Jinn of Quality and Risk

Cristian Vidmar: There is an interesting implementation of pie menus on Mozilla that can substitute the context menu... 

Cristian Vidmar: how about piemenu-based browsing? 

Don Hopkins: Pie menus are a naturally efficient user interface technique: directional selection of pie slice shaped targets. The cursor starts out in the center of the pie, so all targets are large, nearby, and in different directions. Fitts' Law explains the advantages of pie menus, relating fast selection speed and low error rate to large target size and small distance. 

In a free society, there is no possible justification for privileges granted to corporations over individuals. This is a modern battle that ranges across many issues, from copyright control to investment methods. We need major revisions of the legal status of corporate activity, such as holding executives (and employees) fully liable for their actions (even if shareholders have limited responsibility) as well as ensuring that accountants, lawyers, analysts, and consultants in general do not commit fraud or other crimes while hiding behind nebulous contracts or professional codes. The concept of the corporation is crucial to the development of free markets and modern capitalism, but we should always remember that only individuals have rights and deserve protection. Corporations are useful social structures, within limits. Let's make sure we have the proper limits, and enforce them. Brad DeLong: The SEC has freaked out the assembled corporate lawyers of America by pointing out that there is a difference between maintaining attorney-client privilege so you can provide your client with a fair defense on the one hand, and becoming an accessory in large-scale on-going corporate fraud on the other. 

In their own words, the Danish Inquisition has not found-or felt able to procure-sufficient grounds to deem that [Lomborg] has misled his readers deliberately or with gross negligence. In other words, they really dislike the skeptical environmentalist, but they have absolutely no evidence of falsehood or error; however, they'll only admit it with a grudge. Imagine if a court were to declare: we have not found, or felt able to procure, any evidence that X has committed a crime, whether on purpose or by negligence. How would you express it, normally? the defendant is innocent, i.e. NOT GUILTY. Instead, the Inquisitors chose this mendacious approach: we really did our best, but we couldn't prove he's guilty; so we're obfuscating over 17 pages, and hoping that newspaper reports will complete the smear job for us. We're sorry we can't find him guilty by means of facts and logic, we just feel his style is wrong, and we really dislike the facts he has uncovered by the way.