no, AC, it's not a "pure troll" - I don't do "pure troll." I might, at times, speak some vague dialect of troll. But this was not one of those times.
I was being serious.
Ten million downloads is impressive. And it is nice to think that people might finally be looking at non-Microsoft ways of using the Web and Net. That's wonderful. But shit, it's been over three years since I was using Nightly Builds of anything. If shit ain't working by now...it probably isn't worth working on.
Ah, now that was a wee bit offsides, now wasn't it? A bit trollish?
Still, the more trollish posts are the "none of this matters! IE still 0wnZ the m0z!" Go flame them, Cowboy. And maybe even put some of your precious Karma at risk to do it.
My post is based on ten years worth of waiting on Netscape updates. I remember being excited by 2.0. Those were the days. This is just candy for hyperactive neo-nerds of the new century. Fuck 'em. Call me at the major release dates and don't give me a shitty product, ok?
how something that used to have updates every three to four months now causes people to wet their pants like this: "the latest nightly has been working flawlessly for me all of today."
I mean, don't you all have something serious to occupy your time with? Like Half-Life 2 patches? Or writing the walkthrough?
There is no such thing as a "well behaved" child. Sedated, perhaps.
Oh, and what about that SCO thing? 'Cause I sure haven't figured out what the hell this processor story is about. Heh.
The user should provide the terms that make the search useful to them. If I am looking for pictures of, let's say, pirates, then I probably have an idea of what I want before hand. So, if I type in pirates, I probably will get a ton of images that don't fit into what I want.
So, I would try to self-filter my search a little bit. Pirates "Clip Art" would give me on result while Pirates Carribbean would give me a completely different set.
However, no set of search terms at all seem to bring out Lynndie, the torture photos, or anything else. Now, that might be due to information I didn't know before now, but it might be something else. I think that User Filtered Results from a Complete Set or of more use than Server Side Filters that may or may not match up to User Request.
I think we two are now on the same page at least....yes?
"I would like to use a branded search engine that makes intelligent decisions for me on what I want to see or not."
I bet you watch Fox News, too, don't you? Sorry, cheap shot. Sorry all around.
"Since I have no desire to see these images, I'm perfectly happy to have them filtered. I have no desre for a mathematically precise web search -- I'm not grepping the whole web. Geesh! I want some neural net fuzzy logic processing going on. Some brains in the picture."
You are kidding me, right? Right? I'm being expertly and subtly trolled into the open to be made fun of? Right? If you don't want to see those search results, you would have simply not searched for them. No one willingly goes out of their way to search for "Tub Girl" and hope that picture is filtered out. No, they simply don't look for it. This is not a valid argument for this story.
"If I don't like the result set, I'll use another service. Very simple to do. It's called the free market, folks. As long as I have the ability to choose vendors freely the vendors must compete for the most useful and complete search (which are contradictory goals, by the way)"
Do you have the freedom to choose? Yes. But we all know that the free market is a myth. It's a wonderful concept that we simply don't have in place. Not even here on the wild wonderful interweb. We have a more bizarre corporate oligarchy of information in place, one that is probably more insidious and subtle than the open one out there in the Real World.
Come to think of it, what the hell are you trying to say?
I tried to submit this as an AskSlashdot feature on where to turn when Google's policies censor searches you want weeks ago. Thanks for finally running something on this.
I think it is high time that people woke up to what google is doing out there. We can talk a big game about google "being a privately held company" and "freedom to do what they want" and whatnot, but it is seriously frightening to me exactly what it is that they want to do to the internet, especially when they are not too terribly forthcoming about what they want.
Do any of you all use an alternate search engine? If so, post it and let us all get away from google. We claim that decentralized data is what we love the internet for, yet we all clamor to a single search engine for that data. It's incongruous and seemingly dissonant to do this.
makes you wonder how soon before universities forbid people posting sites that "might get linked on slashdot"
What needs to happen
on
Broadband Bits
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
What needs to happen is that ISPs need to wake up and smell the roses, ala Speakeasy. Allow the user, who is paying for all this anyway, to have port 80 open, to run servers, to have static IPs and the rest.
At least offer this as a "power user" option through cable and DSL providers. That way, people can actually create websites that are not fed by those banner ad driven hosts.
And yes, I know how many people probably are not up to the challenge of setting up firewalls and routing tables and whatever else it takes to do all this stuff, hell, I'm not able to really do it either. But, it would be nice to have the option to do it. I can manage apache well enough.
As it is, most "broadband" users here in the states are crippled with restrictive TOS/AUPs and upload bandwidths of around 256k. Hello? That's broadband?
As I understand it, people pay for upload. If that's the case, then consumers should be highly pissed at what they are paying. But, I guess most consumers really are amazed that they can download entire albums in ninety minutes, assuming that they find someone sharing it out at that rate.
Hmm, well so much for this not very thought out rant. I hope you all can make sense of it.
...the internet as a tool for sharing and disseminating information is falling short of what people said it would do years ago.
Google is scary enough to think about, what with their gargantuan server farm, their bizarre "don't delete your email (and even if you do, we're going to keep a copy)" policy, their odd way of censoring things in image and web results, but now we have a Google that has come right out and made it possible to really strip a web browser's secondary functionality?
I think it is time to stop treating Google as the mystic, all-holy and wonderful search engine and perhaps begin treating it as a hostile assault on the general idea and purposes of the web.
This here is a blanket response to one AC and TrueGrit.
Yes, the net is a medium for information, and maybe the corporate control is not total.
But it is remarkably prevalent in the households that are swarming to broadband. After all, what was the last commercial you saw advertising a website that was free, didn't require registration, and would let you look up interesting things? You don't.
Instead, these hundreds of people are signing on to their corporate billboards - being sold crap without the nasty inconvenience of the unwashed masses actually going out to stores (even if they themselves are the unwashed masses).
Is the internet a failure? Not quite, but it's looking bad for the home team. Should inventions be judged by their relative merit to humanity? Mmmm, probably. That's why I'm not sold on the space program. I do not see how most of that money could not be better used down here, used in demonstrable ways to improve living conditions - instead of promising us some idea of how "we might be able to get five people to Mars alive!" Or whatever. Joy to the five space colonists, and fuck the rest of us?
Would Linux and OS be possible without the net? Who knows? But this isn't really about that, it's about what has happened now that broadband is exploding. It used to be said that the Internet was like the world's largest library, with no card catalogue and no librarian to ask help from. Now, it's that same library, only with thieves and killers in the rows. And unprepared users are swarming into it every day.
Oh, I'm sorry. I guess one of you out there has no sense of humor. So, I'll explicate just a little bit.
As someone who installs broadband devices for a living, let me tell you what this "explosion" in broadband numbers means. Every day more and more people are getting on the Interweb for the very first time. They aren't doing much more than fucking up signal-to-noise ratios, when they do manage to interact. For the most part, they just want in on ebay or poker room or porn.
The Internet failed to be a wonderful, great, uplifting experience for humanity. Now, it's just another corporate shill in a never-ending line of shills.
Now, you may also mod this as bitter, off-topic and a troll. But it is true. And you all know it.
Slashdot Mirror
I reckon you are assuming that all of us here are city folk, then ain't ya?
I live in an area so dark at night the lightning bugs wake us up in the springtime.
Damn them critters.
no, AC, it's not a "pure troll" - I don't do "pure troll." I might, at times, speak some vague dialect of troll. But this was not one of those times.
I was being serious.
Ten million downloads is impressive. And it is nice to think that people might finally be looking at non-Microsoft ways of using the Web and Net. That's wonderful. But shit, it's been over three years since I was using Nightly Builds of anything. If shit ain't working by now...it probably isn't worth working on.
Ah, now that was a wee bit offsides, now wasn't it? A bit trollish?
Still, the more trollish posts are the "none of this matters! IE still 0wnZ the m0z!" Go flame them, Cowboy. And maybe even put some of your precious Karma at risk to do it.
My post is based on ten years worth of waiting on Netscape updates. I remember being excited by 2.0. Those were the days. This is just candy for hyperactive neo-nerds of the new century. Fuck 'em. Call me at the major release dates and don't give me a shitty product, ok?
how something that used to have updates every three to four months now causes people to wet their pants like this: "the latest nightly has been working flawlessly for me all of today."
I mean, don't you all have something serious to occupy your time with? Like Half-Life 2 patches? Or writing the walkthrough?
Or, something?
Egon told us 20 years ago that print was dead.
archive myspace and livejournal? At least it would save the taxpayers a pretty penny.
Just looks to me like the reviewer reads way too much of the crap on pitchfork media. After reading the review itself, I'd say I'm sure of it.
There is no such thing as a "well behaved" child. Sedated, perhaps. Oh, and what about that SCO thing? 'Cause I sure haven't figured out what the hell this processor story is about. Heh.
Apu has something like a dozen kids, which is why the Quick Mart is his entire life...
this will triple the price of the hardware, instead of lowering it. right?
will regular lcd prices slide down?
will it tell me when my toast is done? (sorry, no breakfast yet...)
"I had to uninstall it and resort to using IE to download the full installer, again."
What, you don't know how to ftp from the prompt?
but about how quickly can Microsoft turn it into a security hole for your friends and family?
The user should provide the terms that make the search useful to them. If I am looking for pictures of, let's say, pirates, then I probably have an idea of what I want before hand. So, if I type in pirates, I probably will get a ton of images that don't fit into what I want.
So, I would try to self-filter my search a little bit. Pirates "Clip Art" would give me on result while Pirates Carribbean would give me a completely different set.
However, no set of search terms at all seem to bring out Lynndie, the torture photos, or anything else. Now, that might be due to information I didn't know before now, but it might be something else. I think that User Filtered Results from a Complete Set or of more use than Server Side Filters that may or may not match up to User Request.
I think we two are now on the same page at least....yes?
Do you have the freedom to choose? Yes. But we all know that the free market is a myth. It's a wonderful concept that we simply don't have in place. Not even here on the wild wonderful interweb. We have a more bizarre corporate oligarchy of information in place, one that is probably more insidious and subtle than the open one out there in the Real World.
Come to think of it, what the hell are you trying to say?
I tried to submit this as an AskSlashdot feature on where to turn when Google's policies censor searches you want weeks ago. Thanks for finally running something on this.
I think it is high time that people woke up to what google is doing out there. We can talk a big game about google "being a privately held company" and "freedom to do what they want" and whatnot, but it is seriously frightening to me exactly what it is that they want to do to the internet, especially when they are not too terribly forthcoming about what they want.
Do any of you all use an alternate search engine? If so, post it and let us all get away from google. We claim that decentralized data is what we love the internet for, yet we all clamor to a single search engine for that data. It's incongruous and seemingly dissonant to do this.
Could be, yea, that he just feels "special" 'cause these cunning Zimbabweans just happened to guess his bank.
Which could also mean that they are netting fewer people than he thinks...except that there are really not that many small banks anymore.
With only a group of maybe five or six major banks in the US, I am sure it isn't too hard to snag some morons every now and again.
Don't trust emails from "banks," don't click links from said emails. Everyone in Zimbabwe is a cunning and ruthless online thief.
And, since the scammers knew what bank this guy used, I'd say he already has a security problem.
makes you wonder how soon before universities forbid people posting sites that "might get linked on slashdot"
What needs to happen is that ISPs need to wake up and smell the roses, ala Speakeasy. Allow the user, who is paying for all this anyway, to have port 80 open, to run servers, to have static IPs and the rest.
At least offer this as a "power user" option through cable and DSL providers. That way, people can actually create websites that are not fed by those banner ad driven hosts.
And yes, I know how many people probably are not up to the challenge of setting up firewalls and routing tables and whatever else it takes to do all this stuff, hell, I'm not able to really do it either. But, it would be nice to have the option to do it. I can manage apache well enough.
As it is, most "broadband" users here in the states are crippled with restrictive TOS/AUPs and upload bandwidths of around 256k. Hello? That's broadband?
As I understand it, people pay for upload. If that's the case, then consumers should be highly pissed at what they are paying. But, I guess most consumers really are amazed that they can download entire albums in ninety minutes, assuming that they find someone sharing it out at that rate.
Hmm, well so much for this not very thought out rant. I hope you all can make sense of it.
After seeing this, wouldn't you say the same?
No, it was Gremlins.
Collect $200?
Google is scary enough to think about, what with their gargantuan server farm, their bizarre "don't delete your email (and even if you do, we're going to keep a copy)" policy, their odd way of censoring things in image and web results, but now we have a Google that has come right out and made it possible to really strip a web browser's secondary functionality?
I think it is time to stop treating Google as the mystic, all-holy and wonderful search engine and perhaps begin treating it as a hostile assault on the general idea and purposes of the web.
I hope that doesn't sound too extreme....
Yes, the net is a medium for information, and maybe the corporate control is not total.
But it is remarkably prevalent in the households that are swarming to broadband. After all, what was the last commercial you saw advertising a website that was free, didn't require registration, and would let you look up interesting things? You don't.
Instead, these hundreds of people are signing on to their corporate billboards - being sold crap without the nasty inconvenience of the unwashed masses actually going out to stores (even if they themselves are the unwashed masses).
Is the internet a failure? Not quite, but it's looking bad for the home team. Should inventions be judged by their relative merit to humanity? Mmmm, probably. That's why I'm not sold on the space program. I do not see how most of that money could not be better used down here, used in demonstrable ways to improve living conditions - instead of promising us some idea of how "we might be able to get five people to Mars alive!" Or whatever. Joy to the five space colonists, and fuck the rest of us?
Would Linux and OS be possible without the net? Who knows? But this isn't really about that, it's about what has happened now that broadband is exploding. It used to be said that the Internet was like the world's largest library, with no card catalogue and no librarian to ask help from. Now, it's that same library, only with thieves and killers in the rows. And unprepared users are swarming into it every day.
Oh, I'm sorry. I guess one of you out there has no sense of humor. So, I'll explicate just a little bit.
As someone who installs broadband devices for a living, let me tell you what this "explosion" in broadband numbers means. Every day more and more people are getting on the Interweb for the very first time. They aren't doing much more than fucking up signal-to-noise ratios, when they do manage to interact. For the most part, they just want in on ebay or poker room or porn.
The Internet failed to be a wonderful, great, uplifting experience for humanity. Now, it's just another corporate shill in a never-ending line of shills.
Now, you may also mod this as bitter, off-topic and a troll. But it is true. And you all know it.
just keeps on going, stretching into infinity.