Slashdot Mirror
Hubble Shatters the Cosmic Distance Record
An anonymous reader writes: One of the holy grails of cosmology is to measure, directly, exactly when the first stars and galaxies formed in our Universe. The Hubble Space Telescope has been pushing the distance record farther and farther back, with its measurements typically confirmed by ground-based, spectroscopic follow-ups. This time, however, the new record-holder was so distant that confirmation needed to be done from space: by Hubble itself. The result? A galaxy at a redshift of z=11.1, from when the Universe was just 400 million years old, or a mere 3% of its current age. This is a record that will likely stand until the James Webb Space Telescope launches, as it took a combination of incredible work and incredible luck to find a galaxy this far back with our current technology.
For fuck sake! STOP! Pushing Forbes for Science articles!!!
Has Forbes any kind of business relation with Slashdot? I can't find another explanation for the repetitive insistance on linking to it.
It this behavior is going to continue, paid links should at least be identified, so those of us who won't ever whitelist Forbes in our adblocks don't have to hover every link to avoid opening the Forbes spam over and over again.
When a site does let you in just because you have an Ad Blocker, mean I won't use it, I don't mind if they bitch about having an Ad Blocker but Forbes doesn't even let you past, of F*k off is all I have to say to them.
F*k off is all I have to say to them
I think that sentiment is mutual. Ads provide them with income and if you block them they don't want you there. Which is fine: their house, their rules. Should Slashdot link to such sites though? I don't know... what I do know is that Slashdot should stop linking to Forbes because it's a rubbish magazine: the articles are often about highly interesting subjects but they lack substance, and in most cases there are far better (and free) alternative sources.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Indeed. And even if the new owners don't want to ban a site on the ideological grounds that it bans adblock users, they should at least see that this is disruptive.
We get more irritated people talking about Forbes than the actual subject, and irritated people aren't wont to return for more.
Internet users are fickle, and will leave if you give them reasons to. We are relatively thick skinned here, but the glass is overflowing, so don't keep adding drops of piss to it..
Forbes goes, or I go. And presumably a lot of other oldtimers go too.
Even worse, the NASA site renders nothing with javascript disabled.
I can understand a site blocking users that don't generate revenue, but requiring scripts to display information funded by taxes doesn't feel right.