Slashdot Mirror

This is not quite true. Take, for example, Salon. A number of people may be upset that they've started charging for quite a bit of their content now, but the fact remains that they have some of the best coverage that I've seen of recent events.

-Henri

P.S. I'm impressed that Salon made it so long without charging. They still make *half* of their money from ads. That's pretty impressive.

I also love some of thier business practices, and believe business students will be studing these for years to come in universities all over the USA.

Which ones are you referring to?

• Embrace and Extend
• "Lobby" to get the politicians who support you elected
• Leverage one market with your monopoly in another
• Censorship
• If you can't beat them buy them

You're right about the phraseology. It's easy to get my emotions raised in the general din and clamor. And being so confrontational doesn't accomplish much in this case when everyone else has high passions from Sept. 11.

I'll just rant now and give my 2 cents on what I'd do if I was in power.

There are two issues here. One is nation building for afghanistan. The other is the "war" against terrorism. About the first, I think the Afghans are very tired of war, and that bombing them will not bring them closer to democracy. We like to think that, so our bloodlust seems more noble. I think bombing will probably strengthen the radical factions among them -- those groups calling for war and vengeance. Just like it has in Israel. Just like it has in the US. But Iran, for instance, has made a lot of progress recently with Khatami and liberalization. That was after a period of economic development and relative peace. Now they want our blue jeans. As soon as you no longer live in a cave, the mindset of the stoneage will also lessen.

For dealing with terrorism.
First, Afghanistan played little role other than it's leaders harboring bin laden, to whom they owe much because of his help in the war against Russia. And if the fact that the leaders of a country harbor/finance terrorists is reason to be bombed, then many nations deserve as much, including our own.

Again, our real desire is bloodlust, and not justice. Most of the funding comes from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Manpower comes from Saudia Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, Yemen. Look at the nationalities of the terrorists. We wont bomb those countries because they are allies. But they don't have the political will (ability?) to shut down the radical (and popular) mosques and "education" centers, or to stop the flow of money to al-quaeda cells (in hamburg, egypt, etc.). There is trouble, especially in Pakistan, where the dictator just fired two of his top generals (who were sympathetic to the Taliban) with rioting in the streets. If it becomes destabilized, it will be a taliban-type state with nuclear weapons. So in this case, at least, sanity has prevailed and we are not targeting them.

So what can we do? I think that this article (http://www.salon.com/news/letters/2001/09/14/klar e/) outlines a better plan than what we're doing. Read it, and then reread bin laden's speech, if you're spending as little time working today as I am:). Also, restraint, now, on our part, would do a great deal to boost our standing in the Islamic world. It would cut one of bin laden's strengths. After he is isolated, we could negotiate, and I think the taliban were willing to negotiate (but not capitulate) to his extradition and trial. Possibly the Hague, as was done with the lockerbie bombings. The end result would be a safer, saner middle east. bin laden behind bars, and most importantly, al quaeda would be a weakened, rougue network without the popularity/influence it now enjoys. At least I would try this route. You can always bomb/invade. You can never unbomb.

Finally, the last benefit to moderation might be that we wont have a "minister of Fatherland security", and hacking wont be considered terrorism, we wont add 60 billion to our military budget, and a lot of bad laws wont get passed by a cowed congress.

That's my 2 cents, and probably why I will never get elected to any sort of office. I appreciate your encouragement, though.

It's not like they're going to develop Open Source software.

Odd you say that. Did you know that *BSD was funded with grant money from DARPA? And recently DARPA granted over a million dollars to NAI Labs to develop Trusted BSD.

Where do you think much of the origninal funding for the Internet itself came from in the first place? I do admit I find it ironic that DoD paid for BSD with taxpayer dollars and then ran off and threw their cash to proprietary vendors.

Salon also has an article on the topic. It discusses the condensate in terms of a new "state of matter" (to go along with solid, liquid, gas, plasma?). It also mentions the most obvious applications are for precision measurement and nanotechnology.

...this kind of war!

A source for that? Just google it. Here's one I found quickly.

Yes, true, Jefferson was a GREAT writer. The preamble to the Decl. of Ind. is quite great. And that idiocy of "creating a Union better then the U.S." is quite stupid. I never criticized American government, simply reminded you that the American forefathers are not as perfect as the textbooks make them out to be.

Try this link
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2001/10/08/file _monopoly/print.html [salon.com]
should do the trick

And if that doesn't do it, try:
https://premium.salon.com/sub/do_register.jsp

(Worked for me...then again, I like Salon.)

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2001/10/08/file _monopoly/print.html

should do the trick

All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. I don't think our leaders had to tell us that the country was attacked. The jumbo jets flying into the skyscrapers did that just fine. The barbarians must be destroyed.

-- What's Bin Laden's Goal?

Have you forgotten where the link in your sigfile leads? An anti-war editorial written by an Afghan.

So, are you an unapoligetic hypocrite, or is a hundred million dollars (in explosives) all it really takes to change your real beliefs?

According to this, that is exactly why he did it. I made this link my new signature. In the last 50 years, Hitler has gotten thrown around as justification for a lot of things, but in this case I really think we do have another Hitler that wants to conquer the world and remake it in a radical religious image.

If the only thing you can see is "They hurt us and we will hurt then more" you are an idiot.

No, what I see is "they hurt us, and it's our responsibility to make sure they can't ever hurt us again".

You want the "why"? Here is the "why". Can you handle the truth that these are power-hungry people who want to destabilize the world?

If you want to read a real movie review, Salon has a well done review of "Training Day" that actually discusses the merits of the film and will be much more useful in deciding whether you want to see the movie or not. Jon's reviews always sound like he didn't see the movie, but had someone else tell him the plot.

I have no problems with them taping me walking home but if they want to see inside my house or tape what I say to friends then that's a different matter

Incidentally here's a similar article from Salon someone linked to from Slashdot a few months ago... rather amusing to a Brit, IIRC :)

The contract between publishers and society is that publishers have the right to distribute their works as they see fit and then the consumer can do whatever they want with the physical copy of the work they have purchased.

Backup a moment, part of this 'deal' is that we allow them to abridge freedoms because it encourages them to create. To clarify, we volunteer to *not* do something that is very easy and honest in every sense, that is create a simple copy of some information. we do this because it seems reasonable considering a free-market is supposed to be involved and balance this by dropping prices, increasing features and encouraging innovation (the real kind, not the MS kind).

Now, today, we have the RIAA, a collusive group of plutocrats, buying legislation and agreeing to not compete. They dont innovate: they dont embrace new technologies like the internet to lower costs and lower prices. They dont increase features: instant-cheap-streaming music. What the RIAA dosnt do is provide the balancing act that an agreement like copyright relies on to achieve some sense.

The RIAA acts in concert to control the music industry. It acts in concert to control prices (already found guilty). It acts in concert to not compete on price, technology or distribution methods. It acts in concert to wrangle artists into a do-or-die (see this salon article) contracts. It acts in concert to exclude others from the industry in any way: mp3.com, napster (after it promised to reform).

The RIAA is a syndicate amounting to an effective monopoly. This is also illegal.

So, again, to the issue of what 'rights' the publishers are entitled to... if they were willing to behave as honest business people, and not like a mafia, I might be willing to entertain the idea that we should continue to extend them the privilege of copyright. As it stands today, Id say that the detriment is BY FAR outweighing the benefit people used to find acceptable in exchange for a breach of basic freedom.

cp my.mp3|wav formyfriend.mp3|wav Makes me a manufacturer, the historical role of a 'publisher'.
mail -s Enjoy this great new music &#60 formyfriend.mp3|wav makes me a promoter and a distributor, the historical role of a 'publisher'

In light of our new reality, both the state of the industry and the reality of the digital world, I believe, we should simply abolish copyright.

Simple, easy, honest and very reasonable act on the part of a free and conscience person. (that is cp and mail)

Are you beginning to see the big picture?

Am I the only one who thinks this is wrong? I mean, obviously the sight of the WTC in these movies may be upsetting to some people, but in my opinion, wiping them out of movies and tv shows like they never even existed is extremely disrespectful to the memories of those who lost their lives in the disaster.

I'm reminded of Jessica Mitford's analysis of the funeral industry, which has so sanitized and commercialized death that families have no practical connection to the corpses of their loved ones, and thus often have difficulty dealing with the reality of the event. Sometimes exposure rather than avoidance is the fastest path to acceptance of a tragedy.

you think that the music industry is the artists' friend?

.... this popular artist doesn't seem to think so, as well as many others that I've heard about, and a few that I've known.

You can either subscribe (please do) or you can use a product like WebWasher to filter out the ads. It does an excellent job, is free for non-corporate users, and comes in Linux versions. It works with Netscape, IE, and Opera (haven't tried with Mozilla, but WW doesn't seem to recognize that I have it installed).

I just went to Salon.com, and read several stories. Didn't see any of these ads. There was one popup which I clicked closed. Possibly because I have most banner sites blocked on my hosts file, and already had Salon's cookies blocked.

Salon's editor wrote that the new ads will be only shown once per user per day, and use cookies.

I'm definitely against giving away any freedom.

Too late: The terrorist networks and the countries that protect them already have. They declared war on the US, and it's naive to think they are going to stop at this point.

This is not about the US's mideast policy. I'm sure you've seen this letter that has been circulating. This is not about Israel, this is about conquering the world and converting it to Islam. Bin Laden will keep attacking in hopes of igniting a World War which will remake the world as Islam.

Often Hitler is used in an exaggerated sense, but I don't think it's exaggering to say this guy is in Hitler's mold. He needs to be stopped at all costs, before we see another maniac rise to power.

Check this out if you think the ad on Salon.com is annoying.

<cliche>There is no free lunch. You get what you pay for.</cliche>

If you don't like the ads, subscribe and poof! No more ads -- and you're directly supporting the editorial work. If you don't want to read it, fine. Just don't expect that you'll find a lasting free ride elsewhere.

"We know that some Web users find this sort of ad intrusive. But before you send in that irate e-mail, we ask you to consider that the content you come to Salon for -- independent-minded, thought-provoking, unavailable elsewhere -- does not come free.

Today we have two ways to support our writers, editors and the rest of the staff that keeps Salon coming to you every day -- through advertising and through subscriptions. If sitting through one five-second ad before you can read an article is simply too much of a delay for you, we offer a Salon Premium subscription as a different way to support Salon -- you get access to exclusive content and the option to turn off most ads on the site. (For more information, click here.) "

How about you subscribe for premium content, thereby eliminating the ads altogether? Not only do you support the company buy paying for reading their content, but you also get more content/articles/etc. when you do. It's a win-win situation.
Support free speech and buy your own beer(or at least don't bitch about the quality/conditions of the free beer).

(Copied shamelessly from here in the hopes that some of you might read it before forming an opinion. Emphasis, where used, is mine.)

About our new ads
A note to readers

Sept. 24, 2001 | Today Salon introduces a new kind of advertisement -- a full-screen message that will show up in your browser when you click on a link, and will play briefly before moving you on to the page you requested. (The ad should only show up once per day per user, unless you have turned "cookies" off in your browser.)

As most of you know, this has been a difficult year for advertising-supported publications, online and off. Like many other companies we've responded by trying to innovate for our advertisers -- so we can remain financially healthy and continue to serve you. As with any innovation, we expect to learn from our experience over time, to keep what works and drop what doesn't.

We know that some Web users find this sort of ad intrusive. But before you send in that irate e-mail, we ask you to consider that the content you come to Salon for -- independent-minded, thought-provoking, unavailable elsewhere -- does not come free.

Today we have two ways to support our writers, editors and the rest of the staff that keeps Salon coming to you every day -- through advertising and through subscriptions. If sitting through one five-second ad before you can read an article is simply too much of a delay for you, we offer a Salon Premium subscription as a different way to support Salon -- you get access to exclusive content and the option to turn off most ads on the site. (For more information, click here.)

Our intention, as always, is to bring you the most intelligent, provocative, fearless coverage of news and culture available anywhere.

Scott Rosenberg
Managing editor

(Copied shamelessly from here in the hopes that some of you might read it before forming an opinion. Emphasis, where used, is mine.)

About our new ads
A note to readers

Sept. 24, 2001 | Today Salon introduces a new kind of advertisement -- a full-screen message that will show up in your browser when you click on a link, and will play briefly before moving you on to the page you requested. (The ad should only show up once per day per user, unless you have turned "cookies" off in your browser.)

As most of you know, this has been a difficult year for advertising-supported publications, online and off. Like many other companies we've responded by trying to innovate for our advertisers -- so we can remain financially healthy and continue to serve you. As with any innovation, we expect to learn from our experience over time, to keep what works and drop what doesn't.

We know that some Web users find this sort of ad intrusive. But before you send in that irate e-mail, we ask you to consider that the content you come to Salon for -- independent-minded, thought-provoking, unavailable elsewhere -- does not come free.

Today we have two ways to support our writers, editors and the rest of the staff that keeps Salon coming to you every day -- through advertising and through subscriptions. If sitting through one five-second ad before you can read an article is simply too much of a delay for you, we offer a Salon Premium subscription as a different way to support Salon -- you get access to exclusive content and the option to turn off most ads on the site. (For more information, click here.)

Our intention, as always, is to bring you the most intelligent, provocative, fearless coverage of news and culture available anywhere.

Scott Rosenberg
Managing editor

The poster is incorrect and therefore his argument is vacuously true. You can link directly to articles.

Please to the logical thing and remove this story immediately.

If it is annoying, then shell out the few bucks to support the site.

It's worth it, gets you access to additional features, and you aren't annoyed by ads. As a side benefit, you support one of the best sources of online journalism.

If you only read the occasional article, then don't bother, but don't complain about the ads. If you read all the time, then why haven't you signed up yet?

about it all , this... and when you think about it, its probably true

That can change at any moment!

In case you haven't been reading the thread, there are a lot incidences where employers have failed to pay wages owed, or written bad checks. In this case, it seems morally bankrupt not to admit that these companies have done wrong.

In fact, the rise of Microsoft's Internet Information Server (IIS) as the dominant Web server on NT shows much the same pattern as the rise of IE as the dominant browser: Microsoft got pole position by exercising its unique leverage as an operating system vendor.
Originally IIS, Web server software that runs only on the NT operating system, was bundled "free" with a version of NT called NT Server. Web server vendors such as Netscape and O'Reilly responded by pointing out in our advertising and PR that if customers ran our third-party Web server software on NT Workstation (a less expensive version of NT, which came without the IIS Web server software), they would end up with a more powerful server than Microsoft's IIS running on NT Server -- and it would cost less too.
Much as it had done by bundling the browser with Windows 98, Microsoft was bundling an application -- the IIS Web server -- as part of an operating system, (NT Server). But in this case, the company offered another version of the same operating system without the bundle, (NT Workstation). It seemed natural to competitors to offer our products on top of the version of the operating system that came without IIS.
It did not, however, please Microsoft that we did so. In June 1996 Microsoft responded by changing the license to NT Workstation to prohibit its use as a server platform. (At first, the company went further, and actually crippled the version of TCP/IP provided in NT Workstation, but the outcry from users forced it to backtrack.)
Microsoft argued, quite rightly, that it had the right to create two different versions of NT, with different price points, and different functionality. But the company went a step further, and used its operating system license (and more specifically the license to the parts of the operating system that implemented TCP/IP, an industry standard protocol) to prohibit the use of third-party applications that duplicated the functionality of Microsoft's more expensive platform.
Microsoft's public rationale for the policy -- that it was protecting its customers because NT Workstation was not suitable for use as a server operating system -- was proven false by my colleague, former O'Reilly editor Andrew Schulman (working with Mark Russinovich). Shulman and Russinovich demonstrated that it was possible to convert NT Workstation to NT Server by changing only a few registry entries. NT Workstation contained all of the same program code as NT Server; the code was simply disabled, and some additional applications bundled.

This email has been making the rounds,

This particular chain letter has the unusual virtue of being (probably) true. It is actually an article posted on Salon.

Why is it that chain letters never link back to their source URLs? Well, I guess most are blatant lies. But even the true ones invariably go out with stupid friend-of-a-friend attributions.

In any case, Afghanistan really is a bombed-out mess, and the majority of civilians would like nothing better than for the Taliban, and Al-Queda, and the ex-Mujahedin, to go away so they can have a real country again.

Law enforcement officials are taking
advantage of the war on terrorism to get
everything they ever wanted.

___

By Damien Cave and Katharine Mieszkowski

Sept. 22, 2001 | Northwest Airlines kicked three Arab-American men off a flight from Minneapolis to Philadelphia Friday, simply because other passengers refused to fly on the same plane with them. The airline defended removing the men from the plane, saying that security rules gave it permission to "reaccommodate" passengers. The Council on American-Islamic Relations reacted immediately: "This is racial and religious profiling of the worst kind. Both the passengers and the airplane personnel should be ashamed of their actions."

[...]



more

Salon has an article on its front page addressing these same issues. Check it out.

Salon has an article on its front page addressing these same issues. Check it out.

*Sigh*

Jon, there is no such thing as a new reality. Reality has always been the same. It is this reality we've seen in Europe, rarely but occasionally, in not so distant past, and it's the daily reality of people in countries like India, Israel, Sri Lanka, and a bunch of other less public places.

The only thing that changed is that that strange USian dream of beeing somhow isolated from all that has been scratched substantially. So, hello and welcome to the club, but given the grim circumstances, we're not really glad to see you here now.

What does that mean ? Well, the real challenge for a democracy is not compromising on their principles because of it.

Another thing is really asking yourself about your relation to the rest of the world. Unfortunately the US morals and principles all too often sharply end at your borders. Outsiders are, in any way, "fair game" - in the worst meaning of this term. For many people in third world countries, the United States simply is the oppressor. American companies with very close ties to the White House can get away with mass murder, can deprive thousands of terminally ill people of their needed medicine (ironically the companies suing here are from all western states, but only the US government is openly threatening the affected third-world-countries) - just to name two examples in a list that could be enhanced for pages.

Essentially, the US is openly beeing a Bad World Citizen, World schoolyard Bully, and is openly saying that rules are there for others to obey, not for them. Even when they right, the tone and habit often prevents them from effectively reaching the intended audience.

Instead we see a US that is only and exclusively bothered by its own interests, and puts most moral asisde as soon as its economic or strategical matters are affected. And you even have the chuzpah to claim moral superiority when doing that - this hypocrisy probably inflames people more than the actual policy it concerns. You run around and preach about reducing government corruption - while sufficient large companies can buy just about any law in DC (I don't even start debating presidential elections). You run around preaching about environmental issues - while you are the worst offender in most categories there. You have the incredible audacity to run around and preach about human rights while you put thirteen year olds to prison for life, juveniles onto death row and have more people per capita in your prisons than just about any fucking police state.

If there is a war for the hearts and the minds of the world, you are loosing it. Big time.

So what's the new reality here ? The new reality is that an utterly delusional US of A got slightly tighter grip to the "real" reality out there. Yes, the US will go after Bin Laden and his cronies - finally, I might say, as you have practically grown and financed him for years. And yes, there will be major action against Afghanistan and maybe a few others, and numerous innocent people will loose their life. This is the way the internatinal power play works, and it's probably a necessity. But will you also learn from it ? Will the US change its habits, alter ist ways ?

This is the real "new reality". You got more insights. You can learn. Improve.

Will you ?

f.

That very well might be, but allow me to respond.

I do agree that Germany and Japan were both among the strongest economies before the war; however, the destruction wrought was horrendous enough that it largely destroyed the Big Mistake #2. Yes, indeed, they did have a large technical base before hand. But then again, BG#2 did also sap a massive amount of the trained expertise into the infantry and other life shortening branches. The Afghanis are well known, even dreaded, for their abilities as being able to work with technical things, but at poor levels of technological support: repair and maintence of weapons that would nominally require a full out machine shop is the oft cited example. Additionally, not all of the Afghanis that have these skills are wrapped up in the Taliban movement. Based on this story I would say a good number would be tired and willing enough to just get on with their lives.

The CIA world fact book notes that they do have oil, precious and semiprecious stones, natural gas, and numerous industrial mineral deposits. Explotation of these would make it well on its way to pulling itself upwards. Especially if the US were to provide the aid to do so.

Additionally, also noted while reading the WFB that the transport and other basic industrial frameworks are not really there at all. Add these in, again, US aid, and watch this signifigantly help. (C'mon, 24.6 *KM* of railroad?!?!)

Nor do I think that this would be a 30 second in and out job. I think teh war would be somethign long, up to 7 years most likely. The reconstruction and occupation would be another ten. Then we'd phase out of being there. The average Muslim would be a lot less worried about the US if they saw how prosperous we left and indeed DID leave Afghanistan afterwards.

With that intuitive skill base, resources available, and US aid, I think we can work from there. Do NOT get me wrong, I do not think, in reality that Afghanistan would be one of the top 4 economies, but I do think it would be impressively better off than it is now. Even potentially verging on a first world country with 50 years or so of peace afterwards.

Then again, I may be, as you said, just expecting too much. :)

ciao

yes, well, except that the federal government uses financial incentives to encourage private organizations to promote certain messages.

I can't wait until the ONDCP starts paying people to logon to AOL chat rooms to Spread the Word.

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality,' which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

• Linus Torvalds is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
• Richard M. Stallman, spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
• Alan Cox is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail, which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted on leftist commie propaganda site Salon.com as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo slut!

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children. To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis, glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat is secret homo slang for the tip of a penis that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously /anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no /opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherit gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

Even the title 'Slashdot' originally referred to a homosexual practice. Slashdot of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, http://www.eff.org/.

The editors of Slashdot also have homosexual names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement. (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot runs on Apache!

The Apache server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'

FEEDBACK

What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo-calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus, Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator.

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism.

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h, Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church. Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee, Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

One scary thing about Perl is that it contains hidden homosexual messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

And PHP stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase, Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation. Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman.

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the fuck?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck right off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD, which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain. You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat, but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Some more proof of Linux's inherent gayness has come to my attention. Readers of Slashdot, a prominent Linux evangelism site, often compete to get the "First Post" on a new story. While this may at first seem like harmless inanity, "first post" is actually an anagram for the much more sinister FIST SPORT, obviously referring to the disgusting homosexual practice of "fisting", whereby one man forces first his clenched fist then the rest of his queer arm up into the lower intestine of another man. How any proper Christian person could find pleasure in this practice is abhorrent.

Also on Slashdot, half of the postings to these articles begin with, in big capital letters, I ANAL, which requires no explanation, and is so blatantly filthy it boggles the mind.

Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

First, As noted here[jerrypournelle.com], The Russians already bombed Afghanistan back to the stone age. and the Taliban are not the Afghans. The Taliban are a bunch of psychopathic nuts, hated by the majority population.

An Afghan-American speaks

You can't bomb us back into the Stone Age. We're already there. But you can start a new world war, and that's exactly what Osama bin Laden wants.

By Tamim Ansary

Sept. 14, 2001 | I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on San Francisco's KGO Talk Radio, conceded today that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What else can we do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we "have the belly to do what must be done."

And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived in the United States for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing.

I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters.

But the Taliban and bin Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" think "the Jews in the concentration camps." It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats' nest of international thugs holed up in their country.

Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan -- a country with no economy, no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban.

We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and healthcare? Too late. Someone already did all that. New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans; they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause with the Taliban -- by raping once again the people they've been raping all this time.

So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what needs to be done" they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about killing innocent people. Let's pull our heads out of the sand. What's actually on the table is Americans dying. And not just because some Americans would die fighting their way through Afghanistan to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that, folks. Because to get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the West.

And guess what: That's bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right there. He really believes Islam would beat the West. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the West wreaks a holocaust in those lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose; that's even better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong -- in the end the West would win, whatever that would mean -- but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours.

Who has the belly for that? Bin Laden does. Anyone else?

I think firing people on the current CIA hirerarchy is a good start !

Here's more on this ...

Why can't Uncle Sam spy? -
The problem is red tape, turf battles and no spies on the ground, say experts

(See this commentary in the New Yorker and this one in Salon for calls to treat this as a police action.)

I suggest that the best analogy for what we need to do is treat this like the Italian struggle against the Mafia. The crucial step is a cultural change, from the situation where the CD party treated the Mafia as a necessary evil that was just part of the political landscape, to where all of Italian society turned against the Mafia, and magistrates and judges were willing to risk their lives to rid Italy of Mafia control. The Mafia still exists, no doubt, but it no longer has the same insidious grip on the political system.

Here, the crucial step is getting the Arab and Muslim countries to stop treating their radical Islamists as necessary evils who, since they can mobilize the poor, and can kill dissenters, must be tolerated and accepted. Many countries, such as Iran and Syria, have used these groups to fight proxy wars for political control over the Middle East. The best thing that can come out of this tragedy is an alignment of Arab and Muslim contries against their radical elements, and a change in the culture there to stop accepting bloody attacks against civilians as acceptable political tactics.

That's why bombing Kabul, for example, is likely to be counter-productive. As much as we want the Taliban to be out of Afganistan and replaced by some more acceptible government, the likelihood that we will succeed is low, and the likelihood that we will simply piss off the very countries we need to align against these guys is high.

I suspect that what Rumsfeld et al. are talking about by "new kind of war" is making their point on asymetric warfare: the notion that we have gotten so good at fighting conventional wars that no one will send armies and navies against us, but will instead fight with more "terrorist-like" actions. My guess is that internal in the Pentagon this is being used as an "I told you so/wake up call".

i think anyone who's been following current events (save for the last two weeks) could see we were on the crest of something huge ... military-type authors, ie. tom clancy (although netforce was pretty much a joke) have been throwing terrorist theories around for years (red storm rising - opens with a group of terrorists attacking a major russian oil refinery). if you want to read something that will make your hair stand on end, try rainbow six, which begins with the hijacking of an airliner.

the main problem with our military and the concept of it, is that it's geared for fighting nations, not individuals. "the us army is a broadsword, not a scapel." invading the nation that hosts the individuals who are responsible may bring them to justice. we should keep in mind that the eyes of the world are on america right now. i don't think there's citizen on this planet (who has access to television) who isn't considering what we're going to do next.

evidence to the fact that we're still not thinking about this correctly comes from quotes like "rid world of evil-doers" ... as if those who acted out of their hate for american would stand-up long enough for the boot of the us military to come crashing down on their collective heads. is this a war? yes, without a doubt. but it's a war we've never see (on our own soil) or fought. i have every hope that our leaders will realize just what a huge leap we took on the eleventh, and how far we have to go to catch up.

_f

EXACTLY. The programming broadcast by a media company is their voice, and it is not only their right, but their responsibility to edit their programming to conincide with the message they want to convey. If they feel certain songs are inapropriate given the state of things, it is well within their right to remove those songs from rotation.

Corporate radio (except for howard stern) is crap anyway. Go listen to a college radio station, or NPR.

Go read the salon article.

Well, in that sense, you're correct. It's not something that abridges free speech. However, I still feel that it's an important issue, and the term 'censorship' is still accurate.

"But in this case, ClearChannel (who i`ve never heard of before now) seem to be censoring themselves."

The own a lot of radio stations. According to this Salon article from April, they owned 1,200 stations, and they've got representation in 247 of the 250 largest markets. In my local market, I'm aware of at least 4 Clear Channel stations (2 of them talk radio where "Clear Channel" was mentioned regularly, 1 of them I discovered only recently when they mentioned using news coverage from one of their "Clear Channel sister stations", and 1 I discovered just now from the Salon article), and I suspect there are more as it's not always obvious that it's a Clear Channel station.

So, as a result, they're censorsing a non-trivial portion of American airwaves. It may be self-imposed censorship, but it's not immune to scrutiny, especially by people who listen to the stations in question.

Just to point this out: it's censorship when there's no other choices to broadcast that medium - even if the government is not doing the censorship. Clear Channel's a monopoly in some areas (see this Salon.com article and this one as well.) This means that while it's not government censorship, these songs are de facto censored in those areas.

Just to point this out: it's censorship when there's no other choices to broadcast that medium - even if the government is not doing the censorship. Clear Channel's a monopoly in some areas (see this Salon.com article and this one as well.) This means that while it's not government censorship, these songs are de facto censored in those areas.

Heres an article on Clear Channel Communications at Salon Magazine.