Slashdot Mirror


Mysterious MilkyWay Warp Finally Explained?

* * Beatles-Beatles writes to tell us Space.com is reporting that scientists think that a collision between mysterious 'dark matter' and two of the Milky Way's nearby neighbors may be causing our galaxy to warp 'like a vinyl record left out in the hot Sun.' From the article: 'The warp is most clearly visible in a thin disk of hydrogen gas that extends across the entire 200,000-light-year diameter of the Milky Way. Viewed sideways, one half of the hydrogen disk appears to stick up above our galaxy's plane of stars and gas, while the other half dips below the plane for a bit and then rises upward again farther away from the galaxy's center.'"

22 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Mod Story -1 Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    * * Beatles-Beatles writes to tell us Space.com is reporting that scientists think that a collision between mysterious 'dark matter' and two of the Milky Way's nearby neighbors may be causing our galaxy to warp 'like a vinyl record left out in the hot Sun.'

    Wow. A Slashdotter, a Slashdot "author" AND a space website conspiring to spam us...*sigh*

    1. Re:Mod Story -1 Spam by lantenon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I can't believe I didn't notice that until now. I've been reading through all of these comments, figuring that maybe, just maybe, there is still a shred of accountability in the Slashdot.org editors, and **Beatles-Beatles was submitting all his stories directly to Scuttlemonkey or something (which would explain the posting history.) But then, the submission isn't quoted, leading me to believe SM wrote it ... and now it's including the phrase "vinyl record". I gotta say this is lending a whole lot of credibility to the belief that SM and BB are in cahoots to raise his pagerank.

  2. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by zerocool^ · · Score: 1, Offtopic


    see my comment here in this thread.

    I'm not asking much. I don't even know if Taco knows this is going on. All I want is integrity.

    --
    sig?
  3. Re:At it again... by node+3 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Wow, how about that... **Beatles-Beatles and ScuttleMonkey at it again. What a team! Coincidence? I don't think so...

    No, I'm pretty sure he and his monkey got nothing to hide.

  4. Re:At it again... by MLopat · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Ok, tell me what I'm missing here. The guy has a tribute site to George Harrison, with no advertising, including no google ads. The page itself has a Google PageRank of 5, so that's not such a big deal. And when I was on it, it said I was the only current visitor? So what's the big deal?

  5. Re:At it again... by abertoll · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Two of those stories were submitted anonymously.

    --
    "he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
  6. THAT'S what I don't get! by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's one thing if he was posted evenly amongst the other editors. Okay, fine, they're all getting scammed by him.

    But, with the exception of a CmdrTaco article, every other submission from this guy is posted by ScuttleMonkey. Why is that? It's proof they just don't care anymore at this site.

    This crap is why people are flocking to Digg.com. Even though the discussions there suck because of no threading (yet), it's not really different from here, and when people are scamming the front page, everyone gangs together and undiggs it to remove it!

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:THAT'S what I don't get! by macshit · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      This crap is why people are flocking to Digg.com. Even though the discussions there suck because of no threading (yet), it's not really different from here, and when people are scamming the front page, everyone gangs together and undiggs it to remove it!

      Um, it is different from here because the comments on digg are a cesspool of uninformed, uninteresting, crap, and digg readers appear to be a pretty dim lot. Slashdot's comments are infinitely better.

      Since I (like the majority of readers, apparently) read for the comments, not for the articles, digg is hardly an attractive alternative; indeed, there seems little to distinguish it from the other 7 bazillion lame web-forums out there.

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    2. Re:THAT'S what I don't get! by pmc · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Slightly sceptical of this, I thought I'd check slashdot.org via google:

      http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Beatles-Beatle s+writes%22+site:slashdot.org&hl=en&lr=&start=10&s a=N - "Beatles-Beatles writes"

      http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22Beatles- Beatles+writes%22+site%3Aslashdot.org+scuttlemonke y&meta= - as above but with ScuttleMonkey in the page

      http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22Beatles- Beatles+writes%22+site%3Aslashdot.org+-scuttlemonk ey&meta= - as first but without ScuttleMonkey in the page.

      First - 126 hits: Second 125 hits: Third - 1 hit. Things that make you go "hmmmmmm....."

  7. Re:At it again... by Chris+Bradshaw · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Your kidding right? Look again...

    http://science.slashdot.org/~*%20*%20Beatles-Beatl es

    --
    Get your Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool Here for FREE! - http://fedora.redhat.com
  8. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by UserGoogol · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    You make some good points, but I think you make some assumptions.

    You said you've only submitted ten or fifteen articles to Slashdot in your entire lifetime. To contrast, I wouldn't be surprised if Beatles Beatles submits at least fifteen articles every week. (He makes money off of it, so it's worth it for him to spend a couple hours every week trolling the Internet for stories.) If that is the case, his success in getting articles submitted would be perfectly sensible.

    That said, the fact that the person who posts his articles is consistantly ScuttleMonkey is intensely suspicious. It is possible that there are other reasons, but we are right to be suspicious.

    That said, I'm not sure if we are right to care. It's not a big deal. Beatles beatles's articles are generally neat little links.

    The sole function of editors at Slashdot is to prevent stuff like Goatse from getting posted. In the years I've been here (less than yours, admittingly) editors have never done anything vaguely editorial. All they do is look in the editor's queue, and post whatever catches their eye. They do not edit the posts for grammar, or check if the article has been posted before, or check if the article is true or not. They are not journalists, they are merely a rudimentary filter. Thus, until Beatles Beatles posts Goatse, ScuttleMonkey is performing his job perfectly.

    --
    "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  9. Re:At it again... by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    There's a bigger question--why are you subscribed to this place? Is this spam really worth your money?

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  10. The truth about * *Beatles-Beatles by dorkygeek · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Looks like ScuttleMoney^H^Hkey still doesn't get it, as well as other Slashdotters. So, let me repost this for the thousandst time.

    Interesting thing is, ScuttleMonkey seems to use some standard template for * *Beatles-Beatles submissions, since ALL of them start by: "* * Beatles-Beatles writes to tell us...".

    So, let me repost some earlier post of mine:

    Ok, let's have a look at his george-harrison.info website. Aha, maybe the links at the bottom of the page? Yes, I see: http://george-harrison.info/reciprocal-links.html.

    Sooo, what may be on that page? Quoting:

    Our reciprocal links page. These links are useful for website promotion, link trades, and generating traffic to your site. There are many sites with useful products, services, programs, business opportunities, information, and free stuff.

    All reciprocal links have been manually screened before getting on this page. Webmasters that post links on this page, also promote this Links Page on their site too. If you want to add your link and become a member of this reciprocal links page, just click on the top link for details. It's free to join.

    Looking at the link list (just a small excerpt):

    Guaranteed Dropship Wholesalers business directory source

    Good Vibrations for Singles - Free Dating, Love, Romance, and Friendship

    Collection Agency - Williams, Cohen & Gray

    Trade Links - Link Swap Page

    Personals Dating Affiliate Program - Instant Sign-Up

    ProfitsRup2U For Successful Internet Marketing

    Trade links page - reciprocal links page

    What do we learn? * * Beatles-Beatles is an ugly link spammer who uses Slashdot to increase the PageRank of his own site, on which he hosts a link farm.

    HTH!

    --
    Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    1. Re:The truth about * *Beatles-Beatles by Z0mb1eman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What do we learn? * * Beatles-Beatles is an ugly link spammer who uses Slashdot to increase the PageRank of his own site, on which he hosts a link farm.

      SO WHAT???

      Every time a story by him gets posted, cue the predictable, righteous, and frankly a bit hysteric posts from all kinds of people frothing at the mouth because of the huge injustice that was just done (to them personally, you'd think).

      Oh no, Beatles-beatles got another story posted. Oh, no, they all start with the same few words by the editor!! Oh No, they're all approved by the same editor!! OH NO, he has a link to his site under his name!!! OH NO, HIS SITE HAS OTHER LINKS ON IT!!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! WOE IS US!!

      Again, tell me exactly WHY I should care he's doing this. BFD - he puts in the effort to find and submit interesting articles. If he makes some money from it, more power to him (and honestly, get a grip on yourselves... how much money CAN he pull from this? $5 a month? $10? Is it coming out of your pocket?) Slashdot exists only because of user content - both the articles and the comments. UNOBTRUSIVELY promoting one's site in return for the content they provide seems fair enough. So many people - including myself - have their site URL in their profile and sig, and no one seems to care much about that. The only promotion I have problems with are the blatant slashvertisments (bob@somecompany tells us that SomeCompany has just released product X).

      If you don't like it, start looking for interesting stuff and submit so many articles that beatles-beatles' stuff won't make it through. Stop posting your inane troll post - we get it, and WE DON'T CARE.

      HTH.

      --
      ClutterMe.com - easiest site creation on the Net. Just click and type.
  11. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by Wheely · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'm trying not to think of it

  12. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by philovivero · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    With the disclaimer that I work at Digg, what makes you think Digg lacks what Slashdot gives you? At first I lamented the fact that Digg, although cool for its front-page articles, has really crappy comments.

    But lately, when I go to a Dugg story with a lot of comments, and read at +1, I get a couple of nice gems.

    Plus, Digg gives me a lot more variety. As a many-year Slashdot reader, I'm actually starting to di-- uh, like the website.

    Again, I know it's kinda hard to swallow since I'm supposed to be all biased and stuff, but I swear I'm not. It took me several weeks of using Digg before I finally decided I could actually eat my own dogfood.

  13. Re:At it again... by dbolger · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Take it easy, take it easy. The deeper you troll the higher you fly. In google pagerank, that is ;)

    BTW, I dont fully understand how search engine indexing works, but wouldn't everybody in this thread constantly mentioning "Beatles" and referencing their songs (even while complaining about Scuttlemonkey and spamming) increase the relevance that google attaches to this guy's link in relation to the Beatles, and rise his page up through the ranks?

  14. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by pkphilip · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hi there Rob! been a while. You doing ok?

  15. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by m50d · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Dumb question: everyone says that, so why doesn't digg just run slashcode?

    --
    I am trolling
  16. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by Black+Parrot · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    > When did this bullshit start anyway?

    When they sold themselves to a corporate pwner, back in the .goldrush

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  17. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by pjotrb123 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ScuttleMonkey and Beatles-Beatles are friends

    Worse yet: I believe they are the same person.
    I think he simply accepts his own submissions.
    He's trying to lay low/cut back, but can't resist.

    --
    I liked my next sig a lot better
  18. Re:**Beatles (thread to be bitchslapped in 3..2..) by Alberic · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What surprises me the most is this :

    • You can be read if your posts were "good" (Karma validation)
    • You can moderate if your views on moderation is coherent with the community (metamoderation validation)

    But, as far as I'm able to guess there is no such validation for higher ranks of administration. Why is that readers are subjject to so much redundant checks whie the one with the most powers are left unattended ?

    Who whatches the watcher ?
    --
    *squeak*