『你真的不要我了吗？』
If such a notification were generated, ill-behaved programs would just react to a click on the balloon’s “X” button with an annoying follow-up dialog like, “Are you sure you want to ignore my wonderful message?” So there was a conscious decision not to give them the chance.
如果通知气球做成那样的话，某些行为不良的应用程序就会利用这个机制，对点击『×』（关闭）按钮做出反应，再弹一个恼人的对话框出来，大概还会写上『真的要无视咱华丽的消息吗？』之类的东西。所以，不给这些应用这种机会是有意设计的。
In the Before Time, software was trusted not to be actively evil, not to second-guess a user’s action, not to invade a user’s private space.
早年，软件是可以被信任为不积极作恶的，也不会对用户的决定做出二次反应，或者侵犯用户的私人空间。
Over the years, we’ve learned that this was a naïve position to take. So now, when we decide that something is an end-user setting, we actively avoid giving programmatic access to it, so programs won’t be tempted to weasel themselves into it.
在过去的这些年间，我们逐渐意识到这种想法实在很天真。所以，现在每当涉及到由用户做出最终决定的设计，我们总是会积极地避免给予程序化的方式来对其施加影响，如此应用程序才能不再热心于利用这些机制来做出奇奇怪怪的事。
远嚣 Comment