Slashdot Mirror

I love how, if we post cutting-edge information that hasn't totally been verified, we get flamed for being "just a rumor site."

But if we wait a few days to try to see if the truth congeals from the flood of questionable facts, we get flamed for being, as you say, "a lot less timely ... News breaks elsewhere now, and /. picks up the pieces."

I'm guessing both, in the case of this story (it's starting to look like MAPS wasn't blacklisting ORBS, as ORBS' accusation and rampant speculation on a lot of other forums would have it). We'll get flamed both for running this stupid story at all, and for not running it sooner. Grrrrrrr.

Personally I'm getting a little sick of this. I got flamed up and down for running the story about Ryan Meader's leaked plans for the Apple Cube; I saw a dozen "proofs" that he faked the whole thing right down to the letter from Apple. And what did Apple announce today? The Cube. Please send your lengthy apologies complete with $50 checks or money orders to: jamie@mccarthy.org. Thank you.

More seriously - your rude remark about "book-content fodder" is bunk. You know, or should know, that Slashdot has already decided not to run a book of readers' comments without getting permission from those who posted them (which basically means not running the book at all, because 100% of the readers will never respond).

It's easy for you to whine about how unfair it all is that Slashdot is delivering ad banners, but when it came down to brass tacks, we yanked an entire book and probably lost a lot of money, because it was the right thing to do. Of course, acknowledging that would just distract people from your point, which was, obviously, to bash us.

Jamie McCarthy

"The /. 1-pixel image is a weird one. It's right at the top of the page, in a 2-pixel wide table to the left of the banner ad (from doubleclick.net BTW). There are two single-pixel images in that table; one's the off-site "bug" and the other is images.slashdot.org/pagecount which you'd think would have a valid purpose."

As I wrote in another comment to this story, the "off-site" graphic traceroutes through dn.net via exodus.net. Both sites (Digital Nation and Exodus) are sites that Andover uses to host some of its services. In other words, the "off-site" graphic probably isn't off-site at all.

I'll ask the slash development team what the deal is. If more than 3 or 4 people care (feel free to email me), maybe I can get Timothy to drop the results in the next Slashback or something. But I'll bet you dollars to donuts they're all page-counters.

Jamie McCarthy

When relatively trivial behavior is declared a crime, everyone and their brother with a lick of good sense and principles -- as well as those who have nothing better to do, and those for whom rebellion is a trivial hobby rather than a thoughtful lifestyle -- will jump at the opportunity to safely show their Resistance to The Man. When the CDA originally passed, hundreds of Usenetters added "ObObscenities" to their signatures.

But how many have the guts to smoke a joint or shoot heroin on the courthouse steps? Or give out free needles/food/bibles/whatever without a "permit"? Or help human beings escape from tyranny to potential freedom? Or stand in front of the tanks even when they know their chances are Slim to None?

Victimless crime laws encourage general disrespect for law, and deservedly so. The more petty and harmless the "crime", the more the public is treated like a child, the more it will start acting like one; and the greater the crackdown, the greater the numbers and extent of the backlash. But when it comes to the big issues, it takes an explicit gun in the face for some people to Just Say No...and all too many meekly, willingly cooperate in their own enslavement and destruction. As James Donald said on Cypherpunks, if just one "tax serf" out of every hundred said No to the IRS and backed it up when pushed to the wall, the house of cards would collapse.

This reminds me of Jamie McCarthy's take on modern-day "civil disobedience" in (Computer Underground Digest? Politech? Can't find the article offhand). Instead of taking the risks of getting hammered with firehoses and tear gas, today's rebels try to overload web servers and scribble/urinate on the pages contained therein. How long before "civil disobedience" becomes a banned search term somewhere? What about places where people WISH that was all they had to worry about?

Having said all that, as someone else (Will Rodgers?) said, "Profanity is the crutch of the ignorant, but every once in a while you've got to talk to one of those ignorant motherfuckers."