Slashdot Mirror
The Spotlight is a Harsh Mistress
If you didn't read (or don't feel like going to) the story linked to above about Bruce's little foot-in-mouth moment, I'll summarize it for you: After getting (IMO justifiably) frustrated over some terms in the license for Corel's new Debian-based Linux distribution and Corel's refusal to change them, Bruce posted a little note on the debian-legal discussion list that said, in part, "It's time for us to bring suit against Corel for this 'can't download unless you're 18' stuff. That's not in our license and they know it."
Almost immediately, a Slashdot reader submitted Bruce's comment to us, and Hemos ran it as a story as soon as he checked to make sure that yes, Bruce had really written that comment. The Slashdot story got over 300 remarks added to it within two hours of its initial appearance, many of which said that Bruce had over-reacted to Corel's licensing intransigence, and many more which lambasted Slashdot generally, and Hemos personally, for having posted a "private" message on Slashdot without getting Bruce's permission in advance.
Bruce was an active participant in the Slashdot discussion that followed Hemos's post and, in the end, backed down his original "we oughta sue" statement. Hemos apologized for the post. And the comments kept on coming, because that's the nature of Slashdot.
There was also some e-mail exchanged between Bruce, CmdrTaco, Hemos, and myself. It was not vituperative. We all like and respect each other. Bruce has my home phone number, and I have his (somewhere). But that e-mail exchange led to this article, because this entire incident, and the way it got blown out of proportion, is a prime example of changes in the nature of online discussion, Open Source development, and Slashdot's role in it all.
Coincidentally - it had been scheduled to run for over a week - yesterday we had an Ask Slashdot piece about the demise of old-fashioned, local dialup Bulletin Boards. There was a lot of nostalgia expressed for the days when your "online community" was 20 or 30 people who all lived near you, and you could all get together now and then for a soda or a beer or whatever. There were no Anonymous Cowards in that kind of environment. Sure, people used screen names like "BBBopper," but if you were a member of the community, you knew that BBBopper's real name was "Bernard," where he lived, and where he worked.
I miss those days, and I'm sure Bruce does too. You could say damn near anything on your freewheeling local BBS, and if you *really* put your foot in your mouth you could either delete your comment or ask your friendly sysop to delete it for you. But it didn't really matter. The chances of a vituperative neighbor or a reporter for the local newspaper reading your post were virtually nil, and even if they were reading, so what? Back then, hardly anyone paid attention to the few weirdos who spent their nights dialing into each others computers.
Fast-forward to now: there are days when Slashdot does well over one million pageviews. Reporters from The Wall Street Journal (Hi Lee!), CNN (Hi, Ian!) and even Al Gore campaign staffers (Hi, Ben!), read Slashdot regularly. Stories that break here are often picked up by general-interest media or serve as inspiration (we say politely) for their own reporting. And Slashdot readers obviously subscribe to discussions like debian-legal, so the distance between a hasty mailing list post and the front page of a national newspaper can be as little as two clicks.
Calling your favorite mailing list "private" or "obscure" does not make it so. If any idiot who has a valid e-mail address can subscribe to it, it is not private. As for obscurity, that depends on the poster. An offhand comment made by Al Average is unlikely to make it into either Slashdot or the Wall Street Journal no matter where it originally appears. A comment by Bruce Perens or Richard M. Stallman or Steve Ballmer or Linus Torvalds or Larry Ellison or anyone else perceived to have "weight" in software development matters is another story. These people are celebrities, at least to Slashdot readers, so their words are going to be taken seriously, analyzed, and quoted, requoted, and even possibly misquoted as heavily as news of Cher's latest love affair will be discussed in the movie gossip tabloids.
In this "celebrity" context, there are two main differences between Bruce Perens and Cher:
- 1 - At least one billion people have heard of Cher, while only a few million (at most) have ever heard of Bruce Perens.
- 2 - Bruce Perens is more important than Cher, especially to Slashdot readers.
A better comparison than Bruce:Cher is Bruce:Alan Greenspan. If Alan Greenspan goes out to eat and tips a waiter 20% and makes a lame (but overheard) joke about waiters demanding higher tips because of the booming economy, two dozen financial pundits will immediately try to figure out if Greenspan is planning to raise interest rates, and the stock market is sure to blip one way or another in response to the "news" of Greenspan's "statement."
Like it or not, if Alan Greenspan makes his remark in a public place it is fair media game. As long as he is quoted accurately, there is nothing he can do about the appearance of his offhand sentence in newspapers and as discussion fodder on talking-head TV shows. Bruce Perens is nowhere near as influential as Alan Greenspan, but within the confines of the Open Source/free software community, his words may have more impact on investment behavior and are, therefore, more important to Slashdot readers who hold shares in Red Hat and other companies that live and die by Open Source software.
I growled a little at Hemos for later adding a "Maybe I shouldn't have posted it" apology to his piece about Bruce's comment. It was an amicable growl; we work together as a tight team around here, and we all accept the fact that each Slashdot author and editor is an individual with his own point of view. But I don't (personally) believe we should ever apologize for running legitimate news, including speculations made in public forums by Open Source celebrities. And Bruce Perens is not only a legitimate public figure in the Open Source context, but is one largely because of his own actions. Bruce is not a reticent person. He has requested Slashdot coverage of his pet projects many times, and often as not he's gotten it. This time, he got coverage when he neither requested nor desired it, and was unhappy at the kind of attention focused on him.
I called this little essay "The Spotlight is a Harsh Mistress" because (RAH reference aside) this statement sums up my main point here: that once you open a press floodgate everything passes through it, not just what you want. And the piece I wrote earlier this week about Open Source and free software developers becoming more like stage performers than reclusive poets was as much of a cautionary tale as anything else. Yes, there are adoring Open Source fans out there, but those fans are as fickle -- and demanding -- as any other kind of fans, and when you have the combination of celebrities and devout fans, paparazzi lurking in the bushes are almost inevitable.
Slashdot is not exactly in the paparazzi category (I like to think) but we are certainly a prime source not only of Open Source and free software development news, but also of community gossip. What "we" post officially is far less than 10% of the site's total content. The rest is uncensored remarks by readers. While you can choose to only read posts other readers (moderators) decide are worthwhile, you always have the option of reading Slashdot in all of its fierce, chaotic glory simply by setting your threshold to -1. (Our boss, CmdrTaco, absolutely insists on this "no censorship ever" policy and we all back him up fiercely on this one!)
Even if you are not logged in as a registered member, you can set the moderation threshold on each individual article as you read it. My personal Slashdot reading preference is a setting of -1, with comments nested instead of threaded. And, believe it or not, I read almost every comment attached to almost every Slashdot article almost every day. There are suprising gems (and some great humor) buried in the mass if you take the trouble to look for them.
Is Slashdot going downhill? Probably, in some ways. It's not the cozy little Web site I discovered several years ago, when it was new and crude and 30 comments on an article was big-time. But by that same standard both the Internet and Usenet have been going downhill almost since day one. First the original Unix heavies grumbled about letting the non-CS (but still research) people in. Then all the researchers grumbled about letting the students in, and how they polluted discussion groups with trivial conversation and dirty jokes and filled up mail servers with stupid chain letters. Then the unwashed mass of Prodigy people hit, over one million strong, and irritated everyone who was already on the Internet, and then they complained about all the "clueless AOLers" who followed them.
But newbies don't stay newbies forever, either on the Internet in general or here on Slashdot. Two or three years from now, I assure you, some of the same AC kiddies who are now going "Whoo! First Post!" will become settled members of "the community" and will grumble about the next Slashdot newbie generation's silly games, whatever they turn out to be.
And two or three years from now Bruce Perens will be a dignified Elder Statesman of the burgeoning, ever-growing Open Source and free software community, and he will be aghast at some of the things that less media-worn people say in forums they considered private but really weren't, and the whole circle will continue to grow, with new, fresh faces always coming on board -- and some of the old ones departing for one reason or another.
Perhaps, too, we'll see the advent of more "members only" forums with strict privacy restrictions, somewhat like the old private BBS operations, and those will be where "online celebrities" hang out and let down their hair with one another, just as some film celebs only feel comfortable at private parties guarded by thuglike doormen who keep out anyone who isn't on a tightly-controlled guest list.
But I would personally rather see total openness, here on Slashdot and in as many other places as possible. Sure, mistakes will be made. You'll make some, Bruce Perens will make some, and I'm sure I'll make (more than) my fair share as well. To me, this is the point of Slashdot; to level the playing field and treat all comers exactly the same, on both their good days and their bad days; to provide a well-lit, well-known "space" where both silly and serious debates can take place, opinions can be aired and debunked, and even (once in a while) a mind or two can be changed.
Are good, others bad. A certain board devoted to RPGs I'm on is (actually, was, we've gone beyond mere http for the most part O_o) one of the best places I've ever been. On teh other hand, AGFF during the M30wers...
This issue has nothing to do with the medium on which we speek.
This has everything to do with honesty in any relationship . . . .on-line or off.
I know that sounds silly, but really it depends on your context. If you're a record-label executive, Cher might be quite a bit more important than BP. In fact, in most places other than the Open Source Community, BP isn't very important at all.
I guess my point is that this isn't anything special. Everything is a matter of point-of-view, but in any situation there are people who are put into positions of importance (like Perens in the OSS community). It happens and when it does, these people either learn to handle the responsibility that comes along with it, or they drop out of the limelight and let someone else do the job. And, yes, that is possible and would not be hard for someone like Perens to do.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
How'd it get here? O_o
ID number error or something?
By going on, and on, and on, about it, you're amplifying the silly mistake that he made and the damage too. He's recanted, we all agree, and now shut up.
First and foremost, let me say this... I respect Bruce Perens. I respect everything (almost) that he has done for us, and the community. I respect Bruce Perens...
There, now that that's out of the way... I think, honestly, that if Bruce REALLY wanted what he said to be private, it would have been. If he didn't want people other than those intended to find out, he would have been able to do so.
As mentioned above, no open forum is PRIVATE, and to even think anything of the like is stupid. Granted a lot of our forms of PRIVATE comm aren't as private as we'd like them to be, but they're also not open.
If I wanted my wife to see some naked pictures of myself that I took (NO, that's never happened), I wouldn't put them in an open forum, and invite her there, cause that would be silly. I would send her an email with it attached. Yes, still not secure, but still a lot better.
Secondly, While I do agree with what was said concerning the openness of the forum in which it was posted, I almost feel like some sort of paparazzi agent.
I'm not a fan of National Enquirer, and if I were famous, I'm sure I'd be even less. I don't think that it makes sense to follow someone around until they do something "newsworthy". Seriously, Bruce is "newsworthy" all the time, he doesn't have to make a mistake to be on Slashdot, we all know this.
I understand that he's in the public eye, and that eye is heavily focussed on him, as it should be, but the original comment, at least in my opinion, wasn't newsworthy. It was paparazzi-ish (that a word?) at best. It wasn't dubbed as a press-release, it wasn't a "Statement" in the sense of which I'm thinking.
What happened was, he was a little too free when someone was watching. Plain and simply.
With great power comes great responsibility Bruce, and yes, you'd probably do just a little better to keep that more in the forefront of your mind, but at the same time, I surely do sympathize. I do FAR too many stupid things in public.
Is this entirely a bad thing? I for one would say not. The "Open Source", GNU, Linux, and other such products have matured to having a user base. Even worse they are a fanatical user base. With a growing user base the self made 'leaders' of the open source movement must moderate themselves online, just as they do in real life. For instance - how many conferences does Linus attend a year? The answer is not many. It's a universal fact that anyone with influence needs to be more careful about their feelings, ideas, etc..
/. but it will make it more credible in the end.
Personally I wish this wasn't so - that people wouldn't freak out when someone expresses an opinion. Unfortunately the sad fact is that human nature may automatically qualify someone that is a leader is right. This is not always the case, and people do not need to get as passionate about what someone else thinks or says. As I read in an earlier story "The first amendment has never been a popular one" -- which is true but thank goodness that we have it, or at least for the most part.
Censoring the bulk of what someone says is not the way slashdot should run, not with a members area or anything along these lines. Here's a good idea - before posting the story (if it is about someone) verify that the information is correct. This may add an extra check for
Was the troubled point in the corel license fixed or are the 17 yr old developers still not able to d/l their own work ??? While he MAY have over-reacted and I do say MAY because in 2 years this may be the one that started it all...Industry IS going to TRY and RUN AWAY with OSS products...It is cheaper and there is already a user base...How will the OSS community react to the NEXT violation ??? Will they laugh off another Developers fears ??? Has anyone noticed the PRICE of a RH distro these days....Windows is CHEAPER around here..M$ does not even have to do a thing, RH is NOT plug-n-play and COSTS more ?!?!?!
I read the article, the posts by Bruce apologizing, and a few other comments, and then I closed my browser, and had some thanksgiving turkey. That's the end of that for me and most other people, aren't you blowing this a little out of proportion?
Bruce Has millions of bits running on computer systems worldwide.
Cher Is intstantly recognizable with just one name.
Bruce Is intstantly recognizable with just one name.
Cher Has great legs.
Bruce Has great Karma.
Cher Has a lot of devoted fans.
Bruce Has a lot of devoted fans.
Cher Has her own PR people.
Bruce Could use his own PR people.
Just to nitpick a little ...
/. and other sources. Hence how you act, think and reason can be judged by your peers long after the event without much chance of professional spin-doctoring. The truth might hurt, but hopefully it forges the character a little bit stronger and in a positive way. So although there is a similar effect to the media spotlight, I would trust that people take it in the same spirit as peer-review and supply positive criticism and feedback rather than throwing brickbats (unless it's well deserved stupidity). The only real answer to idiots is to ignore them.
:-(.
Despite the best attempts of media to convince the unwashed masses otherwise, there is a distinct difference between celebrity and fame. Part of it is to do with your time horizon and any distinctive or unique claim to a place in history. While most current pop stars or sports heroes will be forgotten in another decade or five, certain names (at least in the hacker sphere) will still be remembered (RS, Linus, ERS, etc) for changing the way we think and view the world. In a sense, fame is somewhat (initially) conversely opposite to popularity (ie raise a ruckus), where people (whether conciously or not) take a principled stand in their view and stick to their convictions. Unlike the standard 30 soundbites, your actions, words and deeds are recorded for prosperity in
Too bad none of the politicians have started a truth in media platform
LL
But the friend on my left here tells me that the Red Hat price includes several months technical support, which from Microsoft would cost you a pretty penny ... (or a less pretty piece of paper). If you want cheap Linux, you can buy cheap Linux, from anywhere!
... 10 copies of Windows or 1 copy of Red Hat ...
/. readers seem to).
Also, what if you have 10 computers that you are trying to install an O/S on
Depends if you live in the business world or fantasy land (which most
-----
[Science] is one of the very few things that raises human life a little above farce and gives it the grace of tragedy.
Do you think he'd open source the lyrics?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Also if you purchase one copy of Redhat with it's support does that support cover a single system or do you get support for as many as you've installed it on? That would be quite a deal for a sys admin how put it on 1,000 machines.
Publish and be damned.
I dont know. Though I did once have a lecturer who once said.
"There is no such thing as power, without responsibility " {he was teaching C programming}.
And thats why Firecrackers and kittens don't mix.
Jeez, I've been working too hard - Cher has a new boyfriend? Maybe I'm just lonely but frankly I think she *is* more interesting than yet another discussion of GPL fine points. People have to chill about this stuff, it's ridiculous.
Just my $0.02.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
I guess in this instancewe can say that drugs and alcohol are not always a good mix.
Lame subject, I know, but ...
/., that works quite good (if you read them regularly for some time, you know how trustworthy they are).
... never mind). Still, I often get emails from people asking questions about that article, and obviously taking it as an expert's opinion on the topic (I even have a disclaimer at the top, but nobody seems to read it).
/. wait too long, everybody will be crying "that's not new! i read that two weeks ago at xyz.com".
Back in the olde days, when you read something in a newspaper or a book you could be sure that it had been read by a few people before it ever got printed. So different newspapers etc. had different "trust levels", depending on their overall quality. But when you read something in a paper you never had heard of before, you were inclined to believe the story anyway. After all, there had to be editors-in-chief, etc. that would do at least some sanity checks.
That is different of course with stuff on the web, so the best way to avoid mistakes would be to trust nobody. But that's a bit paranoid, so you will try to figure out who you trust. And with sites like
But what about stuff on deja, or the homepage of some guy you don't know? You will probably try to judge from the appearance (just like you would try to classify your unknown paper), from the wording, etc. But you can be wrong, of course.
I have a page on my website that deals with artificial intelligence. It's just a collection of thoughts I had a while back, and I am not a researcher in that field (I am kinda, but
So I would say: Don't be too paranoid, but if you want to use information for something important, better find out how credible it is by checking other sources (and the "surrounding" pages). And don't post an email on slashdot that just arrived from a mailing list. You don't know what will come of it. On the other hand, if the guys at
The main problem (I think, and I haven't followed that other story) was the first few words. "It seems that Corel has made one mistake too many." --- that sounded like BP was already suing them.
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
Bruce made a mistake and put his foot in his mouth not because Slashdot popularized the post, but because suggesting a lawsuit against Corel was simply rash at this point; it may come to pass that at some future time a lawsuit against Corel, Redhat, VALinux, Pacific Hi-Tech, or whoever, may in fact be appropriate. So just because Bruce threw out this suggestion a little too soon doesn't mean that defending the GPL with the force of law won't be necessary at some future point.
That said, Bruce made a mistake. God knows, I've put my foot in my mouth often enough -- and usually when I'm pissed off -- so I feel plenty of sympathy for Bruce here. It's impossible to regularly post over the years and NOT say something stupid once in a while. Hasn't Linus overreacted in linux-kernel before? Let's not forget Eric Raymond with his Jedi Knight uniform at the Windows Refund day... I'm sure that went over well with the mass media journalists. And how about Bill Gate's video deposition... talk about tasting foot fungus.
It's normal for anyone who's in the spotlight to make the occasional mistake. Bruce recognized his error and apologized in public. Which is more than I can say for most who back themselves into an indefensible verbal corner.
Bruce Perens is a fairly important spokesperson .. musician?
for a community movement. Cher is a
I don't really know much about Cher. I don't think
the original author was arguing that Perens is
more important to society at large (not that that
would be a hard claim to make), but that Perens is
certainly more influential to geek culture. Perens
does more than program (programming presumably
being the best parallel to doing music), he
influences other programmers and portions of the
movement.. I think this shows clearly that
Perens is more important than Cher, at least in
their relative contexts. Also, record executives
arn't doomed if Cher badmouths them -- likely they
don't suffer a bit, so I would argue that Perens
is more important in a global sense.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
It's wrong to make a news article out of something someone said in a mailing list without consulting them first. Someone who posts to a mailing list is probably only intending to communicate with the members of that list. If you want to widely redistribute what they've said, you should check with them first. That's just courtesy for other people.
The traditional media commits all sorts of terrible offenses. I don't think that using their actions as justification is such a good idea. How do you draw the line between publishing gossip about well-known public people and some of the most grievous offenses of the media (e.g. simply lying in stories)?
It's fairly easy to set up an exclusive mailing list for semi-private discussions. I run two mailing lists and I know all the people on each list. Any new subscribers to the list have to go through me. It would still be possible for a member of the list to copy n' paste another members words and spread it outside the mailing list, but I don't see that as a potential problem.
HOLA! mapata, mei dabanda, perla faya "LINUX", é mapata dola, manucca de lá "LEET SKILLZ" ??
The only thing sadder than a first post is someone complaining about a first post.
You do realize that all this serves to do is make it harder for people to filter out first posts, not to mention that you're giving first posters the attention they want.
Hey, that sounds like an insanely great idea! :)
Get RMS, ESR, Torvalds, Tale, Ritchie, and all
the others who have made big contributions to
the Unix community, and have them play music for
a CD. I'd certainly get a copy of that
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
Sorry, no hablo ingles!
Call them what you will (lamers, scriptkiddies, and a host of other, more derogatory, names), the newcomers to any online community are always going to be irritating. Likewise, humans have a very weighty concern in their own self-esteem and, like it or not, have a tendency to forget their own faults.
Twenty years from now, when the greybeards won't have any hair at all, and the "newbies" are running everything, it's fairly obvious that there will be more "newbies" to irritate the former newbies. Why? Well, for one, when someone new joins a community, they aren't quite sure of their place. They either feel awkward, or superior. Either way, they're likely to annoy those already present.
I suppose that my point is that, hopefully, we can all remember when *we* were irritating people with names like "S00p3rK00L" or what-have-you, and be tolerant. Also, I'm slightly disturbed by the "private party" reference towards the end: it's my hope that many Open Source "celebrities" aren't caught up in their own image, and will remain active in the community, rather than retreating to a reclusive social pool. For surely, without guidance, the circle is broken.
Once upon a time, there was a very clear separation between the public and the private (consider for example that politicians and other leaders could have a private life that would never be accepted today). With the 'new journalism' and the popularity of the net, this boundary has all but dissappeared. As the piece says, Alan Greenspan can't say anything, ever, without worrying about what the reaction would be would investors and analysts get hold of the remark.
Taking this trend just one step further, we would all have to guard our speech in all but the most private circumstances. Even all of us nobodies posting here on slashdot should exercise caution so our remarks won't come back to bite us in twenty years time, when we all are rich and powerful (yeah, right...) or simply when applying for a job.
People considering a tattoo are often asked to think long and hard about whether they will still like it ten or twenty years later. Comments on slashdot or mailinglists have the same kind of permanence, and can be potentially far more embarrassing than a heart-and-dagger on your shoulder.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
I, too, really respect Bruce Perens, but I don't see how he can complain that his lawsuit remarks were meant to be private, when he made the same remarks in a comment on a slashdot article - and you don't get much more open than that.
That said, I would like to express my hope that this uproar does not cause Bruce to retreat into the kind of measured mediaspeak that we get from every corporate flack in the world. Bruce is not an officer of Red Hat and owes nothing to their stockholders. Neither does he owe anything to the stockholders of the Open Source corporation, because there is no such thing, and hopefully never will be.
One of the greatest benefits of the Open Source community is the degree to which we can trust that statements made from its illuminaries come from the heart. Any deviation from this is a lessening of the community, and I for one hope that Bruce Perens recovers quickly from this fiasco and continues to fight the good fight.
Information is not Knowledge
can you tell me what Hemos and whoever posted the poll using the same article number has to do with those substances?
Rob, congratulations. I think you've really brought some great maturity and professionalism to Slashdot, at a time when it needed those qualities more than anything else. I remember seeing the first article you posted back when you were a brand new author, and I thought to myself, "Hmm. This guy's a real journalist. And garsh but he's OLD! I wonder how long CmdrTaco and the gang will be able to put up with him?".
Heh, of course, age brings wisdom, and it seems to me that you've been sort of a father figure at Slashdot. You seem to be the one who does the mop-up job after one of the younger, perhaps less mature or less wise, authors does something silly or something that raises a fuss. And you do the job well. I also seem to recall the Slashdot interview series beginning sometime just after you joined the team...I wonder how much you had to do with that? In any case, that also was an excellent addition to Slashdot's coolness.
Anyway, before all this praise gets out of hand, I'd just like to say great job, Roblimo, and keep up the good work. :)
--
I think Bruce was right to say what he said. What will maintain the integrity of the GPL if not the threat of a lawsuit? Are we supposed to just trust major corporations to do the right thing????
Information is not Knowledge
HEMOS SUCKS, HE'S SUCH A FUCKING DUMBASS
Cher is very famous. I had never heard of Bruce Perens. I am not famous, but one day I will be and you will all want to kiss my 8U77. cMDRtaco or the hamster will be grovelling to get my very word spoken on here. I will have more karma than the holy Alan Cox (either one of 'em). I will rule the world! I am an 3l337 h4x0r!!!! I am the best!!!! And I'm American!!!!!!!
(I rule).
You ignorant twat! I was getting first posts before you were even born. We old timers like to disguise our first posts by making them look like 50 something posts. First post?
Things like this happen every day in countless thousands of publications world-wide. Somebody does something insignificant, and it is blown up into "news" by some editor. If it is not news, the public soon perceives this and issues a collective yawn.
Invariably, soon thereafter will follow an "editorial" piece, describing the situation as one which involved a struggle between social propriety (morals) and duty to the high calling of journalism. And regardless of the polarity of the decision (reporting something which maybe should not be, or failing to report something that maybe should be), the whole point is enroll the reader in the idea that journalism is a perilous path fraught with difficult decisions whose directions have unescapable consequences, and aren't we happy we have such dedicated people to take care of it all for us?
Well, spare us the editorial please. Spare us the lecture about the spotlight being a harsh mistess. It is not news. It is self-serving in a really loathesome way. It is an example of attributing significance where there is none. You are not Woodward and Bernstein. You are not Cronkite. Get back to doing what you started out to do - run a great web site. Spare us the self-importance.
I thank you, and the people of MeepZorp thank you.
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Sacred cows make the best burgers.
Okay, here's the scoop... Babelfish can't do a thing with it, neither can Translator, so either, that's not Spanish, or ummmm... well, I dunno what else. Somebody help?
What really bothered me was when he once suggested issuing a new `distribution' of FreeBSD under the GPL, just to illustrate how `silly' the FreeBSD licence is, and how easy it is for someone to `steal' the code. Seeing an open source crusader bicker over something as incosequential as that, and prepose and idea that would no doubt cause great division between two groups with similar goals, didn't improve his standing in my eyes at all.
Amount that I care about Bruce Perens: 0.01
Amount that I care about Frank Zappa: 0.1
So by any objective standard (this is assuming that any objective standard is "how much antizeus cares"), Bruce Perens is more important than Cher, though less important than Frank Zappa.
-- $SIGNATURE
are you being ... uh ... ironic, here?
/. used to be cool news. Now it's S/N sucks and most of the info is bogus.
I have my doubts that Bruce Perens will become an elder statesperson in the world of Linux/OpenSource. (Roblimo might.) Right now, he has a certain level of popularity, but he seems to create more contention than consensus wherever he goes. (Anyway, that's more of what *I* hear.) As the movement grows and becomes more mainstream, people like Bruce will have served their purpose (that being to make noise and draw attention to that movement), and then, if they can't integrate themselves into the "larger" community, be silently forgotten or ignored.
I bought Corel stock. I think Corel is critical to the success of the acceptance of Linux and Open Source. Other ISV's are watching. If Corel says "screw bruce, screw gnu, and screw linux", then we as a community or a revolution or an MS competitor will have a much harder time being accepted. Fortunately, the fact that Bruce was "slapped down" so quickly should be an encouraging sign to Corel and other companies that many in our community do see the importance of their involvement.
People in positions of popularity such as Bruce, cannot be expected to act differently than they normally do just because they are popular. I'm just glad the community and movement is strong enough to absorb missteps that occur. I think the true elder statespersons will be those who breed consensus in the community, those who continually provide improvements to the software, and those who provide advocacy, training, and forums for community. Whether Bruce will remain in enough of these catagories remains to be seen.
Criminalize spam and telemarketing!
I think allot of people will vote for either "free speech" or "my coffee cup is empty". Why? Because you have to be very close minded to say simply "ACs on a message board is bad." There are way too many variables, and every situation is different.
Yes, it is good to allow anonymous posts to protect free speech, but at the same time it can degrade the quality of a forum. People are lazy, and if they want to know how to use the chmod command, which is easier... take 2 minutes to find it on the web, or 30 seconds to post it to a help forum? Add 2 minutes of hassle to register, and they won't bother the people on the help forum that are (hopefully) discussing something a little more time-worthy.
As for a community aspect, registration is both good and bad. It insures that a defined community is there, but it discourages the passerby from jumping in and possibly becoming a regular.
In a very political and/or controversial forum, requiring registration can be very bad. Many people want to get their point across, but not be hassled by people who don't think they're exactly politically correct.
I'll be right back, my coffee cup is empty.
-----
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
i think robin's main point here was very well thought out and spoken: we need to treat events like this one as learning experiences and grow up as a community.
he missed one huge point, though, which has been gnawing at me for some time: slashdot has an insane amount of power, which can be abused. yeah, only a tiny portion of the content of /. is posted as headlines, but it is those headlines that attract attention to a topic and essentially guide the community.
even in an anarchistic society such as the internet and (to a lesser extent) slashdot, people can be influenced. and right now slashdot has a lot of power to influence.
for a good reason slashdot can't and doesn't post everyone's "pet projects". i have had articles accepted and rejected. when i have had my articles rejected in the past i have wondered why my contribution wasn't considered "News". slashdot has the power to make or break a project. that's a lot of power...being able to decide what and what isn't news. and it's frightening to me.
Bruce's comment wouldn't have gotten nearly the attention it got had the article not been posted on slashdot. the main question that arises (at least for me) is whether it should have been posted at all. i personally am not subbed to the debian-legal mailing list. was his comment of importance enough that i should have even known that he made the comment? i don't think so. not that i think there should be censorship on slashdot, but that drawing too much attention to one person's angered comments on an "obscure" mailing list is dangerous.
there has been an increase in the amount of power which can be wielded in our community, and i believe that will grow exponentially in the future, as more "real world" interest is shown in OSS. we have been dealing with that newfound power pretty well up until now, but this "incident" makes me wonder if we're ready for it.
i think one powerful and necessary addition to /. would be an open-ended discussion of slashdot itself. a section, right alongside the rest, where issues relating to slashdot and the community can be discussed without forcing people to tack on off-topic posts to articles...venting their frustrations or love of slashdot.
if someone has a problem with how slashdot is doing something, they should be able to have their voice heard.
Not irony. Pathos!
His features, like John K's, just plain suck. I don't CARE about his opinion, especially after the sexist 'how to find a chick' rant, and would greatly, greatly, greatly appreciate a method of filtering this kind of crap out. Unfortunately, he also posts a great number of articles, and I don't want to miss those. Can you add either a second preference to filtering to allow Author->article type, or have RL use a different handle for posting 'features?'
Thanks!
i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
Apparently /. fancies itself to have reached the stage where headlines are no longer the news, but /. itself is the news.
It's a pity, but was of course only a matter of time.
Doesn't this all have a lot to do with thick skin and asbestos underwear?
It's well known that you've got to have a set of asbestos underwear if you're going to post to slashdot, read slashdot, post a comment, or even practically THINK about slashdot.
When somebody puts their foot in their mouth, it's happened before, and they're going to get flamed. It happens, but those are "the rules of the game" so to speak, and you can't stop it, so just make sure you're wearing that asbestos when you do things in the first place. The debian list that Bruce posted to is of course public, and while it may not be as big as slashdot, I'm sure the same rules apply there as they do here.
I'm not criticising anybody but this story seems like old news. Yes, publicity is a cruel mistress, and you have to have thick skin. But that's ok, because obviously Bruce, Roblimo, and the rest DO have thick skin otherwise they wouldn't be here. A quote from Henry Rollins for those who are familiar with him: "If I took the time to bleed from all the tiny little arrows shot my way I wouldn't be here". That's true of anything in life in general, it just seems that as far as personality conflict is concerned, the net is life amplified. People lose their fear of offending others, and let it fly.
Bruce posted an apology, and as far as I'm concered, it's water under the bridge already. Even if he *hadn't* posted an apology, I'd think of it as his opinion (I haven't made my mind up about it yet) and move on. And when next week's story comes out and gets 300+ comments, the flamers will all move on.
Don't sweat the small stuff Bruce/Roblimo/CmdrTaco/Hemos.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
I'm glad Roblimo growled at Hemos for that "apology". I'm also glad we have Roblimo to defend the nature of Slashdot this way.
first...
/. style. Personally I like having access to firsthand opinions/reactions of 100,000 geeks sorted by "goodness", and although there are advantages to being able to have a beer with your entire connected circle, there is strength in numbers. Even if that strength is only used to get to the bottom of a story.
And Slashdot readers obviously subscribe to discussions like debian-legal, so the distance between a hasty mailing list post and the front page of a national newspaper can be as little as two clicks.
This is both true and very neat. Not that I'm famous, but the same thing (kinda) happened to me. The Internet makes control of digital media impossible, so things like this are bound to happen. As long as everything is sorted out in a reasonable time, what's the damage? There SO VERY MUCH information available, shouldn't it now be second nature to question everything you read, or at least wait for confirmation. I'm as guilty as the next party in jumping to rabid conclusions, that's emotion working, but before longterm opinions and biases set in I at least look for a confirming source.
That being said I would like to compliment slashdot on what I found yesterday. (check my homepage
if you don't understand) Get out your random string generators and you can have your precious small BBS done
enough.
+&x
I thought Roblimo & Hemos are one person. Like Bruce Wayne & Batman. Have you ever seen them at the same place at the same time?
Posted by polar_bear:
As a site that sometimes claims to be of the journalistic variety there is a responsibility to ask yourself whether something should be posted or not. In many cases, what is posted on Slashdot a Real Journalist (tm) or Real Editor (tm) would have shunned posting it. A decent journalist would not run a story based on Greenspan's off the cuff commentary in a restaurant. If Bruce had planned to actually sue Corel (and I'm not saying it's a bad idea...) he would have made an official announcement. That would have been the time to actually cover the "story" -- Now Bruce and others like him know that unless they wish to be unduly scrutinized they can only communicate with the community via private email (time consuming), or only post non-controversial comments (self-censorship) or stay silent lest they be crucified for their opinions, whether they act on them or not. Hemos was correct, this should not have been posted in the first place. Kudos for doing the fact-checking, at least that's improving, but just because Bruce or one of the figureheads of the community makes a comment it doesn't make it fair game. True, under fair use law, it's legal to post one of Bruce's comments on a public mailing list, but that doesn't make it right.
Like the super heroes that most of us loved as kids, and probably still love now, Slashdot needs to learn that with great power comes great responsibility, and that means learning not to post everything that might be interesting until all of the facts are in. It's time to start behaving like a true news source, guys.
i have a problem just waiting for a post with 200 comments attached to it to load! Who has time to read every comment? Roblimo is watching us all! Beware!!!
I do agree with Slashdot's policy of anti-censorship. But i don't think Rob has the time to read every comment that's spelled with caps and digits.
Hey, The Flintstones absolutely rock! Yabba dabba dooooo!
to a non-issue...
How many minors actually have their own Internet account? How would 16-year-old pay? Credit Card? Check? When did ATT, MCI, etc start making contracts with minors? They don't, they make contracts with parents, teachers and others over 18.
So this is just a total non-issue.
You all must be very bright, but very inexperienced/young
This is kind of on topic here, not only because ACs are becoming a pest again.
... well, that option isn't absolutely necessary, IMHO.
What do we need ACs for? I mean, what amount of information about myself do I give away by creating an account? It's not that I need any ID or anything. If I am planning on contributing stuff here (and setting my own preferences, etc.), I *will* create an account. And if I am going to act like an asshole
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
It's wrong to make a news article out of something someone said on the radio without consulting them first. Someone who speaks on the radio is probably only intending to communicate with people tuned into that station. If you want to widely redistribute what they've said, you should check with them first. That's just courtesy for other people.
It's wrong to make a news article out of something someone said on TV without consulting them first. Someone who speaks on TV is probably only intending to communicate with people tuned into that station. If you want to widely redistribute what they've said, you should check with them first. That's just courtesy for other people.
It's wrong to make a news article out of something someone said in a newspaper without consulting them first. Someone who writes for a magazine is probably only intending to communicate with people reading that newspaper. If you want to widely redistribute what they've said, you should check with them first. That's just courtesy for other people.
------
What? You don't realize that the Debian legal list is open to anyone with a valid e-mail address, just like a radio station's broadcast is open to anyone with a radio in recieving range?
Posting something to a publicly-accessable mailing list is not a private communication. It isn't even as private as shouting it out in the middle of the office Christmas party. Instead, it is as private as saying it on a radio call-in show, or in the op-ed page of your newspaper, or on public-access TV.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
My Opinion:
The person who submitted the story rushed things. Hemos posted it too quickly. (Sorry, buddy.)
Really, is the desire to get a scoop so intense that people are willing to run to the submit script every time someone says something controversial? I for one do not read Slashdot because it has the fastest news. Does anyone?
As for Roblimo's story, I'm a little saddened. It seems like he's shifting responsibility for this little ruckus onto Bruce. Okay, so maybe he sent that message prematurely, but he *didn't* send it to a million people like Slashdot did. Yes, it's hard to be in the spotlight, but it doesn't help when your friends are following you around with a 50,000 cp handheld deer-blinder.
There's a big difference. Suppose there's a nice little flameware on the kernel developer's list, or suppose Tom Christiansen lets someone have it on the Perl Porter's list -- does that really warrant a story that Linux or Perl is doomed? I'm willing to wait a day or two for confirmation of details before panicking. If I ran Slashdot, that would be the rule.
I don't, and it's just a suggestion. But I do hope Rob and Robin and Jeff and Justin and the rest sit down and decide if speed in reporting is more important than accuracy and insight, and then stick to that decision.
--
how to invest, a novice's guide
> very similar to the phenomenon of
:)
>Five-Member-Male-Vocalist-Groups
proof positive that our educational system is declining--folks can't even get the number of singers in a quartet right anymore
I've been regularly reading/posting slashdot for about 4 months now, so I'm relatively new. The SNR ratio may have gone down, thats usually safe to say when the number of users keeps going up, as well as the other side effects of popularity. There isn't much need to worry , however.
Slashdot is still WAY better than most media outlets. What do you get from mainstream media, even those that normally cover tech-related issues? You get one opinion, filtered down and censored, so they don't offend anyone. On top of that most news sources cover tabloid topics nowdays, things that don't matter at all in the grand scheme of things.
On slashdot we have an unlimited number of opinions that I can learn something from (new ideas). Posters here actually know something about computers and tech in general, most posts are better than some journalist writing for a newspaper who likes to say "windows sucks, imacs are cool".
I really like the alternative viewpoints here as well. You're not going to find arguements against capitalism or the US on CBS evening news with Dan Rather. In addition to tech related stuff, we've got politics, economics, and social issues as well (or they at least come up in the posts).
Basically the positives outweigh the negatives: you still can't have everything. Slashdot might have a bit of a "tabloid" effect like mainstream media does, but it's not nearly as bad. The bottom line for me is that I'm exposed to more opinions, and I'm challenged to think by slashdot posts more than any mainstream story ever could.
Personally I hope all media evolves into a more "populist" form like slashdot someday.
Bruce had been saying all along that he thought Corel should be punished on SLASHDOT ITSELF. Thus, the posting of his comments on debian-legal was NOTHING NEW.
By going on, and on, and on, about it, you're amplifying the silly mistake that he made and the damage too. He's recanted, we all agree, and now shut up.
I don't know that I agree that this story amplifies the damage-- on the contrary, I think it helps *dampen* the damage.
Look, you say "We all agree", but who is this "we"? THe casual ZeeDeeNet reporter browsing Slashdot who just saw "Bruce Parens says SUE COREL!" and then jumps off to write a story without clicking 'read more'? I think it's QUITE valuable to reiterate the whole debacle and reflect on what WE AS A COMMUNITY are doing to the reporting of news.
So this FEATURE (not a news story, mind you) recants and reflects upon the fact that Bruce Parens jumped the gun on a 'private' (ie. slightly less avialable than slashdot) forum, got a bit lambasted by Slashdot readers, and Bruce recanted. Now we take a moment to analyze the process.
I think this serves two very valuable purposes for good journalism from Slashdot: 1) Tells the casual shareholders that it's okay, the big bad Open Source amoeba isn't going to try to eat Corel. and 2) Highlights an important changing trend in the process of news event and idea sharing.
I see so many messages on this thread talking about the 'old Slashdot'. Well, akin to what this article is saying, I'm sorry boys and girls but we're out of the GARDEN OF EDEN and the AGE OF INNOCENCE is gone. Slashdot is a NEWS MEDIUM, in the SAME class as the big boys-- more so perhaps, because I know I for one give Slashdot more credibility than most other news sources because of the wide open forum attached to each story.
Slashdot informs, influences, and it's a good idea to take a moment to be self-consious of the process.
Well you understand that a significant portion of Slashdot's operating budjet comes from Andover.net and they most certainly determine the narrowness of content. Slashdot of 2 years ago would never get financed simply because the stories were too technical and unusual. Probably they could have stuck with the shared T1 in Michigan and we would all be posting to segfault or some other portal, but unlike those portals the Slashdot people dropped the obscure and unusual and started quoting CNN and MSNBC in exchange for more money. Nothing comes without a cost, whether the programmer borrows $100,000 to pay for it or the user pays for it. I remember when a virtual server costed $25 a month with unlimited bandwidth. Nowadays you can't get that for $200 a month. You can't depend on corporations to stay up and keep providing the same scope of the content.
It's normal for anyone who's in the spotlight to make the occasional mistake. Bruce recognized his error and apologized in public. Which is more than I can say for most who back themselves into an indefensible verbal corner.
And I say KUDOS TO SLASHDOT, both for reporting the news and providing the equally visible PUBLIC FORUM where that recant could take place.
What other news publication does the same? Something like News.com or ZeeDeeNet would fire and forget on the story, and then maybe take a few weeks to print a story on the recant.
D00D, KAMRA W0RZZ sx0r:P
The reason there all AC is beacuse they don't want to loose there own karma by being moderated down
--
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Oh, please. If Corel hasn't contemplated this before investing in Linux, they deserve what they get. You seriously want us to belive that they haven't examined the various licenses involved? Perhaps you're right, and they're idiots who don't have lawyers at their beck and call. I doubt it, tho. But if they want to play fast-and-loose with the licenses, that's their call because its their money. But they shouldn't cry too much when they get spanked because of their inability to stay legal.
The one good thing about all of this is that it reminds the money-men that there are licenses involved, and that they should try very hard to abide by those licenses. If they can't, they're perfectly free to buy the software, or hire programmers to replicate the functionality.
When you own the software, then you can dictate terms.
James
I think there are a lot of good aspects to what happened. First of all, it was demonstrated that the community is open. You can't keep secrets among a clique at the top, if anyone knows, soon everyone knows. This may be embarassing for Bruce, and I feel for him, but what happened is what should have happened and should be a warning to all those who post or email. Kudos to Hemos for posting, this is a better result than an unsubstantiated rumor that Bruce wants to sue Corel. It is *less* likely to be blown up in the mainstream media because everyone can now see there is nothing there.
In terms of the actual event (not the posting to Slashdot) I think it not unreasonable for Bruce to get angry. Not ideal maybe, but quite understandable. I think the under-18 Debian developers deserve some anger in their behalf. I'll bet Corel knows Bruce was angry. This is good.
The negative consequences described seem to be mainly that the corporate Linux supporters and those yet to be will take from this that the Linux community is sue-happy and will back off, or not extend support. This is unreasonable. First, any who read Slashdot already know that hundreds of us will yell "Sue!" at a perceived GPL violation. Bruce is rather mellow compared to some in that regard. However the fact is that the GPL remains untested in court to this day. Since such a case would more likely revolve around the right to distribute rather than money, I don't believe there is likely to be one soon, even with the increased commerical support. It's a no-win proposition unless a critical principle is involved.
Finally, copyrights are *only* meaningful if they are defended. If a company truly violates the GPL and won't change we *should* sue them. Since the results of losing the case could be catastrophic, we need to pick the case extremely carefully however, and this spat with Corel doesn't cut it, at least as it appears to me.
Theres one important thing about Web-Based Discussionboards: The usenet can do all they can, only better.
I currently live in a country, where Phonecosts are something, that is based on the time you use your phoneline. While I can read News very comfortable when offline, I've got to pay for every single second of Slashdotting.
And Newsgroups were invented for Discussion. Web seems just to be the wrong Media for a discussion forum.
Just my 0.02 EUR
Nils
I understand Hemos' logic: Anyone can subscribe to the debian-legal mailing list (there may even be a Web-accessible archive), so Bruce Perens' suggestion, "It's time for us to bring suit," could be considered a statement to have been made in public view, and fair game for journalists.
I still have two problems with Hemos's posting.
First, I think Bruce's preferences (for where his words appear) should be respected. If he'd wanted a discussion on this in Slashdot, likely to be picked up by WSJ/NYT/Salon/Wired/etc., he certainly knew how to submit it, and the Slashdot editorial staff would have posted it in seconds (and Bruce knew that too). He didn't, so presumably, he didn't.
Second, if Bruce can't quietly raise a suggestion such as this on debian-legal, where *can* he raise it? Alan Greenspan can meet with his peers behind closed doors. Bruce could have (maybe should have) picked a few close friends on the list and asked them to keep the subject private for the moment; not clear he would have gotten the kind of feedback he needed.
I know privacy on debian-legal (or lots of places on the net) is not guaranteed. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be respected.
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
Corel has had a record in the past of non-conformance with licences, such as the whole beta-test license thing. They are a non open source company moving into the realm of open source, maybe they need a kick in the butt like this every now and again to remind them that they're playing by a different set of rules now.
Now, on to a bit of a different topic... why did most of your article seem to revolve around the impact things like this could have on the stock price of RedHat or Corel, or whatever? In the future, what happens if everyone's pocket is lined with dividends from RedHat and Corel and are too worried about the stock price to raise a stink about a company violating a license?
Sorry, but this is not funny. This is *retarded*.
You heard it here first! Slashdot is trying to become a rumor and gossip monger just like the fabulous production known as The Register .
/.??? Fuck You!
The post by Hemos was the worst of the worst when it comes to news articles and I can't support any news source that allows itself to use this kind of trashy gossip. Roblimo should seriously think about what he wants Slashdot to be. A news source for nerds or just a message board for flaming and rumors. I think Hemos should have thought a little more about the post but Roblimo is trying to justify the post on
If you think you are just any other news source and don't have to check articles to see what the author really meant, I can get my news from somewhere else thank you. With such a close relationship with Bruce, why the hell didn't you just call him to see what he said on something that was as controversial as this? You guys don't want censorship and neither do I but WHEN YOU ARE WRONG, YOU MUST RETRACT THE ARTICLE!
is an advantage of commercial software
it's silly when time is wasted dwelling on the code review policies of the freebsd-core or how a license that grants near unlimited use short of credit where credit's due is too restrictive to people who take to needing several pages of terms or some goofy comments from people we all know
what positive impact will discussions like this one or this one have on the future of computer software?
To me any time the journalists become the story there is something wrong. Either the journalists have an over-inflated ego, or they are not covering the story in a professional and comprehensive manner. Clearly to have three stories in a short period of time where /. itself is the main issue of the story ought to trigger a careful reassesment of the editorial policy (if any) of the publication.
I would strongly urge Rob et al to do a little research on what constitutes sound editorial policies. Slashdot's long term growth and reputation could be adversely affected without some care in this area.
I don't see this as Bruce Perens' fault, but Slashdot's. And yet, Robin is quick to dismiss this, and even inform us that he "growled" at Hemos for posting an apology. First off, where does Robin get the right to growl at Hemos? Hemos was here long before Robin ever was - Robin just came on board when Andover took over. Am I the only one who detects a note of arrogance in some of Robin's many editorials? Yes, yes, I know, if I don't like it, I don't have to read Slashdot. All I can say is, if I were Hemos, I don't think I would tolerate any "growling" from Robin's direction. The way Robin's long-winded editorials keep popping up (like the one about how to get women - how sickening was that), you'd think this will soon be Roblimo.Net. I miss the old /.
The "editors" at Slashdot are doing more harm than good to the Linux community. Please get rid of them and hire a professional staff.
No, what Bruce posted *was* newsworthy. Bruce has a nasty habit of turning rogue on people. I'm very surprised that anybody is trusting him to be a venture capitalist, given his history. Have people forgotten his "fuck you all" message to the Debian list? Have people forgotten how he quit Debian, was talked out of it, quit again, quit OSI, and now has quit helping Corel?
Bruce is not reliable. Stay away from him.
must be.
Illiad is giving Corel some deserved grief.
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
I think the major point here is that the web is too "immediate" to give people time to get over their bouts of anger; Bruce heard about yet another case of Corel (or at least their legal department) demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the GPL. He understandably got annoyed, and while still annoyed dashed off a quick email to the appropriate user group. After an hour or so, he calmed down, but by then the echos of that note had spread across the planet....
--
-=DaveHowe=-
I think that it's somewhat naive to think that Bruce's (much respect) preference as to whether the story should have been run should have been taken into account.
Slashdot is about journalism. I know that a lot of the time it seems to be about linux or about OSS, but it is one of the purest forms of journalism around. These things just shine through because they interest us.
It could be said that Slashdot has a positive effect on the Open Source Community, but would you have a story held back because it is potentially damaging to said community?
"Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality." -- Dalai Lama
Other incidents such as slashdot prematurely posting various unfounded "conspiracy theories" ( Corel dropping WINE, etc ) serve little purpose other than to draw several predictable knee-jerk rants from ignorant readers, in a manner reminiscent of 1984's two minutes of hate. Rather than slashdot commentating on how hard it is to deal with the tabloid-like linux press, slashdot ( who ARE the only "linux tabloid" ) could perhaps improve matters by choosing their front page stories more judiciously.
We can all feel righteous outrage and screw up the solution to the wrong problem. In the early days (when Babbage was a child :-).) when there were no programming languages computing was akin to a black art and only mathematicians and brains like Turing understood. Today is very different. Young men like the 'celebrities' refered to, while young to the post Turing generation like me are old and god like to 'minors' (how I dislike that word). The future is not their's, they have had their time and a new generation of original thinkers are now using/programing GNU/Linux. Even though Corel may have acted on sound legal advice for good commercial reasons my grandson's question to me this lunchtime "Grandpa, why are you still using Corel WordPerfect when they won't let me download Linux?" required a long and not very convincing answer. The 14 - 17 year olds using GNU/Linux today are the IT Directors (VPs) of tomorrow and as every parent knows children have a long memory. It is not the point that Bruce Perens has no PR; it is rather that Corel PR may well have shot themselves seriously in the foot. PS. I use WP because I'm too old to change, my grandson used it because it was not MS. He is currently converting all his files on Sun's StarOffice(r).
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
But just because it's the most obviously revolutionary thing happening doesn't make it the most revolutionary. What CmdrTaco and the boys are doing is pretty revolutionary too - to take another of today's stories, for example, it's the Slashdot effect which surges huge flows of traffic around the Web. It isn't the Times effect, the CNN effect or the BBC effect, and it isn't because these bodies, skilled and resourced at newsgathering as they are, have not managed to exploit this new medium in the way that Slashdot has.
What I'm suggesting is that Slashdot may be to Berners-Lee as The Times was to Caxton, or CNN has been to Logie Baird: the body which has most effectively discovered the formula to harness the new technology to journalism, and which will in the long run influence the way in which journalism on the medium is presented.
Of course I may be wrong here; I may be simply absurdly overestimating Slashdot's importance. But at the same time I can't help betting that there are executives in half the media coroprations in the world lying awake at night wondering how they let Andover get away with such a bargain, and executives at Andover lying awake at nights wondering what to do with it.
We all (I assume) believe this medium is powerful, and yet we're all continually being surprised by how powerful it is. And so, from time to time, we get surprised when stories like this blow up out of nowhere. This is another sort of Slashdot effect , a consequence of using a powerful technology when you don't have enough experience with it to know instinctively the potential consequences of your actions.
What I liked about this story is that it is Slashdot introspecting about Slashdot. Introspection is something which, as Eric Raymond has often pointed out, we in the open source movement don't do enough of. When what you're doing is revolutionary, when the waters which you are navigating are uncharted, if you don't think carefully about what you're doing you are likely to do much less well than you otherwise might.
So Rob (and everyone else who has contributed), don't be upset by accusations of self indulgence. Sometimes looking at what we're doing, trying to understand what we're doing, and, most importantly, trying to understand the consequences of what we're doing, are as important as doing it.
Viva la revoluçion!
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
"But I don't (personally) believe we should ever apologize for running legitimate news, including speculations made in public forums by Open Source celebrities. And Bruce Perens is not only a legitimate public figure in the Open Source context, but is one largely because of his own actions. Bruce is not a reticent person. "
(Emphasis mine)
"Fast-forward to now: there are days when Slashdot does well over one million pageviews. Reporters from The Wall Street Journal (Hi Lee!), CNN (Hi, Ian!) and even Al Gore campaign staffers (Hi, Ben!), read Slashdot regularly. Stories that break here are often picked up by general-interest media or serve as inspiration (we say politely) for their own reporting."
(Emphasis mine)
Stories that break here? Alright. We have stories that appear on the Slashdot mainpage, as well as features, articles, polls, etc. What happens next? Slashdot is an open, public discussion board. Thanks to Rob's wonderful leadership, we can have this as uncensored as we want, too. It's not a news service, and any background checking and points are generally made by the people who post to these forums.
Admittedly, some of the more vapouristic rumours should have some Slashdot staff background checking, but they have to wade through a lot of story submissions each day, not to mention general server maintenance, etc. They post stuff, we discuss and perhaps even reach a conclusion. This is not the news, this is information that Slashdot readers find interesting. Using Slashdot as a basis for a New York Times or Wall Street Journal article, is like writing a story based on some subway bum's ramblings.
Speculation in online forums should not be used as inspiration for the news.
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Well, that would explain why I saw Tux the last time I was at Source Adult.
:-)
I just assumed I was halucinating
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
This reads like a Giant exercise in chest beating. One thing that CmdrTaco and Hemos have over Roblimo is that they are humble. They post the kind of things I'm interested in and say the sort of things I agree with. They never appear condescending or pretentious... the fact that half of CmdrTaco's posts have spelling mistakes makes you think he's very down to earth. Now, before I say anything else remember that Slashdot became what it is with them at the helm.
Now... when I read one of Roblimo's features, I get the exact opposite feel. I feel as though I'm being talked down to... sort of "listen up child, this is how it is". I think the thing that really pissed me off was the "How to get a girl" feature. Who is he to presume that any of us need/want his advice. I also pity anyone who took his advice, the feature read like it should have been titled "Sexism 101".
To come back to the point, I agree with Hemos posting an apology. At least he is still down to earth enough to realize that it is possible to make a mistake. Roblimo appears to be a little too caught up with his own self importance, to realize that this is one thing that makes Slashdot special, and a little better than other web sites out there. Does Ziff Davis ever say "hey we might have been wrong on that one... it turns out our heads were in our asses"? Does Jesse Berst ever issue a retraction? No, and that's one of the reason's why they are crap.
Roblimo, leave Slashdot (or stop posting features) before you ruin it for everybody else.
~cw
BTW - I urge everybody who agrees with this, to reply and tell Roblimo to stuff the features
What shocks me is not the speed at which Bruce's opinions were made public, but the speed with which he changed them upon the advice of the Slashdot hoarde. Are we all to be a herd of stupid sheep? Are our well-considered opinions this flexible?
An open offer to Corel: I will post a public retraction of this Slashdot post for the bargain price of $45,000. Figure out what it's worth to your stockholders, and send me an email.
The same offer is not open to a herd of fifty Slashdot readers who disagree with my opinions.
- But, don't you think it was inappropriate for Slashdot to take Bruce's remarks from the list and post them without asking him?
- What about our relationship with Corel?
- Perhaps, but the lawsuit was still premature.
I think it's time we evaluated this issue in perspective, and quit our en masse ass-kissing knee-jerk reactions. For the good of the project, let's quit talking about our respective issues and worry about what we believe is best for the software we're writing.I think the only reason people are saying this is, because, given hindsight, it is a naively obvious way to ``make everyone happy.'' It doesn't make any sense. Lists are public. Slashdot is public. Lists are a place where things are discussed and ideas are hashed out, where disagreements and agreements take place. Slashdot is the same thing--it is nothing but a highly moderated web-based mailing list. If you think there is such a thing as ``news,'' in a world of its own, you are mistaken. News is anything that happens. It is not a flavour of cereal, or anything else packaged in shrinkwrap and branded with a logo. Today's media has convinced you that ``ethical'' news is news that doesn't piss off any large corporations, or important individuals, or incite people to argue and think for themselves. Anything which does these things, even if it's otherwise newsworthy, is somehow ``unethical.'' I call this shame, prudence, backrubbing, or collusive materialistic compromise. Ethics indeed!
Relationship? Hah! So-called ``Commercial interest'' in Linux may be a good thing, but I think its importance is overpercieved. We are used to commercial OS's like OS/2 dying because there aren't enough ``programs to run,'' or something. This is nonsense in the present day and age, when people only want web browsers, word processors, and video games--the elusive ``Killer App'' at Comdex, that is, app, singular. Commercial interest is not important to Linux's success, and Corel can pucker up their arrogant little lips and kiss my ass for all I care about their ``contribution'' to the Linux community, which so far seems to amount to nothing but vaporware hype that makes our optimism seem progressively less warranted, a notoriously buggy distribution that distracts new users from better-architected less-expensive compilations, flagrant violations of the GPL, and an unwillingness to enter respectful dialogue with representatives of the open projects that permit their existence.
What are you waiting for, then? They violated the license, and the effects of their violation were exactly what the license was intended to prevent: they stole Debian's code and distributed it in an unfree manner, and then disrespectfully ignored the Debian folk--the representatives of the developers whose work they illegally stole. They apparently feel they can take Debian and do with it whatever they like, but for better or worse GNU/Linux is under the GPL, and they are mistaken. How much is this ``professional relationship'' worth to the Linux community? Is it worth losing control of the project? Is it worth losing the credibility and enforcability of Open Source licenses? I think it's worse less than that. A lot less.
This idea was suggested before on Slashdot but doesn't seem to have been taken up yet by Slashdot's creators -- my post from 4th June 1999 comment:
There is nowhere permanent on Slashdot to post topical comments, suggestions or questions about Slashdot itself, e.g. how many people read Slashdot today, how best to use Slashdot via my firewall, who's CmdrTaco, what text clients do people use for reading Slashdot, where is Slashdot, etc. This would be a place for discussion. It could be called something like "The Slashdot Comments/Questions Page" linked from the home page slashdot.org/comments.htm where people can discuss current Slashdot issues.
ITs LIKE 'tall poppie sysndrome', as an AC i get it all the time.
OF course all criticism of AC's is harsh, cause we R mainstreeeeem
You seem to be forgetting that Hemos was a man about the whole affair, and issued an apology. Roblimo is the doofus who wrote this article that attempts to justify the whole affair, and smacks of self-importance. (Wow, you have Bruce Peren's phone number "somewhere", you are so 31337...) Keep Hemos; he made a mistake but admitted it. Dump Roblimo, he turned the affair into YACE (Yet Another Condescending Editorial). Kudos to Hemos for admitting he goofed - he's a keeper.
While I agree with the editorial that Slashdot's job is to post relevant news articles, the question remains whether or not Mr. Peren's e-mail constitutes news. I mentioned in a post I made yesterday that perhaps it is time that Slashdot obtain the services of Managing editor. The problem I have with the whole mess is that, for all of the 'importance' the original article had, it wasn't really news at all. Consequently there have been hundreds of posts on the whole issue _about_ the whole issue.
...bad news, just like the local televison news broadcasts ...let's post it!'.
I can see posting an article had Mr. Perens filed for a lawsuit, but to post an article about an e-mail to a discussion group borders on yellow journalism. I don't perceive a lack of articles being posted on Slashdot, so to choose to print an article with very little substance makes little sense unless the attitude in the editorial offices was 'Cool
In the immortal words of Socrates, who said; 'I drank what?'
Dear Mr. T, You're hella cool. I also agree with everything you say. Roblimo sucks.
I just assume everything I say, online or in real life, is going to be heard by the person who'll be most likely to be hurt by it. I almost never say anything I haven't carefully gone over in my head. I say a lot of stuff that is just plan nuts but rarely anything that is cruel or bound to cause problems (even by accident). After a while your brain seems to adjust to this, at least mine did. It has made me a nicer person but has made it harder for me to be charming on controling. I haven't decided if it was worth the trade yet.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
The story really didn't have any substance (in fact Bruce's comment wasn't even available on the mailing list archive when the Slashdot story went live). The story had just enough "clues" to cause a stir. Pure sensationalism.
I hope we don't see any more of this sensationalism here. Regarless of "intentions", sensationalism means more readers, and that means more revenue.
Does this really deserve 5 (five) points??
debian-private is for this purpose
Bruce did not say this only on debian-legal. He said this on SLASHDOT ITSELF, attached to the original article about corel.
Do not upgrade this comment to Score: 5, I already read it. Thanks.
In the days of newsprint only, the way things would have gone is like this:
1) Bruce declares a lawsuit
2) The newpaper reporters write up the story
3) Bruce retracts his law suit after taking advice
4) The newpaper reporters get this also, and the editor kills the story, or amends it so that the tone is lessened.
It would have never gotten into the public eye.
With Slashdot and other online news sources, things like this get reported as they happen, and storys get updated as things come in. CNN is a good example of how this is - a story breaks; they publish a short piece on what happened, and update as details come in.
This type of journalism has the same turnaround as open source software. Compared to the old style print, it travels light years faster, and things get fixed just as fast.
I don't think anyone should be berated or flamed for posting a breaking story like the Corel incident. It is news, and should be reported.
This sort of thing will happen again, and people should be aware that whatever they post on the net will be read by a lot of people, and if they are anyway powerful at all, will be reprinted shortly afterwards.
This is not to say that people should say nothing at all.
When making a statement like this people should send out feelers to decide if their idea will fly and will be backed up. This will not always work - it's hard to lead by mob, but with legal issues and major changes of direction its often a good idea to gauge feelings first.
rather people should be aware that once they have made a position public, they will have to make sure th
Roblimo refered to the lack of intimacy in the current web based online community, where you knew who 'Vanity Flair' or 'Azeem Fizban' were (to name-drop two from my history -- Hi Yuko!) because you went out periodically and had a beer with them. When you had your own community, it was a safe haven where you could say (potentially) inflammatory things to stimulate discussion, and everyone knew that was all you were doing.
Of course, none of us were discussing things that affected large financial investments.
The whole thing smacks of media hypocracy (and I am not for one second implying that Slashdot is being malicious about this). The media claims that a person (in this case, Bruce) should be aware that there is this ultracoverage of his every word because he is a public figure -- while studiously ignoring the fact that he is a public figure because the media made it so!
Just something to think about.
--
you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
I am biased because I own Corel stock, but I only own Corel stock because of their (extended) Linux involvement. I consider myself a part of the Linux/Open Source community (advocacy and training). I consider Corel a part of the Linux/Open Source community.
;)
This community can only reject a "member" thru consensus and peer-pressure. Bruce tried to leverage his popular community power to persuade others to "reject" Corel. That offended me, because I think Corels involvement in the Community is a "Good Thing". So I added my voice to the peer-pressure/consensus to "reject" Bruce's position. I believe that Bruce has contributed a lot to the growth of Linux/Open Source. But I also believe that Corel's involvement at this point is critical. So, in this case, I was very glad to see Bruce's misstep corrected ("slapped down" *was* too harsh).
The community is open to all. I think some of our major luminaries have even "welcomed" Microsoft to create their own distribution. Corel has been a part of the Linux Community for well over a year now. They were the *first* existing MS-bound ISV to offer an existing commercial product ported to Linux. In *my* mind, if Bruce Perens went away right now, I don't think that would set back the growth of Linux as much as if Corel went away right now. Hopefully, neither will, and both will learn from their missteps and we will all move forward together. (fade in music here
Criminalize spam and telemarketing!
I just thought I'd waste a packet here because I want Bruce and /. to know I felt they did the right thing, and that it is an important issue.
My father is a journalist, and now a journalism professor, and I do not fondly remember the trouble he used to get into when he reported what some state insurance commisioner said, and they later changed their mind. ( and I'll probably be trying to get him to work this into his class on media.)
On the other hand, it might be said that there is a difference in reporting fact A and that some one said A in public. I think this tripped up people in this mess. People say things all the time, in many media, but they are not press releases or legal papers.
My two cents,
adric--
sigless -- palm3 is down the hall
<script>alert("I never liked JavaScript, really; it just seemed a bad idea.");</script>
I'm glad the majority of moderators understand the importance of satisfying interpersonal communications, and that these interpersonal connections are what many seek whilst reading this material.
Others are here to prove their worth, judge truth and distinctiveness, merit similarity with the blade of a zealot, and portray lies where there are none. Just like any physical community, there are those that seek similarities to bind and strengthen, and those that seek to improve themselves at the expense of others.
(Not to divide society into two factions. Everyone knows there are two types of people: those that divide people into two types of people and those that do not. Unless everyone divides everyone into two types of people or vise versa.)
Ok, that's offtopic enough for me. ;)