Slashdot Mirror

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

--
Sig: You too should read and post to Cowboi Kneel's Journal! I am sure he would appreciate all your comments!

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of members:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of members:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of members:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

--
Sig: You too should read and post to Cowboi Kneel's Journal! I am sure he would appreciate all your comments!

--
Sig: You too should read and post to Cowboi Kneel's Journal! I am sure he would appreciate all your comments!

--
Sig: You too should read and post to Cowboi Kneel's Journal! I am sure he would appreciate all your comments!

--
Sig: You too should read and post toCowboi Kneel's Livejournal! I am sure he would appreciate all your comments!

WHAT CAN I DO TO HELP??

--

Sig: You too should read and post to Cowboi Kneel's journal! I am sure he would appreciate all your comments!

--
Sig: You too should read Cowboi Kneel's Livejournal! I am sure he appreciates all your comments!!

But c'mon we are talking about a program that at best was running on tens of thousands of machines during it's worst security times. As Sendmail usage has gone up so has the security it has offered. Comparing to a hole in a client that is deployed on millions of computers really isn't fair.

You open source apologists are getting on my nerves more and more. Stop spreading your FUD.

Why makes you believe that Sendmail usage has gone up? Unix is losing more and more of its marketshare, and even the users of that ancient POS are moving to alternative, more secure MTAs like qmail and postfix.

Finally, security has nothing to do with the number of users of software, but with the software design process. Open source is simply inferior.

--
Sig: You too should read Cowboi Kneel's Livejournal!

You have nothing too loose but you're American oppressors!

--
Sig: You too should read Cowboi Kneel's Livejournal!

--
Sig: You too should read Cowboi Kneel's Livejournal!

That was the part where he decides. This is the part where he talks about why.

This sums it all up nicely. This guy was looking at getting a PC, then decided to get a Mac despite his benchmarks.

http://www.livejournal.com

They focus on building community, rather than specific content goals.

A theory must be falsifiable, so I guess, in that sense, if a theory is proven false (i.e. if the theory is "The cat will always go to her food when coming in from outside" and the cat is observed going to the bed instead, it has been proven false) it's false, but more correctly,, since a theory is an *explantion* it's *wrong*. It cannot be proven to be true. It can be supported by observation. It can be generally accepted (the theory of gravity, for example) but it can't be considered true in the way an observation is true or false (I either observed the cat go to her food at 3:40pm today, or I didn't).

Some reading for you:
This
this and
this

Specifically on evolution. When people say 'the theory of evolution' they usually mean one of two things:

1. The theory that states that over generations, through natural selection, species change to better fit their environment. This one has a great deal of evidence supporting it. It's extremely hard to argue against this one. I don't bother. As far as I can tell there are no glaring inconsistancies and it's about as close to correct as we can get right now.

2. The theory that humans evolved from the same predecessor as non-human primates. This one is a bit more interesting. There's lots of evidence for: physical and genetic similarities between humans and non-human primates. But we're missing the 'missing link'. While it is, to me, far more likely that humans evolved over eons than that some outside force (god? aliens?) zapped some poor unsuspecting monkey into the first human being, we don't have enough fossil evidence (or other evidence) to show that this didn't happen. My personal opinion is that this is the most likely theory, but that data could come up, even within my lifetime that suggests otherwise.

Incidently, I don't belive in god or creationism but I'd rather talk to people who have a well reasoned response for why they don't think the theory of evolution (either version) is correct then people who parrot it as gospel without thinking.

Personally, I'd be willing to pay for slashdot, but I'm NOT going to do it just to get rid of the ads. And I think that a lot of other people feel this way too.

I think that the people over at LiveJournal have the right idea. They don't make you pay for subscriptions... they don't beat you down with ads, but they have a way where if you like their site, you can pay them. And in return they reward you with some extra goodies that the unpaid users don't have access too.

I think that solution would work here too... I can think of a couple of decent features you could add to /. to make it worth it. But as for ads... seems like the majority of ads (not counting the banner ads at the top of the page which I really don't mind) are from doubleclick, which I have mozilla block... so as-is I'm not seeing a lot of the ads on /. already.

Besides, there's nothing that says that I can't go to the Palm Pilot version of slashdot, which has no graphical ads at all. So, given that there are a lot of different news sites out there, there's nothing wrong with subscriptions, but you have to make your site stand out above the others if you go to that. If you don't people will just get fed up and go elsewhere.

Here's the rest of the picture --

Part one
Part two

Here's the rest of the picture --

Part one
Part two

A hack and a half, but it actually works!

About 2.5 months ago, I wrote an article in my livejournal about how to solve the problem where Big Company spends money forever on a case, draining the Little Guy. Check it out.

So long as a single non-compliant piece of equipment exists that lets you record a screen or the output of a speaker, circumventing hardware protection is trivial.

Rather than repeating what I've already typed up a couple of times, my thinking about what's really going to have to happen is here.

Okay, we all hate ads. Animated banner ads are a shameless attempt to burn a little ad-shaped hole in your brain, dumping their talentless, artless ad copy right down your optic nerve and into your delicate brain. But let's face it, a lot of websites which could not ordinarily afford to exist are paid for in this manner.

Also, for those who remember the web before search engines, you know, in that supposed golden age, you couldn't FIND anything. I mean, it usually looked like there wasn't that much content out there, but I doubt that was ever true, at least once the universities started taking it seriously, well ahead of everyone else. You could have a good time browsing around, but if you wanted information on a specific topic you had to get lucky, or follow an awful lot of links.

Let's especially not forget the fact that google caches things, so as long as people put their information in ordinary HTML (A trend which is becoming less and less common these days) google will hang onto the data for some time, making the web more persistent.

Sure, commercialization hurts, but someone has to pay for all this bandwidth, all these sites, the hosting... Suck it up. Enjoy the fact that all you have to pay for is your connection. It's worth remembering that access outside of a university or corporation used to be hellishly expensive. Compu$erve charged by the minute, and didn't even have internet access for the longest time, though there was internet mail.

So it's cheaper and faster today than it's ever been. There's more content, useful and not, and more search engines (though google is the only one I use any more, since they're least offensive and most useful) to find information inside of it. Sure, the fact that any asshole can put together a webpage means there's more useless crap, but it also means you have access to data you wouldn't otherwise see.

And for those who cannot find anything to read on the web: Become involved in a community site. Slashdot is just one example, and perhaps not the best, because it's (ostensibly) news-driven. That, plus a blip on the radar every time Katz squats and squeezes out another pearl. But there are sites like Everything2 which can keep you busy for many hours if you're possessed of the necessary pedanticism. Hell, even livejournal can hold your interest.

In general, whiners need to spend their time developing content. I like E2 because it's a resource which can help people well into the future, and which helps me now. I also develop my own content; I run one of the larger drinking game sites on the internet (hyperlogos.org) which I should really spend more time on, but I'm too busy putting work into E2 :)

More pages, more search engines, more content, faster connections. When I started using webpages, modems were the standard, and MANY MANY sites were on nothing faster than a 28.8k modem, including The Circus where I lived - And we had a Class C from scruz.net at the time. :)

http://www.livejournal.com/users/pro_anorexia/

Marla: [noun, adj.] (mâr la)- (pejorative) a "tourist," someone who joins a group or organization to be associated and/or socialize with its members, but lacks the fundamental qualities that define the group's identity. Synonyms: groupie, hanger-on, faker, poseur.
[ ... ]

Technology Marlas:

Individuals who read/post on Slashdot but have never seen a command line in their entire life.

Jon Katz

Anyone who buys books like "XML For Dummies"

95% of the Marketing department in the average software company.

98% of the Associates/VPs in the "Technology" Group of major investment-banking firms

100% of the employees in Public Relations firms that represent "high-tech" companies.

Linux geeks should read it!

http://www.livejournal.com/users/pro_anorexia/

Too funny!

In a nutshell, broadband providers have a lot to gain by restricting users' access, and users have a lot to lose if they let the industry move toward new usage models.

You might wanna check out LiveJournal.

It's ability to easily follow multiple journals, including posting comments to various entries, and it's "communities" make it seem somewhat like your talking about.

Additionally, all the source code that runs it is available.

Having people keep "work journals" of what they're working on makes it easy to keep track of who's doing what, and the communities could be very advantageous in a work environement.

Some info here, which points to, ironically enough, here.

There's a persistent rumor going around about a four hour director's cut--despite the fact that Columbus himself has flatly said those rumors are false. I've written a bit about it in my LiveJournal, with links to the pertinent articles.

I am looking forward to the DVD, though.

It's bad, but bad enough to be funny, I guess. Or maybe not.

You might wanna look at www.livejournal.com They use mysql and linux as a backend and support a massive amount of clients (200k+ I think).

Of course there is also, source forge, fresh meat, etc. Lots of places use linux as the backend.

free pr0n can be found here.

indeed! very glad to see it. Woohoo!

(and, honestly, one of about three 'truly deserveds' in my book, but hey, I don't run the webbys)

jdcatron aka
rark!

Hooray for LiveJournal!

Everybody seems to think of Blogger when they hear the term "online journal," but LJ has been a better experience for most users I've talked to. It's finally getting some press, and recognition as a write-in for the Peoples Voice awards.

Actually, if you listen carefully on very high quality equipment, you can hear the difference between 256Kps MP3 and a CD. Read Scot Hacker's livejournal entry about performing just such a test. Yes, he's the same Scot hacker who wrote the O'Reilly book on MP3 ;-) Part of the entry follows below:
&nbspl
I counter that by saying that the difference b/w 256kbps and WAV is so incredibly subtle, and 320kbps would be virtually indistinguishable in every important way. You still get around 4x compression at 320kbps, and you have the advantage of ID3 tags. Why not take advantage of it?

I could tell there was a difference between the 256 and the WAV in the Wasserman duet/vocal, but had trouble putting my finger on the difference. Mike nailed it down, and had me focus on the spatial relationship or distance between the vocalist near the middle of the room and the cello in the rear left of the room. At 256kbps, there is a sort of "veil" that enshrouds the vocals, and ties it spatially to the cellist in the rear left. It's subtle, but he's right - the spatial distinction between them is just not as pronounced at 256kbps as it is with the WAV.

I am the "All things business" manager at LiveJournal, an open source, member supported community. We've raised around $80,000 since we started doing memberships, and now have three paid staffmembers.

I think the ultimate goal of open source projects should be to empower both users and designers. Part of that empowerment is making it possible for people to support the project, not only as coders and developers, but as active donors to the site. It's time for open source projects to put out the virtual tip jar... but the question I hear a lot is how do you make it work so that people actually support what you create?

The answer is kinda simple. You communicate with them, empower them, encourage them, get them to trust you, and ideally give them what they want. Admittedly, we do community design at LJ, so it's easier to build that kind of communication, but the same principles apply, and there are a ton of open source tools out there to add community to your website. Use them. Don't just throw some content up on a site that only a machine could love... Be human. Design your software for humans, too. Make communication easier within your group, and take the time to build in community on your site before you start building your software.

It is painfully hard for a group of people to build anything without effective communication. Don't take it for granted.