[Klug-general] Talk at the next meet

[Twigathy]

That should have been PGP. *facedesk*

2008/11/15 Twigathy <twigathy at gmail.com>:
> For those of you who use gmail and Firefox, there are some
> greasemonkey scripts around which'll do GPG and friends. I haven't
> tried them myself, but I know they exist. Worth googling if you're
> interested.
>
> T
>
> 2008/11/15 Karl Lattimer <karl at qdh.org.uk>:
>>> > This is a pretty abstract problem. It's actually more about the content
>>> > then the protocols.
>>>
>>> Ok, I think it's more a case of how some people use it.
>>
>> It actually comes down to an inadequate interaction metaphor and
>> "training required" design approach... Everyone needs at the very least
>> a fairly brief introduction to how email works. This sucks.
>>
>>> > For instance, if someone sends me a meeting request via email, why do I
>>> > choose to accept or reject it via my message viewer, why doesn't it
>>> > appear in the context of my calendar?
>>>
>>> Someone sends me a letter inviting me to their wedding. I take out a
>>> peice of paper and a pencil, and write back a letter saying I accept it.
>>> I then turn to the calender on the fridge and mark "29th febuary 2007,
>>> John's wedding".
>>>
>>> I get an email inviting me to a meeting, I hit the reply button and say
>>> "sure, I'll be there". I then move to a different tool and mark in my
>>> calender: "1200 tuesday - meet with man about dog"
>>>
>>> So email implements normal life quite well. It's a work flow we are used
>>> to.
>>
>> I disagree, the message -> calendar problem is a huge interaction
>> mistake. Microsoft made it first, it has perpetuated throughout (I am of
>> course talking about clients that support meeting requests etc...)
>>
>>> > In the old days of offices (before computers) an inbox tray was
>>> > something that items in the following contexts would be placed;
>>> >
>>> >  * Things I've been asked to do
>>> >  * Things I'm doing
>>> >  * Things I'm about to do
>>>
>>> No, an inbox also included all your incoming mail. So your invoices from
>>> suppliers, your letter from your aunt, etc...
>>
>> True, However it makes little sense that we should employ our brains to
>> parse these messages rather than simply use the power of the computer.
>>
>> There's also the "after the inbox" - what do I do with this issue, this
>> can largely be solved or at least softened and organised for us.
>>
>>> > Now if we use this metaphor correctly in terms of email, we suddenly
>>> > realise that email is absolute junk... All of it...
>>>
>>> Depends what you use your email for. I use it to send what I would have
>>> historically done as a letter. "Hi Dad, arrived in Utrecht".
>>
>> Of course, one of the metaphors that email is good at is the letters &
>> mailings metaphor, however there has ended up being some crossover
>> between IM and mail.
>>
>>> Erm, I store it all in one inbox, which sorts things by threads. I never
>>> was able to process the information when it was automatically sorted
>>> into many boxes. It is too much a pull method. I prefer for push
>>> methods. If it isn't in my inbox, it never happend.
>>
>> You must get a lot less email than me... I used to do this, now I simply
>> get too much to leave it to the email horizon.
>>
>>> As someone who hasn't, don't, and will not, use facebook. I consider
>>> this a bug in facebook, not email :p
>>
>> Facebook isn't the only thing that sends notifications, paypal among
>> other services is just one more example.
>>
>>> > So its pretty plain to see its all full of junk, and it needs some
>>> > language processing, semantic linking and contextual separation at the
>>> > natural points of separation rather than artificial ones. Moreover it's
>>> > got to do all this without a user lifting a finger.
>>>
>>> What sort of email do you get?
>>
>> I get email related to various projects, email related to various tasks
>> I've been working on, emails where I'm collaborating with someone on
>> documents, images etc... emails which are from mailing lists, emails on
>> various financial matters the list goes on and on and on...
>>
>> Firstly collaboration is pretty broken, mostly because there's no
>> inbuilt revision control, that's why wizbit (http://wizbit.org) will
>> start handling this in the future.
>>
>> Then you've got the boxing problem, which makes the whole house of cards
>> fall apart (if anyone got that joke I'd be really happy). for instance
>> (a crude example to highlight the semantics)
>>
>> item: Evolution & Seahorse integration
>>
>> folders
>>  Evolution
>>  Seahorse
>>
>> Urm... I've had this problem come up so many times with hierarchies that it's just not funny anymore.
>>
>> This is why organise framework is so important.
>>
>>> You used the term leverage and framework. Are you being assimulated into
>>> the marketting department?
>>
>> "organise framework" is a framework currently under development
>> http://www.organise-fw.org/
>>
>> leverage is something we use when we have to lift something heavy.
>> Therefore a tedious highlighting of my language semantics proves
>> fruitless...
>>
>>> Use the tool for what it was intended?
>>
>> Good luck telling everyone that... Good luck telling everyone not to
>> dump shit in my inbox that should have arrived via a more sensible
>> medium...
>>
>>>
>>> > There's a lot we can do to improve the situation, right now a huge dump
>>> > of messages is not an effective way of organising things.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I personally prefer encryption of the message, not the transmission
>>> medium. Sure I would like my mail to go in an armoured truck, but cos
>>> it's all encrypted anyway, its not such a problem. You mention a
>>> deficiency in one protocol (yes I know there are others in others).
>>> Personally, I don't like IMAP, or POP3, or exchange. I use Mutt, and I
>>> run it on the mailserver. Email arrives and is delivered to
>>> /var/mail/user. Works really well for me. I am sure people would frown
>>> at it, and go "You should use maildir" or "But this gui app can do..."
>>> and the like. But ultimately, it integrates to my workflow (urgh, I used
>>> that in a serious email, shoot me :p). I can use the editor of my choice
>>> to write my mail, I can use the handler of my choice to handle it.
>>> etc...
>>
>> works well for you, but wouldn't for me
>>
>>> Personally the only gripe I have with email, is the idiots who insist on
>>> using html for email. Whilst I don't think we have evolveed to the
>>> pinacle of what the technology can do. What we have arrived at is a
>>> system that for the large part, works amazingly well.
>>
>> Only one or two use cases work well, others are complicated and inhibit
>> workflow, what I'm getting at here is that there are lots of things
>> which can change.
>>
>>> Any new system would need to be backwardly compatable with the existing
>>> systems, other wise you are going to suffer the video phone problem.
>>
>> I'm leaving that to pvanhoof to worry about, all I'm interested in is
>> the knowledge systems that are required in order to build a better user
>> experience.
>>
>> In the end, this is all about user experience, human computer
>> interaction and usability... Three subjects we're all aware you feel are
>> satanic spawn of UI designers.
>>
>> *sigh* wouldn't it be nice if every linux user was like you, then
>> microsoft would have an even bigger monopoly.
>>
>> BR,
>>  K
>>
>> P.S. There's also the fact that being a command line zealot you
>> highlight your terrible ability to spell to the world.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kent mailing list
>> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent
>>
>