Actually, because history shows that powerful people with lots of resources and the ability to keep their activities secret (either through complete obscurity or through intimidating knowing parties) tend to act with impunity, it's seems perfectly logical to inger that these things will continue to happen. The fact that they keep happening seems a clear indication of this. As for intelligence run by popular vote, sort of. I want an intelligence agency that serves a government by command, not by what it perceives as the best interests of the state. The best interests of my political state are the preservation of open and transparent actions on the part of my government, the general freedom of its citizens to live free from oversight and as they see fit. I see no point in protecting america if we do so at the expense of making everything everyone writes, says, or otherwise commits to expression outside of their heads subject to review by an agency with opaque methods, goals, and intent. In other words, if the preservation of liberty is gained at its own expense, what's the point?
you should have to register to post. people who post about hot grits will have to do so with an id that can be revoked. maybe then slashdot will stop sucking so much.
you forgot to mentioned the sometimes highly biased moderation, and inaine nattering from all the people who do not know that they're talking about, nor care.
how many questions did you expect to get that didn't involve you explaining why you suck so much, or the like. This isn't a troll or a juvenile little snap at you. It's just that everyone (nearly) on slashdot seems to hate you, and the discussion provoked by your articles has at least as much (read: a lot more) to do with people venting at you than at anything you really say. What's the point, I guess, of all this? Are you just trolling, are you serious, what?
1) too many people say the same thing over and over, usually in lessening degrees of clarity. 2) too few people are interested in having actual converstation as opposed to an eristic flamewar/jokefest 3) the stories are rigged to produce above mentioned flamewars/jokefests 4) any discussion of the problems with slashdot is always offtopic/troll/flamebait 5) any "rules" for conducting the discussion are ignored my %50 percent of the people 6) The moderation is careless, and obviously often performed without reading the comments all the way through.
If this were usenet, we'd have started another group by now.
1) The survey questions were formulated to elicit responses that produced the resulting numbers
2) The public at large knows little about Microsoft's business practices or the DOJ suit agains MS
3) The public at large knows so little about technology that their opinions about it bear the same weight that their relative benefits for new prescription drugs might
4) Large corporations are centers of lots of money and ambition, and tend to do stuff to further the wealth and ambitions of their owners/employees
5) MS is a large corporations and tends do lots of PR work which is shady and underhanded to further it's own ends
Exactly how much "/." sucks? Same conversations and arguments over and over, same stories. Crap, crap, crap. Not to mention the moderation. Because you put the moderation in the hands of the idiots who regurgitate the same nauseating pablum, they tend to mark down any post that either doesn't jive with their prejudices or moves beyond the level at which they operate. Oh and the automatic moderation down for short posts. I'd think being a windbag who writes pages full of shit would be a better criterion for a demotion. Please mark this down for being off topic. Discussing the flaws in the nature of the discussion format is never acceptable or on topic.
Actually, the Chineese government is not fascist. It is a totalitarian state; however, totalitarian is not the same as fascist. Please use terms accurately, or our language will start to loose its descriptive power.
I don't want to see anyone who has only read the short, polemical work of a generally complex philosopher tell me what he said. Saying that Marx's work is a vision of how to accomplish anarchy demeans the insightful analyses of history and economics, in addition to being merely incorrect. His work is descriptive, perhaps predictive, but it is not prescriptive. The sweeping spectre of communism is not something he's encouraging so much as assuming will happen, in the context of his dialectical materialism. Your view of his work makes him little more than the intellectual heir of radical crackpots, rather than the logical development and maturation of the work of Hegel. Please learn more about Marx before telling me to learn more about Marx. Thanks.
An excellent point. It's well proven that disposable products tend to promote disposal. The last thing we need is more solid waste so some ungodly wealthy cocksuckers can make more money off of the laziness of the average consumer.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, because history shows that powerful people with lots of resources and the ability to keep their activities secret (either through complete obscurity or through intimidating knowing parties) tend to act with impunity, it's seems perfectly logical to inger that these things will continue to happen. The fact that they keep happening seems a clear indication of this. As for intelligence run by popular vote, sort of. I want an intelligence agency that serves a government by command, not by what it perceives as the best interests of the state. The best interests of my political state are the preservation of open and transparent actions on the part of my government, the general freedom of its citizens to live free from oversight and as they see fit. I see no point in protecting america if we do so at the expense of making everything everyone writes, says, or otherwise commits to expression outside of their heads subject to review by an agency with opaque methods, goals, and intent. In other words, if the preservation of liberty is gained at its own expense, what's the point?
cause NT sucks!
Just in office time, not including outside learning/hacking or time I spend dreaming about a project (yes, I code in my sleep).
Take a peek here for an interesting perspective on this issue.
slashdot already has gone bad
you should have to register to post. people who post about hot grits will have to do so with an id that can be revoked. maybe then slashdot will stop sucking so much.
you forgot to mentioned the sometimes highly biased moderation, and inaine nattering from all the people who do not know that they're talking about, nor care.
how many questions did you expect to get that didn't involve you explaining why you suck so much, or the like. This isn't a troll or a juvenile little snap at you. It's just that everyone (nearly) on slashdot seems to hate you, and the discussion provoked by your articles has at least as much (read: a lot more) to do with people venting at you than at anything you really say. What's the point, I guess, of all this? Are you just trolling, are you serious, what?
Actually, wouldn't you really just have Linus and a few other kernel developers. After all, it's not GNU/LinuxWorld, is it?
75 % of all slashdot moderation occurs randomly
slashdot sucks because:
1) too many people say the same thing over and over, usually in lessening degrees of clarity.
2) too few people are interested in having actual converstation as opposed to an eristic flamewar/jokefest
3) the stories are rigged to produce above mentioned flamewars/jokefests
4) any discussion of the problems with slashdot is always offtopic/troll/flamebait
5) any "rules" for conducting the discussion are ignored my %50 percent of the people
6) The moderation is careless, and obviously often performed without reading the comments all the way through.
If this were usenet, we'd have started another group by now.
1) The survey questions were formulated to elicit responses that produced the resulting numbers
2) The public at large knows little about Microsoft's business practices or the DOJ suit agains MS
3) The public at large knows so little about technology that their opinions about it bear the same weight that their relative benefits for new prescription drugs might
4) Large corporations are centers of lots of money and ambition, and tend to do stuff to further the wealth and ambitions of their owners/employees
5) MS is a large corporations and tends do lots of PR work which is shady and underhanded to further it's own ends
Let's talk about something more interesting now.
you mean, in semi-random, ranting blurts?
means the original author was a sicko
a convenient install for the HURD. Take a look at
the install instructions on the Debian GNU/Hurd
website; they're inconvenient at best.
Exactly how much "/." sucks? Same conversations and arguments over and over, same stories. Crap, crap, crap. Not to mention the moderation. Because you put the moderation in the hands of the idiots who regurgitate the same nauseating pablum, they tend to mark down any post that either doesn't jive with their prejudices or moves beyond the level at which they operate. Oh and the automatic moderation down for short posts. I'd think being a windbag who writes pages full of shit would be a better criterion for a demotion. Please mark this down for being off topic. Discussing the flaws in the nature of the discussion format is never acceptable or on topic.
Actually, the Chineese government is not fascist. It is a totalitarian state; however, totalitarian is not the same as fascist. Please use terms accurately, or our language will start to loose its descriptive power.
No, they're selling a shitty, half-assed mandrake-ripoff distribution cause they're concerned about the greater good of the linux community.
I'd agree, actually.
I get it. You really don't know what you're talking about and I've caught you. I thought as much. Thanks for playing.
I don't want to see anyone who has only read the short, polemical work of a generally complex philosopher tell me what he said. Saying that Marx's work is a vision of how to accomplish anarchy demeans the insightful analyses of history and economics, in addition to being merely incorrect. His work is descriptive, perhaps predictive, but it is not prescriptive. The sweeping spectre of communism is not something he's encouraging so much as assuming will happen, in the context of his dialectical materialism. Your view of his work makes him little more than the intellectual heir of radical crackpots, rather than the logical development and maturation of the work of Hegel. Please learn more about Marx before telling me to learn more about Marx. Thanks.
actually, commies don't really value freedom. They value communial ownership of the means of production (at least in the marx-derived version).
An excellent point. It's well proven that disposable products tend to promote disposal. The last thing we need is more solid waste so some ungodly wealthy cocksuckers can make more money off of the laziness of the average consumer.
dynamic content makes the technical quantity of distinct "pages" far greater than a billion.
does anyone else think web based recruiting for spy agencies is funny? I think I need coffee.
. In fact, it would be over a year before I ever saw an intelligent post from the aol.com domain.
There are no intelligent posts from aol.com. You must be mistaken.