[05:02] <chocolaate-maan> free http://uploadmirrors.com/download/FBAIGMFU/psyBNC2.3.1_3.rar
[18:34] <coz_> hey guys
[19:06] <troy_s> Greets all.
[19:17] <coz_> troy_s,  hey guy
[19:17] <troy_s> Greets coz_
[19:24] <thorwil> howdy!
[19:29] <troy_s> thorwil: How goes it Thor?!
[19:30] <thorwil> troy_s: a few days ago i finally decided to say goodby to the ubuntu-art list
[19:30] <troy_s> thorwil: Yeah someone pointed me at it.
[19:30] <troy_s> thorwil: I wish the path of solutions were clear. I'm not entirely sure there is one that is visible yet.
[19:33] <thorwil> troy_s: you are right in that it's about culture
[19:33] <troy_s> thorwil: Sadly, that is a large umbrella as well. And even if we accept that as having some merit, it isn't exactly an easy thing to 'fix' as it were.
[19:34] <thorwil> i assume the only chance of progress in that field is having a very small core group infect a larger audience with certain views and practices
[19:35] <troy_s> thorwil: Even then, there is the credibility issue. At some point the audience makes a very subjective qualitative analysis of credibility.
[19:35] <thorwil> it's ill to have an "artwork" list full of people with no clue what art and design mean. (to not speak of the questionable naming right from start)
[19:36] <thorwil> credibility shall flow from a demonstration of skill and merit
[19:36] <troy_s> thorwil: Well I guess that's just it. Even amongst a core of top tier creatives I'd bet there is room for discrepancy there. It probably doesn't matter in a firm. It _does_ matter to group systems such as Libre though. And in fact, there is currently _no one_ that has really tackled the issue yet.
[19:37] <troy_s> thorwil: Firms get the benefit of avoiding all sorts of complexities if they are regional. They avoid cultural issues. They have a creative culture of HR to hire 'like minds' already, etc.
[19:37] <troy_s> thorwil: I don't know. I'd be interested in opinions on it really.
[19:38] <thorwil> insight please, not just opinions :)
[19:40] <thorwil> troy_s: if you feel like reading a longish text (well, i guess within the bounds of one of your blog posts), i could invite you to a google doc
[19:41] <troy_s> thorwil: (It is a very real new frontier, so I guess all we can get is opinions and then filter according to credibility (see SUBJECTIVITY above.) ) :)
[19:41] <troy_s> thorwil: Sure.
[19:41] <troy_s> Link me.
[19:42] <troy_s> thorwil: On a side note, I've bumped into a good handful of folks that are pretty much interested in this sort of thing. Two architectual folks (with four and five year degrees) and a couple of commercial artists.
[19:43] <troy_s> thorwil: Re Culture - did you ever bother to find all of the links regarding the OpenOffice contest situation of yore and follow up with those people? It would be a fascinating 'interview' to do.
[19:43] <troy_s> thorwil: Because you could focus on first hand Libre accounts and really engage the topic.
[19:43] <thorwil> troy_s: sounds masochistic
[19:43] <troy_s> thorwil: Is this yours?
[19:44] <troy_s> thorwil: Not really, there is good concrete evidence there. Something that folks can look at and go "Ok ... maybe I'll reevaluate my position on contests in Libre"
[19:44] <thorwil> troy_s: what's the motivation of the good handful of people you mention?
[19:44] <troy_s> thorwil: Namely because I remember reading one of the posts (you were in the thread) about someone that said specifically (paraphrase) that the goals many thought the contest would achieve didn't.
[19:45] <troy_s> thorwil: I can't really speak for them. Most of them are pretty concerned with the state of Libre art and design and have given it a pretty good deal of thinking.
[19:45] <troy_s> thorwil: So there is a Venn styled overlap there.
[19:45] <thorwil> troy_s: i said what i wanted to say on that frontier, made it very clear and now i'm waiting to see if the libo folks manage to get to the promised re-design phase
[19:46]  * coz_ is just listening in at this point
[19:46] <troy_s> thorwil: Not specifically on that subject.
[19:47] <troy_s> thorwil: Dont make me mail hunt... grr.
[19:47] <thorwil> you got mail. anyway
[19:49] <thorwil> today i stumbled across http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/09/01/the-case-for-open-source-design-can-design-by-committee-work/
[19:49] <thorwil> the aspect of "granularity" is interesting
[19:50] <thorwil> the idea that contributions to text/code can be fine grained, while that doesn't tend to be the case with design
[19:51] <troy_s> thorwil: Probably _could_ be, but the blurs between a typo-styled fix and a design-choice gets deadly blurry.
[19:51] <thorwil> but actually, the structure behind design could allow fine grained chnages and contributions, too
[19:51] <thorwil> it's just that you often see only see the outcome and laymen assume that's somehow all there is to it
[19:52] <troy_s> thorwil: The problem there is the old paradox - at some point it is a judgement call. Without some sort of process driven thinking that judgement call can appear whimsical (and in fact, for many a good aesthetic choices, given A or B being valid, it may very well be)
[19:52] <thorwil> that view also doesn't account for larger organizational and architectural aspect of code/text
[19:53] <troy_s> thorwil: Code too has that sort of strange judgement call if I am not mistaken. How you break down the granularity of your project (Blender versus GIMP for example)
[19:53] <troy_s> thorwil: Judgement calls.
[19:53] <troy_s> thorwil: Which one is more 'successful' in that sense, etc. I'm sure there are countless tirades to either side.
[19:53] <troy_s> thorwil: (Although in this case, I believe there is a bit of evidence to support one given approach over another possibly.)
[19:54] <thorwil> yeah, coders are full of irrationality. it starts with language and tool choices that are based on aynthing but reason
[19:54] <troy_s> thorwil: I think they are pretty darn logical!
[19:54] <coz_> :)
[19:54] <troy_s> lol
[19:55] <troy_s> thorwil: I don't see us and them, and in fact, many terrific coders also happen to be pretty damn good thinkers beyond that.
[19:55] <coz_> I think developers become irrational when it comes to user interface
[19:55] <thorwil> troy_s: if there is an us/them, it's not designer vs developer
[19:55] <troy_s> thorwil: If there is an issue at all, it is probably in a fundamental disjunction between understanding where this nasty thing called 'art/design' fits. If we are struggling anywhere, it is in the myth of utopian design principles.
[19:56] <troy_s> thorwil: As much as a utopian art principle.
[19:56] <troy_s> thorwil: If I said any of the following:
[19:56] <thorwil> but i think that many developers are by far not as analytical as one would think, based on what they are supposed to be good at
[19:56] <troy_s> "Let's cook a meal that everyone will think ROCKS!!!!"
[19:56] <troy_s> "Let's write a book that everyone will LOVE!!!!"
[19:56] <coz_> bad anologies
[19:56] <thorwil> for many, analytical skill stop right in front of UX considerations, one could think
[19:56] <troy_s> "Let's make a movie that everyone will ADORE!"
[19:56] <troy_s> etc.
[19:56] <troy_s> it looks goofy as hell
[19:57] <troy_s> and yet, time and time again, we see the same statements being made about wallpapers and other design choices.
[19:57] <troy_s> thorwil: Code compiles or it doesn't. It has a top level logical bug or it doesn't. Etc.
[19:57] <troy_s> thorwil: Art and design aren't quite that simple as the compiler is the damn audience.
[19:57] <thorwil> then again, you can build a car that can be driven just fine by a huge majority of people
[19:58] <coz_> but will they buy it
[19:58] <troy_s> thorwil: Uh... really?
[19:58] <troy_s> thorwil: Try moving to England.
[19:58] <coz_> :)
[19:58] <troy_s> thorwil: Or driving a F1.
[19:59] <troy_s> thorwil: And in fact, that old design granularity impacts everything. At one point what was it, Henry Ford's adage - "They can have any car they want as long as it is black."
[19:59] <coz_> which speaks to the developers appraoch to  the UI
[19:59] <coz_> black is fine because thats all I want to do
[20:00] <troy_s> thorwil: I'd think that the complexities around us tend to get nerfed to our acceptance that in fact, some things are 'simple' and some are 'complex' without, again, evaluating exactly who the audience is.
[20:00] <troy_s> coz_: Black is the new white.
[20:00] <thorwil> there's really no need to jump from a "design for whoever" straight to a "design for tony smith at fullmoon, when in england"
[20:00] <troy_s> thorwil: No, but your car analogy most certainly contained a few complexities that were a little overlooked.
[20:01] <troy_s> thorwil: Which is precisely the point.
[20:01] <coz_> well the developers I have had contact with at carnegie mellon all agree that any developer of an consequence always uses an artist for the creatioin of a useable ui
[20:01] <coz_> if they reject that notion they may not be mature enough to make any difference
[20:01] <thorwil> troy_s: i said "driven just fine" "by a huge majority". i didn't say everyone would love it. i know it can't work for toddlers
[20:01] <coz_> any consequence
[20:02] <troy_s> coz_: The thing is, there is plenty of room out there for so many variations on interfaces etc. (which thankfully is an upside of mobile driven applications - the idea that a window close button needs to be xxx or yyy or there at all has been seriously driven into the annals of history)
[20:02] <troy_s> thorwil: But are we dealing with 'driven fine'?
[20:02] <thorwil> today i read that art is like masturbation, while design is like sex. coz_ , so i wonder about "artist" in that context
[20:02] <troy_s> thorwil: Or are we dealing with attempting to deliver some degree of visceral emotional experience?
[20:03] <troy_s> thorwil: "Works fine" is trumped by "Works awesome!". Always.
[20:03] <thorwil> troy_s: the ability to do better for the special case doesn't say that much about the common case
[20:03] <coz_> thorwil,  I had a mediocre instructor who told a fellow student who had already won awards for there abstract work...."Your work is just masturbation!  Wake UP"
[20:03] <troy_s> thorwil: Bugger the common.
[20:04] <troy_s> thorwil: A case in point for that statement
[20:04] <thorwil> troy_s: better not, in the light of scarce ressources
[20:04] <troy_s> thorwil: Would be how many companies could survive on Libre software?
[20:04] <troy_s> thorwil: Probably 99.99% had the _niche_ applications existed.
[20:04] <troy_s> thorwil: In my experience
[20:04] <troy_s> thorwil: It seems that the ability to survive
[20:05] <troy_s> thorwil: Can hinge on that .01%
[20:05] <troy_s> thorwil: But alas, somewhat sidetracked here.
[20:05] <troy_s> The question of culture stands.
[20:06] <coz_> thorwil,  design is simply a part of the whole concept of compositon in general  not a specific field in and of itself...in my opinion
[20:06] <troy_s> And is well beyond this pea brained idiot's ability to address sufficiently.
[20:06] <coz_> thorwil,   so that statement is a bit naive
[20:06] <troy_s> (Somewhere I'm pretty sure we could substitute Umma and Gumma for Art and Design respectively and be left with about as much meaning.)
[20:07] <thorwil> coz_: i've seen a whole lot of definitions for design, but none of them made it a "part" of "composition"
[20:07] <coz_> I disagree   the words and definitions are set and quite clear in my mind
[20:07] <thorwil> coz_: that's cool for all inhabitants of your mind
[20:07] <troy_s> coz_: As they are for everyone. The issue comes up when you smack definition A in coz_ up against definition A in thorwil.
[20:07] <coz_> thorwil,  no it true for any form of art
[20:08] <troy_s> coz_: Both are legitimate working models. The paradox only shows up when you start trying to convert units in each system.
[20:08] <coz_> troy_s,  I can accept that
[20:08] <troy_s> coz_: Which sadly is probably what we are all ramming our heads against.
[20:09] <troy_s> coz_: It's almost like some strange discussion in philosophy. For many, they just want to go "it's all semantics and move on" but apparently for Libre, it is a real world problem that somehow needs to get negotiated.
[20:09] <troy_s> coz_: Or ignore it and carry on carry on.
[20:10] <troy_s> coz_: Although one could probably say that historical evidence suggests the 'carry on carry on' approach isn't yielding much fruit.
[20:10] <coz_> troy_s,   absolutely true,,, carry on only indicates reluctance to work... or mindless work
[20:11] <troy_s> coz_ / thorwil: vish had an interesting suggestion in IRC a while back.
[20:11] <coz_>  what was that?
[20:11] <thorwil> it's pointless to argue about definitions, except if you rely on them for effective communication. so in a debate, you might be able to get around it, but for continued goal-driven discussions, it's not acceptable
[20:12] <troy_s> coz_: I seem to recall it involved a list that was created out of portfolios etc. Sort of reminded me of the idea of somehow focusing on people. Which seemed great.
[20:12] <troy_s> Of course, it leads to scaling problems. How to grow to a certain size and carry on etc.
[20:12] <coz_>  troy_s  sounds reasonable and abit nebulous
[20:12] <troy_s> Who is the arbitrator / HR mind / etc. What are the qualities. Etc.
[20:13] <coz_> thorwil,  I dont know... definitions in my eye allow for individual and group creativity... a guide of sorts ,,, something to bounce off of
[20:13] <troy_s> coz_: I think the crux of it was that it starts with a portfolio. It starts with credentials.
[20:13] <troy_s> coz_: Then builds out into a list from there.
[20:13] <coz_> troy_s,  i agree
[20:13] <troy_s> Which seemed fair.
[20:13] <thorwil> focusing on people sounds great in theory. but if applied to ubuntu-art, it would appear naked
[20:13] <coz_> troy_s,   but have you seen what was available for "protfolios":
[20:14] <troy_s> Granted, there will be cries of divaism and exclusiory blah blah, and it is also subject to failure if the folks fail to create work that ends up being successful.
[20:14] <troy_s> coz_: I'd think that would address that wouldn't it?
[20:14] <coz_> troy_s,  yes
[20:14] <troy_s> coz_: You can even speak to an inability to get things up where others can see, right?
[20:14] <troy_s> ;)
[20:14] <coz_> :)
[20:14] <troy_s> coz_: Which, again, works fine in certain contexts. In terms of Libre art and design, it certainly doesn't.
[20:15] <coz_> troy_s,  ok you got that one in :)
[20:15] <troy_s> coz_: Any chance I can get to bash you I'll take thanks.
[20:15] <troy_s> LOL
[20:15] <troy_s> Because you damn well deserve it.
[20:15] <troy_s> But also
[20:15] <coz_> :)
[20:15] <troy_s> there are a good number of damn important thinkers out there with credentials that fork a little wider than this focused audience.
[20:16] <coz_> for sure
[20:16] <coz_> troy_s,   but what is there to focus on here?
[20:16] <troy_s> For example, I am pretty sure that a Ba philosophy or PEng can bring some valuable thoughts to the table.
[20:16] <troy_s> Same goes for Ba anthropologist
[20:16] <troy_s> There is plenty of overlap in that Venn diagram.
[20:17] <troy_s> where the core would be 'successful art/design' as a nasty murky nebulous goal.
[20:17] <troy_s> coz_: The architectural person I alluded to pointed me to Hall's work
[20:17] <troy_s> coz_: And Hall happens to be an anthropologist.
[20:17] <coz_> troy_s,  interesting... I have had contact with a few anthropologists  in the past
[20:18] <troy_s> coz_: Which I've obviously had a great admiration for over the past decade, as they seem to be leaps and bounds ahead of everyone with regards to design and art thinking.
[20:18] <troy_s> coz_: These two tomes are well worth looking at:
[20:18] <troy_s> coz_:  http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Culture-Visual-Perception/dp/0672608251
[20:19] <troy_s> (Herskovits has a Wikipedia article worth reading)
[20:19] <troy_s> and
[20:19] <troy_s> coz_: http://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Dimension-Edward-T-Hall/dp/0385084765/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1298837949&sr=1-1
[20:19] <coz_> troy_s,  I also appreciated joseph cambells work on symbols
[20:19] <troy_s> (Hall too has a worthy Wikipedia reference)
[20:19] <troy_s> coz_: Oh... wow. Not familiar. Link.
[20:19] <coz_> hold on
[20:20] <troy_s> coz_: The latter is interesting because it is apparently a seminal book on the implications of architecture on space in relation to cultural norms etc.
[20:20] <coz_> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell
[20:20] <troy_s> coz_: And he has a couple of other books that elaborate on that dynamic.
[20:20] <coz_> thorwil,  I had spoken with his daughter a few times on the phone
[20:20] <coz_> sorry troy_s ^^
[20:20] <troy_s> coz_: Oh I have heard of him.
[20:21] <coz_> troy_s,   quite interesting
[20:21] <troy_s> coz_: The Hero book I have come across.
[20:21] <coz_> troy_s,   i will take a look at them  as well so thanks
[20:21] <troy_s> coz_: I wasn't entirely sold on his view that it was the same concept rewrapped.
[20:21] <troy_s> coz_: As I find that to be a sort of ethnocentric warping. A cognitive bias issue.
[20:25] <troy_s> thorwil: Cool.
[20:25] <troy_s> thorwil: The notes are pretty damn cool!
[20:26] <thorwil> troy_s: heh, thanks!
[20:26] <coz_> which notes?  or is th is private?
[20:26] <troy_s> coz_: It's a Google doc. Maybe thorwil will let you view it.
[20:27] <coz_> maybe later I have to break here...family things... cat needs a pat,, I need food,,, probably grocery shopping... and I wanted to be a doctor lol
[20:28] <thorwil> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2267861
[20:32] <troy_s> vish: YOU LURKER
[20:32] <vish> troy_s: atleast i dont copy "--"  ;p
[20:33] <troy_s> I DONT KNOW HOW TO DO THAT DASH DASH DASH
[20:33] <troy_s> Jerk.
[20:33] <thorwil> lol
[20:37] <troy_s> Wow. Google docs is pretty damn impressive.
[20:38] <thorwil> troy_s: yes. strange how it lacks hyphenation, title numbering and any kind of paragraph style (making me do first line indent the hard way)
[20:38] <vish> thorwil: what do you mean by first line indent?
[20:39] <vish> the triangle on the top(the one facing right) should take care of that..
[20:39] <vish>  if thats what you mean..
[20:39] <thorwil> vish: indentation of the first line of a paragraph
[20:39] <vish> ah!
[20:41] <thorwil> troy_s: strange how i didn't come across this earlier. http://www.uiml.org/
[20:41] <troy_s> thorwil: Hence the power of collaboration. The exact same thing that led me to miss Hall's work.
[20:42] <troy_s> thorwil: There is an interesting side note here... when you use a thing such as Quickly, it allows you to Quickly make more of the same. If that same isn't rooted in solid design thinking etc., then it is truly, more of the same.
[20:42] <thorwil> heh, yeah
[20:42] <troy_s> thorwil: TL / DR: "Quickly allows you to now make the same asstastic applications Quickly."
[20:43] <troy_s> thorwil: (UIML might well fall into that as well if there aren't strict enough controls over aesthetic choices for example. CSS / HTML seems to be an interesting hybrid.)
[20:44] <thorwil> eek, dead links
[20:44] <thorwil> so badly maintained it suggests that project is dead
[20:45] <troy_s> thorwil: I never really followed up on it. But the kernel of the idea seemed interesting.
[20:46] <troy_s> thorwil: Personally, I'd probably say the idea that interfaces and desktop systems that used CSS / HTML would be most useful. As well as obviously providing some tool above that for strictly visual based design.
[20:46] <thorwil> if it provides more than abstract widgets and tables for layout expressed as tree syntax
[20:46] <troy_s> thorwil: Bark bark woof woof bark.
[20:47] <troy_s> thorwil: SVG versus Inkscape for example.
[20:49] <troy_s> Fascinating comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2268839
[21:00] <troy_s> thorwil: Thanks for that HN link. Very, very, very interesting read. And, again to my shock, HN has apparently managed an audience that actually thinks about things. Some incredible comments in there.
[21:00] <thorwil> troy_s: one could think the wall-of-text shock really does help ;)
[21:01] <troy_s> thorwil: As exemplified by the absolutely abhorrently idiotic "Make something beautiful that we all believe in" got voted way down.
[21:01] <troy_s> thorwil: Erm. You can spot the deadly recursive nature of your last comment I hope. ;)
[21:02] <akshatj> does Shnatsel hand out here?
[21:03] <thorwil> troy_s: well, i'm aware that it's something that might never really get fixed. short of applying strong AI
[21:03] <thorwil> akshatj: not that i know
[21:04] <akshatj> thorwil: ah ok, will thank him through other means
[21:07] <troy_s> thorwil: Cultures sort themselves out.
[21:07] <troy_s> thorwil: It's a strange thing, but it is much like having people agreeing to be a part of a country or anything else.
[21:07] <troy_s> thorwil: If you don't like it you move on.
[21:08] <troy_s> thorwil: And I suppose the _kernel_ of a starting point of a culture is the only place to really make that long lasting impact.
[21:08] <troy_s> thorwil: Things like statements such as the Code of Conduct etc. all _matter_.
[21:08] <thorwil> troy_s: isn't that what i was talking about? :)
[21:09] <troy_s> thorwil: I only can see AI and "never really get fixed".
[21:09] <thorwil> we must be more carful who refers to what, when, here :)
[21:09] <thorwil> not more full of cars, care!
[21:10] <troy_s> Huh?
[21:10] <troy_s> LOL
[21:10] <troy_s> thorwil: I was strictly looking at your last statement.
[21:10] <troy_s> thorwil: Erm... your "well, i'm..." statement.
[21:13] <thorwil> troy_s: yes, and i thought you meant the comment regarding meeting logs
[21:13] <thorwil> unfortunately, i have to run
[21:13] <thorwil> troy_s, vish: feel free to keep going. many thanks, i added a credits section
[21:14] <thorwil> good night!
[22:03] <cozziemoto> y
[22:03] <coz_> ok back
[22:04] <coz_> ah they left