Slashdot Mirror
Sony Introduces Passage
UncleCrispy writes "Sony, a newcomer in the cable industry announced its new technology, Passage, on the opening day of the BroadBand Plus Show to the receptive ears of the cable community. "Sony's Passage Technology is a simple, elegant solution that allows equipment from multiple vendors to peacefully co-exist on legacy digital CATV networks"
Now you won't be stuck with the SetTopBox your cable provider forces on you, but with Passage you should be able to go to the store and buy any box you want. If you want a DVR box, you can buy it, and you'll no longer be stuck with the rental fees.
Sounds like it's a good deal for the cable providers and consumers, but how will current SetTopBox monopolies take the news?"
V1.1 - Added Appendix-A for general posting guidelines suggested by AC (almost verbatim, minor html changes only)
V1.0b - First revision
Introduction:
Greetings Slashdot. I have noticed that trolls on Slashdot are having too easy a time recently, with the most random gibberish getting modded up and many child comments (bites) attached to it. This recent trouble can only realistically be due to an influx of newbies, so I have composed this FAQ to bring newbies up to speed and recognise trolls for the scum that they are.
On clichés:
I have deliberately elected to avoid the greatest cliché of FAQs, by not actually answering any questions, frequently asked or otherwise. Instead this will be an informative guide.
The FAQ:
Moderation :
This section gives guidelines on when to/when NOT to moderate.
- Groupthink moderation: When deciding whether to moderate a post, take no cues from existing moderations. It is well known in the trolling (often referred to as 'trollerizing') community that the first moderation is critical; if somebody spots you as a troll, all subsequent moderations are likely to be troll. If, however, the first moderator mistakenly thinks it is insightful, then the rest of the moderators will think it is insightful too. Avoid this mentality and ignore current moderations entirely. Judge a post solely on its merits, ignoring what others think.
- Follow the links: Related to the point above, a comment with links (often purporting to be a mirror or further information) will often get moderated very highly. It seems the mentality is that the comment has informative looking links, and is moderated as insightful, so it must be insightful, right? Wrong. All it takes is one moderator to assume it is legitimate and moderate it up, the rest of the moderators then partake in groupthink moderation. You will not. Click on all the links and read the linked articles. If they are informative, mod them up. If they are 'ghostsee links' (a horrific image of a distended anus) then mod them as trolls. If you do not wish to follow the links, then don't moderate the post. Simple.
- Check the facts: If a post produces a mass of information, be it figures, quotes or whatever, check his sources! It may be that the figures are made up off the top of his twisted head; if no sources are offered and Google doesn't turn up anything, the chances are that it is made up. Scientists wouldn't believe a paper with no cited references. Follow the rules that should be becoming clear: if the information checks out and is informative, mod him up. If it totally doesn't check out and seems to be made up, mod him down. When in doubt? Don't moderate. And remember the golden rule - other people's moderations are no guide to veracity. Avoid groupthink moderation.
- What's in a name: Do not moderate people up based on their name. There are two facets to this:
- If somebody writes a shit comment, it deserves modding down. Just because Alan Cox happened to write it makes it no more insightful than if 'Peg Troll' wrote it. Do not moderate up famous people.
- ...And it probably isn't them. Does $famousPerson even post on Slashdot? Are you sure that's how they spell their name? Does the name say 'Alan Cox' or 'by Alan Cox'? The latter of the two is very hard to spot in context. Check their UID - then check their posting history. Check that they are who they say they are. Even if they are, you should generally not moderate them based on their fame unless it is because they are commenting on an area in which they have specialist knowledge.
- What's in a name revisited: Do not moderate them up because they are female. Firstly, they are almost certainly men pretending to be females exploiting this weakness that I am now advising you of. Secondly, even if they are female, even if they would like you because you modded them up, moderation is ANONYMOUS. Remember, moderate up the quality of the post and trolls are scuppered from the start.
- Opinions: Feel free to moderate up personal opinions - just don't do it solely because they agree with your point of view. If it is well argued, eloquent, mod it up. If it is badly argued, a stereotype taken to extremes, mod it down. If it takes things too far but happens to agree with your point of view, it is likely a troll looking for your kneejerk mod. Even if it's not, it doesn't deserve modding up as it takes things too far.
CommentingThis section gives guidelines on when to and when not to reply to a comment. This will cover several of the points made in the moderation section.
- Linux 8 - as discussed, there is nobody on Slashdot who doesn't know the difference between the kernel and Redhat.
- Lunix - nobody posts this accidentally. Yes, we all know that there is a different OS called Lunix and you pointing it out is not clever - the troll will be even more happy with this than a plain correction.
- O(log n) - if someone gets the big-o expression for an algorithm or process wrong, think how that came to be. They made it up off the top of their head. People can have opinions on many things, but they cannot be of the opinion that the TSP is O(n log n) - it is just wrong. The only exception is if somebody tentatively suggests that they vaguely remember that it might be O(...) but they aren't sure.
- Dijkstra - this man was a genius, but even he could not invent as many algorithms as trolls attribute to him.
- GPL - Anybody asserting that their lawyers told them X about the GPL where you know X to be wrong. If this man had really consulted lawyers, do you think that the lawyers would get wrong that which you got right?
That was just a sample - I hope to come up with a more definitive list sometime in the near future.I hope that helped, any contributions will be gladly received as a reply to this comment. One last rule:
Never EVAR start a comment with "I know you're a troll but..." This is trolling gold dust. Nothing is better than somebody saying that they are too smart to be fooled by you and then writing a 1000 word point-by-point rebuttal.
Appendix A: General posting guidelines by AC
You are not funny if you post these "jokes":
Don't post Microsoft bashing comments on stories that have nothing to do with Microsoft. Also, if you talk about Microsoft, write Microsoft or MS, not Micro$oft, M$, MicroShit, MicroShaft, MickeySoft of any variation of these.
Learn the difference between its/it's, there/they're/their, effect/affect, your/you're and ridiculous/rediculous. Just by learning those five groups, you'll be able to avoid 90% of the annoying Slashdot typos.
I R-U-L-E!!!
It has recently come to my attention that MacSlash now sees fit to delete users' comments, which is a form of censorship. It is with this post that I hope to bring this move towards terrorism on MacSlash to the sites' readership. The responsibility for such Hitlerian tactics must lie utlimately upon the shoulders of AcaBen, who owns this domain and has final say over how it is run.
Earlier this fine, December, 2002 day, I posted comments to MacSlash that were, within a few hours, deleted. After not only switching browsers but also entire systems to check the status of MacSlash and ensure that I was not experiencing a caching or proxy problem with my browser, ISP, or router, I confirmed the worst: my account had been compromised by AcaBen and my lastest two comments had been deleted.
Giving AcaBen and MacSlash one last benefit of the doubt, I posted two more comments regarding this odd behavior in hopes that there had been a problem with the MacSlash database. Lo and behold, these new comments were deleted even more quickly than the original two! Having seen that there was no other possibility than AcaBen acting out in a totalitarian rage, not unlike Saddam Hussein, I contacted fellow MacSlash readers and Slashcode experts to consult on possible courses of action.
Realizing that terrorism was winning on MacSlash, my only course was to let the truth be known and bear witness to the Macintosh world regarding this rotten Apple that is AcaBen and MacSlash. To further ensure that the truth regarding AcaBen's Satanic reign is propogated far and wide, I have initiated the following plans:
It is my plea to you, gentle MacSlash readers, that we pull together and stop this censorship and terrorism in its tracks. Only by constant vigilance and community can we hold back the tide of ultimate evil that AcaBen and his insidious gang of cohorts wish to foist upon innocent, unsuspecting Mac users.
Thank you.
Congratulations! You got first post!
YOU DID IT!
.. oops!
November 26, 2002 | Paul Thurrott
According to a new Aberdeen Group report, open-source solution Linux has surpassed Windows as the most vulnerable OS, contrary to the high-profile press Microsoft's security woes receive. Furthermore, the Aberdeen Group reports that more than 50 percent of all security advisories that CERT issued in the first 10 months of 2002 were for Linux and other open-source software solutions. The report muddles the argument that proprietary software such as Windows is inherently less secure than open solutions. And here's another blow to the status quo: Proprietary UNIX solutions were responsible for just as many security advisories as Linux in the same time period. Could Windows be the most secure mainstream OS available today?
"Open-source software, commonly used in many versions of Linux, UNIX, and network routing equipment, is now the major source of elevated security vulnerabilities for IT buyers," the report reads. "Security advisories for open-source and Linux software accounted for 16 out of the 29 security advisories--about one of every two advisories--published for the first 10 months of 2002. During this same time, vulnerabilities affecting Microsoft products numbered seven, or about one in four of all advisories."
The stunning report makes several claims that seem to fly in the face of widely accepted beliefs. First, the Aberdeen Group says that Windows-based Trojan horse attacks peaked in 2001, when CERT released six such advisories, then bottomed out this year, when CERT didn't issue any alerts. However, Trojan horse-based attacks on Linux, UNIX, and open-source projects jumped from one in 2001 to two in 2002. The Aberdeen Group says this information proves that Linux and UNIX are just as prone to Trojan horse attacks as any other OS, despite press reports to the contrary, and that Mac OS X, which is based on UNIX, is also vulnerable to such attacks. Even more troubling, perhaps, is the use of open-source software in routers, Web servers, firewalls, and other Internet-connected solutions. The Aberdeen Group says that this situation sets up these devices and software products to be "infectious carriers" that intruders can easily usurp.
According to the Aberdeen Group, the open-source community's claim that it can fix security vulnerabilities more quickly than proprietary developers can means little. The group says that the open-source software and hardware solutions need more rigorous security testing before they're released to customers. This statement is particularly problematic because many Linux distributions lack the sophisticated automatic-update technologies modern Windows versions contain.
We can rail against Microsoft and its security policies, but far more people and systems use Microsoft's software than the competition's software. I believe that we'll never know how secure Linux is, compared with Windows, until a comparable number of people and systems use Linux. But despite the fact that Linux isn't as prevalent as Windows, we're still seeing a dramatic increase in Linux security advisories today. I think the conclusion is obvious.
I guess we have geeks/enthusiasts for every possible field/product in this world... I didn't get most of the "terms" they used in the specifications.
interesting concept... but will the cable companies accept it ? Is not that the BIG question here ?
Forget spell-check, you need a grammar-check, my friend.
-MT.
Sorry, you're all going to hate me for this, but IT'S A SNOW DAY! HURRAY!!! Sorry, I just needed to let that out. Who knows why I'm telling you people this with a no anonomity. Oh well. Anybody share my excitement?
my cable modem was free! no monthly rental fee! free lifetime replacement if it breaks! regularly achieve 500-600 KB/s (i live in CT, USA)! no limits on amount downloaded per month (aside from capability of hardware)! has gone down only once in past 3 months (all cable service was down for a few hrs)!
w00t w00t!!
Cablevision's Optimum Online.