 2019-style
7 Likes
4 Likes
10 Likes
(Flashing warning - many sudden video cuts.)
I’m listening right now, they’re in orbit around the moon, trying to configure the LEM for descent in 46 minutes. It’s not going perfectly smoothly. It took them three tries to take a star track, some of the switches won’t stay pressed, and a pressurization pump (which never ran during the simulations) is filling the cabin with a noise like wind through the trees. Kind of tense.
ETA: Well they made it. I wasn’t sure how that would work out.
8 Likes
I just had an argument (not shouty, just intense) with a colleague about something related to this.
He said older people aren’t interested in New technology and people of different ages can’t relate to each other.
I said diversity in age is vital to teams, and seniors often take an interest in tech now that they’re retired and have the time to research and explore.
Trying to think of a way to make this video relevant at work:
11 Likes
I definitely agree with diversity being vital and think different age groups can get along well and are stronger due to the complementary differences. Regarding tech, I see at least two distinct scenarios:
I think older people really are interested in new technology - tech that lets them do new things or do things in an objectively different or better way, as your link illustrates.
But for rehash tech, that just lets them do the same things but forces them to learn a new way to do it (and often isn’t objectively better in any way)… Well, people get tired of that over a lifetime. They learn several ways, pick one that works well, get proficient at it, and feel good about being good at doing the thing. Then suddenly they have to learn a whole new interface, new terminology, new bugs and workarounds, etc. just to do the same thing and achieve the same results. Especially when the only objective difference is that the new way has more hardware requirements, more software dependencies, and is more fragile and less performant, people are likely to reject it.
I’m starting to feel that way already in my early 40s. Things in tech so often go in cycles where cool new thing B replaces old thing A and does things differently to address the problems with A, but it has different problems. Then cool new thing C comes along and does things differently than B (usually a lot more like A did them) to solve B’s problems, then cool new thing D comes along to solve C’s problems and is a lot more like B and with the same types of problems it had.
Eventually people get tired of running on the trendmill just for the sake of being trendy and never getting anywhere new. They just want to get things done as efficiently as possible. Using the tech that they’re already proficient in is a better way. And having seen the cycles, they can see the problems that the new stuff will have and realise that it’s not so great and wonderful as all the hype says.
I think it’s worthwhile to consider the distinction between that scenario of rehash tech and actual new tech. Much like we might be more excited about a new movie than yet another remake or sequel of a classic movie.
That said, I still like learning the new stuff, but it gets really irritating to see the same problems that we already addressed back in the 90s and again in the mid 2000s cropping back up again in the new stuff. And so much added bloat and complexity that increases bugs but does nothing to improve things for the end user. Often objectively worse in terms of performance and sometimes security or other factors.
18 Likes
You may remain on my lawn.
15 Likes
And sometimes the new technology just doesn’t work.
I get that touchscreens work for a lot of people, but they don’t work for me with my coordination issues. New technology may not work, depending on people’s disabilities. It’s especially frustrating when older technology did work, or did work with the right accessibility tools, but it’s no longer available or no longer supported because it’s obselete because everyone’s moved to the new technology which does not work…
10 Likes
You know, I’ve never thought about this angle before. Thank you!
We’ve got a lot of tech stagnation at work, but we also have a lot of neophilia (for both tech and younger people) that annoys me. I’m not against either, but I am against new for the sake of new. I really don’t believe it’s older people or even older processes holding us back, just a general fear of change. I’m seeing that fear across the age spectrum, same as I’m seeing progressiveness across the age spectrum.
11 Likes
For older people who’ve spent a lot of time learning ways to do things, it’s kind of a pain to have to spend time that they may not have left to learn to do something a new way when it was perfectly acceptable the old way (and perhaps better).
On the other hand, people in STEM fields have to keep up to be effective. I’ve heard your knowledge has a half life of five years or something to that effect.
8 Likes
LOL, a lot of our stuff is not really “perfectly acceptable” – it’s more of a “better the devil you know” scenario. That, and there are new ways which are going to entrench collaboration – and and there are a lot of people who have really invested in the silos they’ve made.
But again, I don’t see that as an age thing, simply because I’ve seen young people manage to build fiefdoms, and very quickly too.
It’s not age, but culture and power.
4 Likes
I hate touchscreens, and I have no disabilities.
they just suck.
IMO.
11 Likes
That’s another good point - in my experience, accessibility is never prioritized at the beginning, it’s always late in the game. First get it done, then get it right, then make it perform well, then sales will eventually run into a customer who mentions accessibility and only then does it get prioritized. It really should be the default from the beginning, but on an accelerated agile development schedule, there’s just no time to develop and test things that aren’t top priority. So the older stuff will almost always be better in that regard, if it’s been around long enough for people to actually spend time on that aspect.
It’s sad because it’s not that difficult but it almost always gets skipped in new stuff in order to hit a deadline.
That’s my current nemesis. I have to learn a lot of new stuff and quickly. But this stuff is so much like the stuff that we learned 30 years ago and then after actually putting it into practice and seeing its flaws, we ridiculed and hated. Which led to the next generation, with different flaws. But now it’s a new generation and we’re right back there again making the same mistakes. (Hence my ranting about the cycles.)
As a developer, my job is to make new things and change things constantly. At my old job, IT’s job was to keep everything running smoothly, which meant that they didn’t like new or changed things, only things they already knew how to deal with; bugs they already knew about and how to mitigate, etc. Despite being rivals with opposite goals, which sometimes/usually hindered each other, we ended up becoming good friends and getting stuff done. There’s actually a lot of common ground there despite the natural conflict. I don’t know how to explain how to work around it. But with the right people it can be done.
I learned a lot from that job, mostly from those interactions with IT. 
Maybe someday I’ll figure out how to put it into words.
7 Likes
4 Likes
I had no idea that the one-drop rule was still being adhered to:
11 Likes