Slashdot Introduces YRO

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by CmdrTaco on Friday September 10, 1999 @04:00AM from the what-a-dumb-acronym dept.

Now that the new hardware is in place, I'm happy to announce the first new section on Slashdot: Your Rights Online [YRO] is a place where we can go into greater depth on the issues surrounding freedoms and liberties on the Net, and really in the world at large. So much happens in this area that the Slashdot Homepage just doesn't have enough room to host it all, so while YRO will appear on Slashdot when I think its relevant to everyone, it will largely stand alone. Read on to learn more about the section.

The Net is changing fast, and so are many of the issues surrounding your rights online. The US Policies on Encryption Export, governments filtering websites from their citizens, and right now, the PICS project In fact, the PICS project is what the first article's about. It's part 1 of 2.

YRO will be maintained by Michael Sims and Jamie McCarthy Their job will be similiar to what the existing Slashdot Authors do; read submissions and pick the best articles for publishing, just in a more focused area. In addition, they'll be writing original articles when it's appropriate. YRO will have room to post many stories that wouldn't have been able to appear on Slashdot, while Slashdot will continue to post the stories that we think are more relevant to everyone.

Michael Sims is a programmer for the Department of Energy and online free-speech activist who administers censorware.org. He swears that there won't be a nuclear catastrophe on January 1, 2000. Jamie McCarthy writes perl code all day; if he ever gets free time he works on The Holocaust History Project or censorware.org. He owns every book Theodore Sturgeon ever wrote.

We're pretty excited about this. I hope you are too. Now let's just see if it works...

46 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Censorship is a relative thing by Anonymous Coward · 1999-09-09 23:44 · Score: 0

Mostly, I hear that censorship is inherently evil. But how far to you take it? Spam is a capital crime on the internet -- doesn't shutting down spammers amount to censorship? At the same time, spam is a concept we all understand, yet not can seem to concretely define. If you were a boss and one of your employees spent all day downloading porn or fundamentalist theological treateses, would you fire him or her? If censorship was banned under civil rights laws, could the employee sue? I've read the Anarchist's Cookbook (checked it out from the public library.) His instruction for making bombs are dangerous -- cooking explosives in you kitchen oven is an invitation for disaster. How many of you would want your kids, neices or nephews blowing themselves up from this? I think most people tend to be ambevilant (sp) about such matters until it hits too close to home. Most people associate censorship with porn or language. Some people find the porn ads offensive. How many people would find fundamentalist ads of the same nature offensive? There is talk that the end user should be allowed to regulate content. Sounds good. But who should that be? Child? Parent? I mentioned a work situation. It sounds resonable that the employer should be allowed to regulate use of his resources on his time. What about socialist countries where most of the equipment is owned by the government? Oh, you say that the government is responsible to the people? That is an American/western concept. Most people don't have that world view. (Sorry, dont have time to address oversimplification of "good" and "bad" worldviews.) My point is that censorship is not a universal evil. Implementing a reasonable censorship is not as simple as some people think.
1. Re:Censorship is a relative thing by cmarkn · 1999-09-10 14:54 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, but your point is invalid. Censorship is universally evil. There is no such thing as "reasonable censorship."
  
  > doesn't shutting down spammers amount to censorship?
  
  No, not exactly. They are still able to publish their message, as only one method of distribution is being controlled. And this is because they are imposing costs on the receipients without their permission, not because of the content of the message. They could still send their message by snail mail, for example, where the entire cost of the delivery is charged to the sender.
  
  > If you were a boss and one of your employees spent all day downloading porn or fundamentalist theological treateses, would you fire him or her?
  
  If that were all they were doing, and I was paying them for something else, yes.
  But this is not censorship. I would not be firing them because they were downloading porn or worse, but because they are not doing their job. They are still able to go home, get on their own home computer, and download whatever they want.
  
  Censorship is when someone makes something completely unavailable to those who want it. Making it difficult to obtain, but still obtainable, is not censorship. For instance, limiting the sale of adult books to adult bookstores is not censorship. But limiting the sale of adult books to adult bookstores, and then shutting down all the adult bookstores is censorship.
  
  A parent turning off the TV to keep his child from watching a certain show is not a censor, because the control is at the receiving end. A parent blowing up the TV station to keep his child from watching the show is a censor, among other things.
  
  --
  People should not fear their government. Governments should fear their people.
Re:Spare me, McCarthy. by rjrjr · 1999-09-09 23:46 · Score: 1
This is a charming site, really delightful. Excerpts from their "Statement of Purpose" follow.
- It is not the purpose of CODOH to prove "the holocaust never happened," or that European Jews did not suffer a catastrophe during the Hitlerian regime.
- I no longer believe the German State pursued a plan to kill all Jews or used homicidal "gassing chambers" for mass murder.
- no physical remains of authentic homicidal gassing chambers exist today
- there are no war-time generated documents which prove they ever did
- For half a century the gas chambers have been at the heart of the holocaust story. The two are absolutely inseperable. No gas chambers, no holocaust. That's the equation.
This argument is ludicrous. Even if he were right about there being no gas chambers, this premise of no chambers => no holocaust is just silly.
I'll have to let my father in law know that the camp that he helped liberate was a clever Zionist propaganda ploy.
Please don't moderate this idiot down. Let people follow the link to get a good taste of intellectual poison, so they'll recognize it when next they see it.
Re:"What a dumb acronym" -- CmdrTaco by dieMSdie · 1999-09-10 00:40 · Score: 1

I like that one better Rob!

--
Don't throw your computer out the window, throw the Windows out of your computer!
Re:feature idea by Phil+Gregory · 1999-09-09 20:22 · Score: 0

Have you tried emailing Rob or otherwise conversing with him directly? Rob's stated several times that he doesn't read most of the comments on Slashdot, so writing here is not a good way to reach him.

--Phil (Not to mention that this thread is rather off-topic for this article.)

--
355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
OT: Intelligence test by belbo · 1999-09-09 20:23 · Score: 2

How many times do you find the term 'Slashdot' in this text:
Slashdot:Slashdot:Your Rights Online:Slashdot Introduces YRO
[ Slashdot.org ] Posted by CmdrTaco on 16:00 10 September 1999 UTC
from the what-a-dumb-acronym dept.
Now that the new hardware is in place, I'm happy to announce the first new section on Slashdot: Your Rights Online [YRO] is a place where we can go into greater depth on the issues surrounding freedoms and liberties on the Net, and really in the world at large. So much happens in this area that the Slashdot Homepage just doesn't have enough room to host it all, so while YRO will appear on Slashdot when I think its relevant to everyone, it will largely stand alone. Read on to learn more about the section.

The right answer is seven.
God, looks like another zero score posting. Where has my karma gone? kaaaarmaaaa!

--
--
"Just believe everything I tell you, and it will all be very, very simple."
1. Re:OT: Intelligence test by Hemos · 1999-09-09 20:36 · Score: 1
  
  7 is right. And you're score is 1. No worries.
  
  --
  Yeah, I'm that guy.
You're Rights Online and the New Katzianism by Arandir · 1999-09-09 20:46 · Score: 4

Reading the PICS article with its comments, as well as similar articles and their comments here on slashdot and elsewhere, I see a new emerging political philosophy that I'm sure will dominate YRO.

The computing populace at large, and hackers in specific, have been classified as neo-libertarian in beliefs. Although there are many exceptions, there does seem to be a libertarian-like streak in slashdot. However, this is as related to libertarianism as fishes are to whales.

Libertarians believe, in a nutshell, that governements should be limited in size, scope and power. This new Katzianism, as I'll call it, goes far beyond this. It's an "us versus them" philosophy. Corporations, proprietary developers, movies theaters, or anyone else that doesn't fit into "us", must be limited as well. Microsoft must be limited in size, scope and power otherwise personal liberty will be in danger.

For example: It's evil if the US Senate mandates music ratings, it's also evil if AOL includes a ratings system with its software, it's also evil if a Mom-and-Pop music store took these ratings into account. In a similar vein, Slashdot posting policies are decried as "censorship".

This Katzian attitude is guaranteed to raise its ugly head repeatedly in YRO. Be prepared for it. Be aware that many calls for freedom are in fact calling for the opposite.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
1. Re:You're Rights Online and the New Katzianism by brockmd · 1999-09-10 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  The new Katzianism will definately be alive and well at YRO, but I hope it will not be the loudest voice there.
  
  Personal liberity is improtant but so is personal responsibility, and no discussion of freedom can really be effective or meaningful without a framework of responsibility. The more freedom you want the more responisblity you must take upon yourself. It would be a great service to the furture YRO community if there is a matching discussion of Your Responsibilities Online.(YRO2).
2. Re:You're Rights Online and the New Katzianism by cmarkn · 1999-09-10 15:18 · Score: 1
  
  Libertarians are very concerned by governments and laws. I think this focus prevents them from seeing clearly; that other hierachial structures, for example large corporations, are a much more serious obstacle to the happiness of individuals.
  
  A perfect example of the New Katzism, based on ignoring the difference between the one government and the choice of large corporations. If you don't like a company, you can either go to their competitor, or you become their competitor yourself. If you don't like a government, they either kill you or put you in jail. It's not the same at all.
  
  It also ignores the fact that corporations exist to and because they make individual stockholders happy, which they do by making customers happy. When they stop making customers happy they go out of business. When they stop making stockholders happy, they get taken over by somebody who can do better. Thus, corporations tend to create a net increase in happiness.
  
  Governments exist to make sure that the rulers are happy, which they do by making their supporters happy and everyone else miserable. Governments tend to create a net decrease in happiness.
  
  --
  People should not fear their government. Governments should fear their people.
3. Re:You're Rights Online and the New Katzianism by Exocet · 1999-09-09 22:20 · Score: 1
  
  I agree that sort of thing is going to happen - there are some people who simply dislike being told what to do, by anyone. These same sort of people believe (wrongly or rightly) that we should have freedom of choice.
  
  I personally agree with this view. I think I can make my own decisions. However, there are plenty of stupid people running around who can NOT or do not want to think for themselves and use some "common" sense.
  
  I suppose we could give them the opportunity to try to think for themselves, but I suspect they wouldn't. Sure, we shouldn't cater to this minority, but they're more vocal than us "smart" people, so they get their way.
  
  Exocet
  
  --
  Exocet Industries - Taking over the world, one computer at a
4. Re:You're Rights Online and the New Katzianism by Anonymous Coward · 1999-09-09 23:22 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed, there is a popular politic thought in the slashdot-community, that is different from libertarianism. Libertarians are very concerned by governments and laws. I think this focus prevents them from seeing clearly; that other hierachial structures, for example large corporations, are a much more serious obstacle to the happiness of individuals. I am grateful that so many slashdot-readers have managed to avoid this trap.
YRO needs an ICON by Sam+Ruby · 1999-09-09 20:54 · Score: 1

Perhaps EFF's blue ribbon?

--
- Sam Ruby
Re:"What a dumb acronym" -- CmdrTaco by Rational · 1999-09-10 03:40 · Score: 1

Well, it does follow the OSS tradition of Recursive Acronyms... I'd go for it...

--
"Be nice, veer left, and never stop thinking" Iain Banks - Walking On Glass
YRO Slashbox, please? by Cyclops · 1999-09-09 21:08 · Score: 1

It would be nice to be able to have an YRO slashbox, so we could select it to have all the news there, and not just those one finds of relevance, should we wanto to.

Just my 2/100 of Euro
On a VERY related topic... by TheGeek · 1999-09-10 04:40 · Score: 2

I run a site called Geekrights.org, which covers many of the same topics and more. I hope that CmdrTaco doesn't put me out of business, but I definitely know (after the interviews, emails, phone calls) that this is a growing topic. Certainly all the work I've put into doing this site has been worth it in the realizations I've had on my own.
Some of the most amazing things that I'm seeing throughout this are the things that high-tech workers are putting up with in the workplace. We're talking outright abuse in some cases. Others are finally working out what they really make for their time (wages divided by hours) and realizing that they aren't that far ahead of working at the 7-11.
But hey, saving money in the bank is easy when you never have time between sleep and work to spend it!
The Geek
Geekrights.org

--

TheGeek
http://www.geekrights.org
Kill the monkey
Still remember to talk to your lawyer. by ColonelNorth · 1999-09-09 21:29 · Score: 1

The YRO is a wonderful idea and I hope it brings valuble information to people's desktops across the world. However, don't consider it the end all of computer or computer related laws. There's more mumbojumbo out there than I'm sure Hemos has hard disk space for. :)
If you are starting a computer company or, god forbid, get into trouble with CIA mainframes, please don't use this as your only resource. It's only a guide.
Some of you may think this comment is common sence, but sometimes people just decide that they know everything on a certain subject. Also, as far as I'm concerned, I'd understand a mess of C code much faster than I could muddle my way through US laws. Leave the specifics to the lawyers, and leave the coding to us.

Mike
Good Luck by Seth+Finkelstein · 1999-09-10 06:53 · Score: 1

Best wishes from a lunatic in Boston :-). I'm sure
you'll provide some much-needed coverage, which is
sorely needed by a geekdom inundated with rewritten press-releases.
Re: Your Rights Online and the New Katzianism by Seth+Finkelstein · 1999-09-10 07:31 · Score: 3

*whimper*

"New Katzianism"? "new emerging political philosophy"???

The concept you are struggling to articulate is usually termed "New
Deal Liberalism". It's several decades old, mostly born out of severe
abuses of corporate power combined with economic depression. Historical
roots go back further, to the era of the "robber barons" and even feudalism.
Mr. Katz, nice writer he though he may be, did not invent it.

It amazes me, just the thought, the very concept, that there could
be an opposition to large concentration of private power, is seen
as *unknown*. You've never heard of it before. You've never read
anything pre-Net about it before. You can't think of any framework.
The only way it's described is as some mutation or bastardization of
*Libertarianism*.

That's scary.
Re:that's slashbox. by jilles · 1999-09-09 22:02 · Score: 1

Not necessarily. The messages could also be inlined with the regular messages. After all its on the same site. I just don't see the point of having to browse two pages. Slashboxes are nice (I use 'em a lot) but I prefer a full featured website.

--

Jilles
Right by David+Gould · 1999-09-09 22:10 · Score: 3

Slashdot has been having trouble scaling to keep up with its growth, and I'm not talking about the servers. With the rate that new stories go up, and the number of comments on each, it has been becoming difficult to keep up. Discussions don't usually stay active long enough to do them justice, because they get crowded out, with some stories falling off the bottom of the page the same day they are posted.

I've been thinking that the problem is that it is organized linearly in time, which doesn't scale too well. Maybe a solution would be to "add an axis", making the layout more two-dimensional by breaking it into sections, each of which would proceed linearly. It's not perfect, but it would allow each story to stay visible for a longer period in its section. It would still be hard to keep up with everything, simply because of the sheer volume, but people who want to skim everything and comment sporadically could do so, while those who want to discuss a single issue in greater depth would also be able to.

Maybe some of the most interesting threads could even be kept alive by using activity as well as age to determine the order of the stories. Also, when the number of comments on a story gets too unwieldy, maybe some of the most active sub-threads could be pulled out into new stories -- these could be kept in a separate sidebar for each section.

David Gould

--
David Gould
main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
1. Re:Right by aaarrrgggh · 1999-09-10 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  I agree... but how do you make the dimensions really scale, and how do you make it a good site to "wander?"
  
  The thing that detracts from sites that have a home/index page is that there isn't enough information there... you have to keep going to different pages before you get any meat. With /.-- there is a lot of info right from the start, and you can open new topics in new windows right away.
  
  Something should be done to help keep the quality of a topic going longer, but the structure of your average (online) newspaper doesn't really make sense here.
  
  What I would like to see is a way that a topic can be extended in time, and comments threaded to that extension-- when an "update" is posted, or additional information still on the same topic, it shouldn't be a new story. There is too much duplication with this (current) system, and the discussion isn't complete in and of itself.
  
  One other point is search engines. I first found /. two years back with links from the search engines. I am not sure how well the indexing works today, but... if you wanted information on privacy as posted on /., you would have a lot of work in front of you.
  
  It seems like the overall structure needs to change a little bit, but... how do you manage it?
  
  anyway... enough ranting
Update! (still OT) by belbo · 1999-09-10 10:55 · Score: 1

Rob, don't you try to outweird me ;-)
Slashdot:Slashdot:Slashdot:Slashdot:Your Rights Online:Slashdot Introduces YRO
[ Slashdot.org ] Posted by CmdrTaco on 16:00 10 September 1999 UTC
from the what-a-dumb-acronym dept.
Now that the new hardware is in place, I'm happy to announce the first new section on Slashdot: Your Rights Online [YRO] is a place where we can go into greater depth on the issues surrounding freedoms and liberties on the Net, and really in the world at large. So much happens in this area that the Slashdot Homepage just doesn't have enough room to host it all, so while YRO will appear on Slashdot when I think its relevant to everyone, it will largely stand alone. Read on to learn more about the section.

Slashdot Self-Reference Factor (SSRF) now 9 and rising. Scotty, we're heating up!

--
--
"Just believe everything I tell you, and it will all be very, very simple."
feature idea by jilles · 1999-09-09 19:08 · Score: 3

It would be nice to be able to select that you wish the YRO articles on the slashdot page in the preferences. Otherwise I would have to check two pages. Users that are not so interested in this topic could still filter the YRO messages from their page while news junkies like myself have everything in one place.

--

Jilles
1. Re:feature idea by heavyd · 1999-09-09 20:13 · Score: 0
  
  Rob, why is Andover net calling me on the telephone trying to sign me up for advertising?
  
  I thought an advertiser's (one time way in the past when the rates were reasonable) was private information. Maybe I was wrong.
  
  And now I get a flyer in the mail. Well, that's better, I can live with mail, but not telemarketing. Also, Andover net did not even respond to my email telling them I didn't understand why they would call me and leave a message trying to get me to call their TOLL #, as If I needed them.
  
  --
  Software testers needed for
Good idea by ghazban · 1999-09-09 19:08 · Score: 1

I as many do, like to know my own rights as they are constantly trying to be constricted. Although the internet has no country, it seems that those countries whom call themeselves "free" like to impose restrictions to that freedom internet wise. ironic.
This cries out for its own slashbox by anticypher · 1999-09-09 19:11 · Score: 4

Nuff said. Then I can keep an eye on the topics, and jump in when it looks good.

the AC

--
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
1. Re:This cries out for its own slashbox by Signal+11 · 1999-09-09 19:28 · Score: 1
  
  Excellent idea - Multiple "mini-slashdots" linked off the main page. It would atleast save me a click or two -and- raise visibility of the forum(s) in question.
  
  --
good idea by darklink · 1999-09-09 19:13 · Score: 1

you all deserve a good pat on the back for this one i think it is a great idea , and yes it does scream for its own / box . i want more boxes i love the little widgets . /. is one of my fav. sites and i enjoy it all the time , i want another / box , one with your karma and posts on it , that would be nice i dont know if you have made it already , but all and all /. is a great site and it only gets better .
Re:Not a rights issue by ghazban · 1999-09-09 19:39 · Score: 1

Agreed, perhaps my wording was slightly off. However, I'm starting to also think that cases such as the mp3.com one, are brought about solely by the legal system. Without an ability to be held liable for distributing such content, it is automatic that mp3.com should place a warning on their pages. They do not want to be sued or similar, no matter how feasible or logical the sueing is. Just a thought.
YRO by dlc · 1999-09-09 19:45 · Score: 1
This is a great idea.
- As slashdot gets more and more sections, perhaps a revamping of the front page is in order. Other than just the latest articles, perhaps the front page should be sectioned off, so that more than one section can be displayed at once. Or maybe give the user the option to have the latest of chosen sections piled in together on the front page, still listed chronologically.
- A few other comments have mentioned a YRO slashbox--there's already one for older slashdot articles, book reviews, Geeks in Space, and the like, so I'm sure Rob has this slashbox planned.
- Is YRO going to attempt to cover the topic internationally, or concentrate on the US? Perhaps when a story comes in, extra effort should be made to find how the subject relates to online rights in other countries.
darren
--
(darren)
something like that for /. by asad · 1999-09-09 19:14 · Score: 1

It would be nice to have something like that for /. so that we can discuss issues that bother people without having to post off topic.

--
Vidi, vici, veni. (I saw, I conquered, I came)
1. Re:something like that for /. by Anonymous Coward · 1999-09-09 19:53 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. A rants&raves section that is a user selectable sideline for the readership would a a welcome feature. With a / bax to see what's on the table?
  
  Often times, a great sideline discussion grows out of what is initially an off-topic, or barely relevant comment. It would be great to be able to take such a discussion 'offline', and easily keep it going beyond the 'page life' of it's parent story.
  
  The question remains of how to keep a discussion pool like that semi-organized though. Rob, perhaps a thread-scope Karma?
Not a rights issue by Jon+Peterson · 1999-09-09 19:16 · Score: 2

Whooa there.

Being required to provide some additional descriptive information on a product that is widely distributed isn't an obvious violation of your rights.

People are required to label food they distribute, so people who hate, say, peanuts, can avoid that food.

What is so obviously bad about requiring people to label multimedia content so that people who hate, say, pornography can avoid it?

Not that I'm in favour of the proposed scheme, but let's _try_ not to jump on things.

--
----- .sig: file not found
1. Re:Not a rights issue by rark · 1999-09-09 19:47 · Score: 1
  
  Peanuts have killed people (some people have fatal allergic reactions to peanuts)
  
  I've never heard of anyone killed by an MPEG (or plaintext, for that matter)
2. Re:Not a rights issue by jamiemccarthy · 1999-09-09 19:29 · Score: 1
  
  People are required to label food they distribute, so people who hate, say, peanuts, can avoid that food.
  What is so obviously bad about requiring people to label multimedia content so that people who hate, say, pornography can avoid it?
  
  It's not just multimedia content; Germany would like to target specifically plaintext with which they disagree, for example, and censors on this side of the pond won't restrict themselves to just MPEGs either.
  More importantly, we should recognize why peanut companies are forced to label their products. First of all, they're selling something, and second of all, they're selling atoms, not bits. Corporations don't enjoy the same free speech rights as real people (for good reason), and atoms can do you real damage if you're allergic to them.
  Hopefully our personal right to speak our minds won't be reduced into the same category as corporations' right to label widgets.
  
  Jamie McCarthy
  
  --
  Jamie McCarthy
  jamie.mccarthy.vg
3. Re:Not a rights issue by Anonymous Coward · 1999-09-09 23:01 · Score: 0
  
  Haven't you heard that the pen is mightier than the sword?
Thank You Rob! by zantispam · 1999-09-09 19:46 · Score: 1

We have really needed soething like this for a long time. Being rather uneducated in these subjects, I really dig all of the freedom (beer, speech, what-have-you) articles and discussions that appear from time to time. This will be a great tool to educate people like me.

P.S. CowboyNeal!...SlashBox, please!!!! :-)

--

censorship is a form of noise, which actively seeks to drown out content with silence - Crash Culligan
Your Rights Online by Clifton+Wood · 1999-09-09 19:25 · Score: 1

I wish this section had existed last week. A few of the Ask Slashdots that I decided NOT to post would have fitted well in this section. I will probably need to talk to Michael and Jamie about them as I think I have those submissions archived someplace.
Slashdot in the News by Jack+William+Bell · 1999-09-09 19:52 · Score: 3

Not that I am suggesting that this is Cmdr Taco's main motivation (or that it even occurred to him), but this seems like a 'yet another reason' why the mainstream media will pay attention to /. and we who post here. Being as online rights are a hotbutton topic right now it seems reasonable to assume that the 'Real Journalists'(tm) who read /. looking for tips, story ideas and carefully thought out views will find much to mine in this new feature area.

Of course they will find lots of less stimulating intellectual fare as well...

Jack

--
- -
Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
Other YRO Slashboxes by Scotter · 1999-09-09 22:14 · Score: 1

Might be nice to have a YRO links slashbox, too, with links to things like EFF and Junkbusters.
Wrong Acronym by trongey · 1999-09-09 19:59 · Score: 2

How about TRYFAHO (The Rights You Fantasize About Having Online).
My dad always said that "Your rights only extend to the point where they interfere with someone elses". I thought that sounded pretty reasonable. Lately, though, I've come to the conclusion that my rights only extend as far as I'm able to enforce them. It's not a pretty view of society, but it seems to fit more often.

"Conserving bandwidth by not having a sig"
Oops, I guess that didn't work.

--
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
Loss of rights, the algorithm by ch-chuck · 1999-09-09 22:49 · Score: 1

appoint yourself supreme being, wait for others to get into trouble, take control, maintain a spotless media profile, repeat until world domination.

The risk of evil is the cost of freedom.

Chuck

--
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Re:that's slashbox. by My_Favorite_Anonymou · 1999-09-09 20:22 · Score: 2

See title, it's not feature. I'm so impression by the continuious improvement Rod and co. bring to slashdot. First the interview idea is very innovative --be that an invention of Rod or other sites. And the /. boxes. It's got practically more boxen than netscape boxes (CowboyNeil we love you please please add a darkhorizon/AICN slashbox.) And not to mention the self-moderating system is the best I have ever seen, this thing is going to change the web.

Way to go, we appricated.

CY
"What a dumb acronym" -- CmdrTaco by Randym · 1999-09-09 23:27 · Score: 1

OK, how about:
"Your Online Unalienable Rights"? [YOUR]
(Yes, I did crib it from the Declaration of Independence. If it was good enough for Thomas Jefferson, it's good enough for me!)

--
DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
YRO as a separate domain? by dave_aiello · 1999-09-09 23:36 · Score: 1

You guys might want to make this its own Web Site. The interest in this topic will not be limited to the existing Slashdot community. Although some will join Slashdot, you will not get as many new community members as if you make it its own site.
Of course the beauty of Slashdot is that you could link everything from yro.org to Slashdot's main page.

--
-- Dave Aiello