Petal’s just another one of the vast menagerie of ‘sweetie’ words that means sweet/delicate/precious. It’s probably British in origin. I know I’ve heard Brits use it.

The best ‘sweetie’ word I’ve heard is from a South African woman who calls her sweetheart ‘cookie’. Apparently it translates directly from Afrikaans as ‘sweetie’, but of course means crumbly, sweet parcel of yumminess in English*. It’s funny to listen to her refer to her ‘cookie’.

*I do realise that in some US subcultures, ‘cookie’ refers to something else entirely. The Cookie Monster was never the same after I learned that meaning ;)

I swear, I thought you meant to say pal and due to some odd keyboard accident “e” and “ta” somehow got inside that word. :P

[quote post=”2278″]In other petal news, I live with a couple that commonly call each other ‘petal’ (among other things).[/quote]

Ok, I can see that but it still sounds kinda funny. It might be an Australian thing. :)

Nah, it wasn’t a typo, it’s a patronising way of telling someone to calm down. Think of a father saying it to a young daughter (his ‘petal’). It’s a good one to use when someone is having a bit of a tizzy.

In other petal news, I live with a couple that commonly call each other ‘petal’ (among other things). One day the male half decided to mix things up a bit and started calling the female half ‘pellet’. That didn’t go down too well…

On a more humorous note:

[quote post=”2278″]Settle, petal.[/quote]

I just wanted to say that this is the first time I actually saw the wort petal used this way. LOL I’m assuming this was a typo. ;)

Settle, petal. If you think that was a tirade, no wonder you have problems understanding people.

I would have thought it was fucking obvious that if a product says it “generates a few lines of Java code” the end user would go “Hangon, isn’t that a few lines of code I can write myself if I read some HTML/Java tutes?” I’m not seeing anything in the tirade about your mother which actaully says she looked at a HTML tutorial too figure out what the basic was, or how easy it is.

[quote comment=”8021″]Not really. Exploiting peoples ignorance is good buisness sense, and it’s perfectly ethical when said ignorance is a direct result of lack of self-cultivation, rather than anything which is forced upon them.[/quote]

It may be good business sense, but it’s still not ethical. You make the assumption that people who need this functionality are all hackers of some sort who should know better. It’s not the case at all. I’ve been watching my mother put together a website with a CMS and it’s fine, but she doesn’t know much HTML. As a result, she doesn’t have the a priori knowledge to know that she can do these kind of things herself. She’s curious, she’s definitely not lazy, but she doesn’t come from a tech background so she doesn’t know what’s possible at her level. There are a lot of people like that out there.

All through your comments I’ve noticed a common thread: you have a lot of trouble seeing things from other people’s viewpoints. You seem to assume everyone has your level of knowledge. It’s just not the way things are.

Open source hippies, all of you. x]

I wouldn’t say it is unethical so long as they are upfront & honest about what the program does and doesn’t do. They are clear it “reduces” people’s ability to copy. Interestingly enough, since I have noscript on, I couldn’t even see the “protection.”

Once I was helping someone save an image from a webpage. Every time they saved it, they just got a blank page. I figured it was just a transparent overlay, looked in the source, found the image url, and saved it that way. The person was totally bewildered, like I’d done some kind of arcane black magic, but also thrilled they could use this picture in a school presentation. That type of “protection” seems to be at least as effective if not more.

I totally agree with your mentality though. I like to help people realize & use the computer capabilities they paid for. If I had written that “program” and it was up to me, I’d post it somewhere and forget about it. Maybe we’re more service than product focused. In any event, I think it takes a special kind of individual to sell something so minimally useful alone for $20.

I see what you mean, Luke. I guess the mis-use of words, using an apostrophe with an “s” to make a plural, and the like are what really irk me. They smack more of the type of ignorance you’re talking about here than struggling to type as fast as we think.

Thanks for taking my post in the spirit in which it was intended. (i.e. pointing out that we’re all a bunch of hypocrites and snobs, each in our own way and about our own subjects) :)