Yes. Here is the angle this article is trying to spin:
Apple is trying to pull iPhone and iPad users off the web. It wants you to read, watch, search, and listen in its Apple-certified walled gardens known as apps. It makes apps, it approves apps, and it profits from apps. But, for its plan to work, the company will need those entertainers and publishers to funnel their content to where Apple wants it to be. As the company makes strategic moves to devalue the web in favor of apps, those content creators dependent on ads to stay afloat may be forced to play along with Apple.
The absence didn't last long. In two previous Monday Notes (News Sites Are Fatter and Slower Than Ever and 20 Home Pages, 500 Trackers Loaded: Media Succumbs to Monitoring Frenzy), my compadre Frederic Filloux cast a harsh light on bloated, prying pages. Web publishers insert gratuitous chunks of code that let advertisers vend their wares and track our every move, code that causes pages to stutter, juggle, and reload for no discernible reason. Even after the page has settled into seeming quiescence, it may keep loading unseen content in the background for minutes on end.
The complaint is about the difference in the treatment of two similar problem subreddits: FPH and SRS, along with the current batch of banned ones.
The former got banned (according to the official explanation) not because of their ideas but because of the behaviour of their members (doxxing, harassing). The current batch was banned because (according to the official explanation) they "are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else".
SRS exhibits the same behaviour that got FPH banned (brigading, harassing) and arguably exhibits the same behaviour that was used to justify the banishment of the current batch: existing "solely to annoy other redditors".
The above posted explanation from the admin admits SRS is a problem but only touches the brigading and anti brigading measures.
It gives the impression that existing "solely to annoy other redditors" was not the real reason for banning the current batch and that "doxxing and harassing" was not the real reason for banning FPH.
This exchange seems to contradict that they don't consider/r/ShitRedditSays/ a problem but the remedies they are willing to try on that subreddit are very different from similarly problematic ones.
spez -944 points 18 hours ago
For the the time being we believe that brigading is best fought with technology, which we are actively working on.
Synsc 894 points 18 hours ago
What does that mean exactly?
spez -772 points 17 hours ago
It means that we can see downvoting brigades in that data, and we are working on preventing them from working. We used to do this in the past, and it worked quite well.
Ultimate_Cabooser 1479 points 17 hours ago
That still doesn't mean anything. They're blatantly violating the "exist solely to annoy other redditors" and they make Reddit a lot worse for everyone who isn't them.
The "we don't need to remove them because we're developing technology that won't let them break the rules" could be said about a shit ton of subreddits that were removed.
I'm not in the "fatpeoplehate shouldn't have been removed"-circlejerk, because I agree it was shitty and was rightly removed, but the "it doesn't need to be removed because we're working on technology that doesn't let them break the rules" argument could have been used for that. If you remove subreddits like that, you have to remove SRS.
spez -601 points 16 hours ago
We take banning very seriously. I believe we can combat negative actions like theirs by improving our own technology without banning them, so that is what we'll try first.
As mentioned in another comment the behaviour of that subreddit goes way beyond simply brigading but in the realm of raiding, doxxing and harassing individual users.
The difference in remedies here is what makes this interesting: if Reddit is not banning for ideas but for behaviour what is the difference between SRS and FPH that justifies the difference in treatment?
/r/Fatpeoplehate being banned for harassment of individual redditors while/r/ShitRedditSays/ not being banned while their stated purpose is harassment of individual redditors.
The top voted comments on that thread, an interesting enough point that is not being dealt with in these last rounds of purges. Reposted here without changes for benefit of the Slashdot audience.
Last week an SRS user went nearly four years into my history and posted this in/r/ShitRedditSays:
Taken with zero context, and without considering this happened in the midst of Reddit banning a few subs and/u/violentacrez getting doxxed, SRS users decided that I was tolerant of rape, or beating women, that I was lazy, a shit-poster, pandering to my "audience", suggested SRS users go to Amazon to see what a piece of shit I was, that I thought "rape" was "freedom of speech", and that I was objectively wrong and thought "freedom of speech" was moderating a website.
They hadn't bothered to read the rest of my comments, where I said "If this were MY company and these subreddits were on MY board, I'd delete them in a heartbeat, because I find them personally offensive."
I was banned from SRS years ago (not for commenting, just because one of the mods thought I should be -- that's their prerogative) so I messaged the SRS admins and asked for a chance to respond, considering this post was #1 in SRS.
/r/Fatpeoplehate was created to mock people based on a subjective perception.
/r/Coontown was created to mock people based on a subjective perception.
/r/Shitredditsays was created to mock people based on a subjective perception.
This is their stated purpose:
"Have you recently read an upvoted Reddit comment that was bigoted, creepy, misogynistic, transphobic, racist, homophobic, or just reeking of unexamined, toxic privilege? Of course you have! Post it here."
They exist to mock and harass Reddit users.
we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.
Your words.
Please explain to me how holding other people up to ridicule without even allowing them to respond is good for reddit, encourages participation, and makes Reddit a safe place to express our opinions and ALSO differs from the subs you've banned.
mfw/u/WarLizard[1] pulls the "WHAT ABOUT SRS" card after being linked here. He regularly contributes to/r/KotakuInAction [2], not sure why he feels like he'd be welcome here at all. He's also complaining about the existence of SRS, so yeah right there he'd be banned. Oh no, a sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic post was made and got linked here. WOULD ANYONE THINK OF THE RACIST'S FEELINGS?
This is a perfect example.
I have posted in KiA, and it has been fascinating to talk with the people there. Much like it has been fascinating to talk to the people in GamerGhazi.
But without context, someone might assume that because I've posted or commented there that I'm racist, mi
The site, which encourages married users to cheat on their spouses and advertises 37 million members, had its data hacked by a group calling itself the Impact Team. At least two other dating sites, Cougar Life and Established Men, also owned by the same parent group, Avid Life Media, have had their data compromised.
"Avid Life Media has been instructed to take Ashley Madison and Established Men offline permanently in all forms, or we will release all customer records, including profiles with all the customers' secret sexual fantasies and matching credit card transactions, real names and addresses, and employee documents and emails. The other websites may stay online," the group's statement reads.
The hackers' main point of contention is with the fact that Ashley Madison charges users a fee of 15 pounds to carry out a "full delete" of their information if they decide to leave the site. Although users have the option of permanently hiding their profile free of charge, the company's advertisements claim that the full delete service is the only way to completely remove their information from the servers.
But the hackers say that that claim is âoea complete lieâ.
"Users almost always pay with credit card; their purchase details are not removed as promised, and include real name and address, which is of course the most important information the users want removed," they allege.
Mentioning without specifying some communities "whose purpose is reprehensible" and disclaiming that they "don't have any obligation to support them" the CEO announces an AMA (Ask me Anything) next Thursday 1pm where they "as a community need to decide together what our values are".
The CEO states that "Neither Alexis nor I created reddit to be a bastion of free speech, but rather as a place where open and honest discussion can happen.".
His party didn't win he election with full majority and is part of a coalition. His coalition partner, Panos Kamennos, is both the founder of the right wing party that allows the coalition to govern and also the Defence Minister.
Yes, why not. Play by play below, italicizes are my asides. Sorry but no TL;DR of the TL;DR, it was hard enough to summarize the whole thing.
1st paragraph: asks Greece to keep their promise this time. To be read with German accent as it was most likely added by Germany. It echoes the statement by Merkel this weekend that says "The most important currency has been lost and that is trust".
2nd paragraph: tell Greece it is either both ESF and IMF or nothing. Meaning Greece will most likely have to agree to another set of measures imposed by IMF.
3rd paragraph, pages 2 and 3, first item on page 4: sets the first measures to be taken and its deadlines. Some must be voted into law by 15 July (72 hours after the meeting) and some by 22 July, next week. They are more or less the same measures that triggered the referendum last week but with a notable absence: cuts in the military
pages 4 and 5, aditional measures:
- model for privatization. Instead of going to the public coffers it will go to a fund (managed by Greece, supervised by Europe). The assets (estimated 50B) will be split: 50/25/25. 50% to recapitalize the banks, 25B to repay loans, 25B for investiments.
- model for the supervision: all draft legislation will be subject of their (EU and IMF) consult and agreement. Greece has until 20 July to ask to be helped.
- reversal of anti austerity legislation: all of them, except the humanitarian crisis bill, must be reexamined and either reversed or replaced by an equivalent measure. SOP for "troika" (as in group of three, EU, ECB and IMF) technicians to become the fourth power in the country during the program duration. Happened in Portugal and Ireland
end of page 5: states that Greece will need between 82 and 86B, unless it can collect more taxes or privatize better. 7 of those billion euros are needed before 20 July and 5 more before mid August. Also states that greece needs to "clear its arrears" to IMF and Bank of Greece Sibling post has it right, this part is "Greece, pay denbts"
page 6: states that Greece either accepts the deal or banks won't reopen. Also, that it is syriza's )and whoever was its predecessor) fault by easing the policies during the last 12 months and that Eurozone can reconsider "longer grace and payment periods" but that will be "no haircuts" Again, "Greece, stop screwing up, pay denbts, all of it"
page 7: states that if Greece accepts the deal the deal will go forward. Also, that in the next 3-5 years 35B will be mobilized to fund investment and economic activity (including SME) via EU programmes This must be the concession Tsipras is talking about, 35B for investment including small and medium-sized entrerprises not counting towards the loan but via EU investment.
Here it is, conveniently HTML formatted for your enjoyment. No emphasis added
The Euro Summit stresses the crucial need to rebuild trust with the Greek authorities as a pre-requisite for a possible future agreement on a new ESM programme. In this context, the ownership by the Greek authorities is key, and successful implementation should follow policy commitments.
A euro area Member State requesting financial assistance from the ESM is expected to address, wherever possible, a similar request to the IMF1. This is a precondition for the Eurogroup to agree on a new ESM programme. Therefore Greece will request continued IMF support (monitoring and financing) from March 2016.
Given the need to rebuild trust with Greece, the Euro Summit welcomes the commitments of the Greek authorities to legislate without delay a first set of measures. These measures, taken in full prior agreement with the Institutions, will include:
by 15 July
- the streamlining of the VAT system and the broadening of the tax base to increase revenue;
- upfront measures to improve long-term sustainability of the pension system as part of a comprehensive pension reform programme;
- the safeguarding of the full legal independence of ELSTAT;
- full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union, in particular by making the Fiscal Council operational before finalizing the MoU and introducing quasi-automatic spending cuts in case of deviations from ambitious primary surplus targets after seeking advice from the Fiscal Council and subject to prior approval of the Institutions;
by 22 July
- the adoption of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is a major overhaul of procedures and arrangements for the civil justice system and can significantly accelerate the judicial process and reduce costs;
- the transposition of the BRRD with support from the European Commission.
Immediately, and only subsequent to legal implementation of the first four above-mentioned measures as well as endorsement of all the commitments included in this document by the Greek Parliament, verified by the Institutions and the Eurogroup, may a decision to mandate the Institutions to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) be taken. This decision would be taken subject to national procedures having been completed and if the preconditions of Article 13 of the ESM Treaty are met on the basis of the assessment referred to in Article 13.1.
In order to form the basis for a successful conclusion of the MoU, the Greek offer of reform measures needs to be seriously strengthened to take into account the strongly deteriorated economic and fiscal position of the country during the last year. The Greek government needs to formally commit to strengthening their proposals in a number of areas identified by the Institutions, with a satisfactory clear timetable for legislation and implementation, including structural benchmarks, milestones and quantitative benchmarks, to have clarity on the direction of policies over the medium-run. They notably need, in agreement with the Institutions, to:
- carry out ambitious pension reforms and specify policies to fully compensate for the fiscal impact of the Constitutional Court ruling on the 2012 pension reform and to implement the zero deficit clause or mutually agreeable alternative measures by October 2015;
- adopt more ambitious product market reforms with a clear timetable for implementation of all OECD toolkit I recommendations, including Sunday trade, sales periods, pharmacy ownership, milk and bakeries, except over-the-counter pharmaceutical products, which will be implemented in a next step, as well as for the opening of macro-critical closed professions (e.g. ferry transportation). On the follow-up of the OECD toolkit-II, manufacturing needs to be included in the prior action;
- on energy markets, proceed with the privatisation of the electricity transmission netw
Because it is not, and it would cause code like to fail for a = 1, b = 2 and c = 0:
if ((a/c) == (b/c)) { // It is safe to assume that a == b
}
In a code as simple as that it is easy to spot but in more complex code this simple verification may be done in more steps or split in many different operations like:
1. People that remained on classic Slashdot theme expects just that: the classic theme. Please don't change it. Considering that the main elements of the articles didn't change much (title, summary, number of comments, submitter, link, etc), the same going for the comments (title, score, commenter, date, etc) it shouldn't be hard to make a separate theme for this (admittedly stubborn) users and leave it alone.
2. The new "cartoon balloon" showing the number of comments is overlapping when the article is collapsed (see first screenshot above)
3. Seems like the old way to show the number of comments was forgotten below the cartoon balloon (see first screenshot above)
4. In the sidebar, seems like "This day on Slashdot" was completely forgotten in the new style (see second screenshot above)
5. It's really acceptable after being bought by Dice to show "Latest Tech Jobs" prominently in the sidebar, we understand that's one of the perks of being the owner. But at least put back the Poll above the fold and push Slashdot Deals and Featured Videos below the fold. 6. It may not have been the intention but it feels really underhanded to replace the (probable) most clicked link in the homepage (Read More) and replace it with the "Share" button. That will more likely to be the main complain, will cost Slashdot a lot of old timers and probably will be as loudly rejected as Beta.
And most important of all: please to eat the comments. I tried to post this exact comment, it went through and suddenly it disappeared (see below). As I had the submitted comments in another window I managed to take the screenshots and to save the text I wrote so carefully
1. People that remained on classic Slashdot theme expects just that: the classic theme. Please don't change it. Considering that the main elements of the articles didn't change much (title, summary, number of comments, submitter, link, etc), the same going for the comments (title, score, commenter, date, etc) it shouldn't be hard to make a separate theme for this (admittedly stubborn) users and leave it alone.
2. The new "cartoon balloon" showing the number of comments is overlapping when the article is collapsed (see first screenshot above)
3. Seems like the old way to show the number of comments was forgotten below the cartoon balloon (see first screenshot above)
4. In the sidebar, seems like "This day on Slashdot" was completely forgotten in the new style (see second screenshot above)
5. It's really acceptable after being bought by Dice to show "Latest Tech Jobs" prominently in the sidebar, we understand that's one of the perks of being the owner. But at least put back the Poll above the fold and push Slashdot Deals and Featured Videos below the fold.
6. It may not have been the intention but it feels really underhanded to replace the (probable) most clicked link in the homepage (Read More) and replace it with the "Share" button. That will more likely to be the main complain, will cost Slashdot a lot of old timers and probably will be as loudly rejected as Beta.
Please put Read More back where it was, I'm sure you guys already realised we are not much a sharing bunch, privacy concerns and all that.
Lifted from the wikipedia article on the US 2nd amendment to illustrate the point being made:
In 1792, Tench Coxe made the following point in a commentary on the Second Amendment:[121]
As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.
[121] "Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution," Federal Gazette, June 18, 1792, at 2, col. 1
The 2nd amendment was not created to rectify a corrupt and unjust government but (along with the proposal of a weak "standing army") to prevent one from falling into corruption and injustice.
For all intents and purposes the current law enforcement apparatus is the equivalent of the standing army of that time. There was no public police force before the 19th century, the task of enforcing the law and keeping the peace war performed by the same forces that fought the wars.
See, for instance, the part played by the British Army in the 1768 Boston Massacre and compare to the current events:
British troops had been stationed in Boston, capital of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, since 1768 in order to protect and support crown-appointed colonial officials attempting to enforce unpopular Parliamentary legislation.
Amid ongoing tense relations between the population and the soldiers, a mob formed around a British sentry, who was subjected to verbal abuse and harassment. He was eventually supported by eight additional soldiers, who were subjected to verbal threats and thrown objects.
They fired into the crowd, without orders, instantly killing three people and wounding others. Two more people died later of wounds sustained in the incident.
The crowd eventually dispersed after Acting Governor Thomas Hutchinson promised an inquiry, but reformed the next day, prompting the withdrawal of the troops to Castle Island.
Eight soldiers, one officer, and four civilians were arrested and charged with murder. Defended by the lawyer and future American president, John Adams, six of the soldiers were acquitted, while the other two were convicted of manslaughter and given reduced sentences.
The second amendment is supposed to be a deterrent, the insurance that prevents a tyrannical government to defraud the "consent of the governed", the ticket to last option.
Option that, when redeemed, consists by definition in treason against ones government and the name for its use is revolution.
Advocating for giving the 2nd amendment rights to a country where corruption is already an issue, where the injustice of the government (at least in the level discussed in the article) is already present and where a standing army is already formed and loyal to the government (in the article case, the police force) is the exactly same as calling for a armed uprising against the government.
One should be very cautious of that because in some countries (India, for instance), it is a crime to incite or even support such revolutions, even online.
That's not what's in play here. Here is the same story with more sources, more technical information and without the Google vs. Apple flamebait angle:
Adblocking is coming to the iPhone with iOS 9
The next version of Safari will let users block ads on iPhones and iPads.
With the roll-out of iOS 9, Apple is giving app developers an easy way to create mobile ad blockers for Safari on iPhones and iPads. The new "Content Blocking" feature allows developers to pass a JSON file with a set of rules for images, popups, cookies, resources and other elements in Safari.
Sources like The Next Web point out that such a feature would allow ad blocking and privacy apps "to exist on iOS for the first time since launch".
On the other hand the Marketing Land warns that this move "could chip away at Google's and other ad networks' mobile ad revenue from iOS devices", NiemanLab calls it "a blow for mobile advertising" and Cult of Mac asks if that is a good thing and proposes as an answer:
Is that a good thing? Well, maybe for the average user, for a period of time. But when you block ads on the web, you prevent content providers from earning any revenue from them. If we all did that, our favorite sites would have to find other sources of revenue, or stop supplying content altogether.
I have no idea why, in a technical and privacy oriented forum as ours, the focus of the accepted submission was not on the fact that this is an "Adblocker app enabler" move instead of a "Google killer move".
Also missing from the article but something potentially change your interpretation of it:
1. It's there implicitly but it's worth to make explicit: "when I was 17, I went with my mother to the local bank" means that this delightful anedote happened in 1974, a long time ago both in years and in differences in tuition prices and legislation around student loans.
2. There will be a lot of talk about federally guaranteed students loans but his loans where unsubsidized private loans with a private bank.
The whole article is flamebait because it piggybacks in the current perception that the student loan system in the U.S. is flawed but offers an anecdote from a very different time and background than ours.
show that it is much more efficient to donate time or money locally instead of to big organizations.
Donate to your local food bank, soup kitchen, volunteer some time in the retirement home, the satisfaction will be the same and the effects will be much more efficient. Or, at the very least, don't screw people over, it is more than enough if you can do that.
Why should you donate anything to help someone in the other side of the world while people needs your help in your own neighbourhood?
Hi, and thanks for taking the time to address those points, altought they were not the main points. They were merely "other important parts (...) removed", the main point being that "Fyodor isn't warning that he doesn't control Sourceforge nmap mirror" but "is accusing them of hijacking his Sourceforge nmap account".
Concerning to the main point:
1. The original title stated that he lost control of "Nmap Sourceforge Account" and not his own and it was very clear that by having the project page erased outside his control meant that he lost control of it.
2. The submission was not about SourceForge (as they were, as you say, pretty much similar to the what was discussed in the previous story) but about the reaction of a prominent figure of the IT world. By editing it for factual accuracy the point of the submission was lost (as what was kept after the edit was not Fyodor's reaction anymore).
I don't agree that those other two points were satisfactorily addressed either and here is for what reason.
1. The entire quote was copied verbatim from the update made by T on the SourceForge and GIMP article. Assuming it was relevant enough to be included there by the Slashdot staff itself I don't see why it is not relevant to be included in a similar article referring to the same subject.
2. The rest of Fyodor quote served to illustrate his opinion that, despite not bundling the installation files with "easy to decline third party offers" (to borrow an eufemism sometimes used by the industry, referred by Fyodor as "trojaned"), it is still risky to download nmap from SourceForge mirror. There are very confusing download buttons on that page that link to those same kind of third party offers instead of to the unmodified installer (referred as "fake download buttons").
it is very misleading to have a submission accepted, altered for factual accuracy but to kept as if it were submitted as is by the original submiter:
vivaoporto writes:
an edited version of what vivaoporto wrote, without any indication of what was changed, who changed and why.
It would be better to either accept the submission as is (with the minor gramatical mistakes corrected) with a "Note of the Editor (NE)" appended or to reject the submission as factually incorrect.
No, it's not. See the difference between the original submission and how it was changed below.
To summarize, it was changed from "Fyodor accuses Sourceforge of hijacking nmap account" to "Fyodor warns that he doesn't control Sourceforge nmap mirror", among other things.
The edits made by Slashdot editors on my original submission (that can be read here) are very telling. Fyodor isn't warning that he doesn't control Sourceforge nmap mirror, he is accusing them of hijacking his Sourceforge nmap account, removing the content and creating a mirror that he doesn't control.
The original title was "Sourceforge Hijacks the Nmap Sourceforge Account" and it was the same title Fyodor used on its post to the maillist. Losing the original Sourceforge original nmap account (created by nmap developers themselves) is not the same news as him not controlling "nmap SourceForge Mirror". The same expression was also changed in the submission body.
Two other important parts from the the original submission removed by the editor:
1. The statement by SourceForge themselves that (emphasis mine):
At this time, we present third party offers only with a few projects where it is explicitly approved by the project developer, or if the project is already bundling third party offers.
2. The reference by Fyodor that even if Sourceforge still isn't bundling anything on nmap, the page is designed to mislead the users with fake download buttons:
"So far they seem to be providing just the official Nmap files (as long as you don't click on the fake download buttons) (...)
Below I repost the original submission so you can compare:
Gordon Lyon (better known as Fyodor, author of nmap and maintainer of the internet security resource sites insecure.org, nmap.org, seclists.org, and sectools.org) warns on the nmap development mailing list that the Sourceforge Nmap account was hijacked from him.
According to him the old Nmap project page (located at http://sourceforge.net/project..., screenshot) was changed to a blank page and its contents were moved to a new page (http://sourceforge.net/projects/nmap.mirror/, screenshot) which controlled by sf-editor1 and sf-editor3, in pattern mirroring the much discussed the takeover of GIMP-Win page discussed last week on Ars Technica, IT World and eventually this week Slashdot.
That happens after Sourceforge promises to stop "presenting third party offers for unmaintained SourceForge projects. At this time, we present third party offers only with a few projects where it is explicitly approved by the project developer, or if the project is already bundling third party offers."
To their credit Fyodor states that "So far they seem to be providing just the official Nmap files (as long as you don't click on the fake download buttons) and we haven't caught them trojaning Nmap the way they did with GIMP" but reiterates "that you should only download Nmap from our official SSL Nmap site: https://nmap.org/download.html"
I don't know if I should be appalled or if it was just a coincidence but check my submission of the very dÃ-me story, reproduced on its entirety below for comparison:
+- WikiLeaks publishes The Sony Archives
Submitted by vivaoporto on Friday April 17, 2015 @09:39AM
"WikiLeaks published on its site a full, searchable archive of the data leaked during the high-profile hacking of Sony Pictures Entertainment last year.
Some of its 30,287 documents from Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE) and 173,132 emails highlights SPE inner works and thoughts on matters like the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, the case against Megaupload and the extradition of its founder Kim DotCom and the connections and alignments between Sony Pictures Entertainment and the US Democratic Party."
What surprises me is the similarity between both introductions not the completely different conclusion between both summaries. It is almost like there was an attempt to control the discussion of these leaks in the context of personal privacy (and of course it is an important part) but also burying the content of the leak itself and its political, social and economical implications.
In a post on a similar article posted on the Hacker News a twitter employee explains that it was a bug in an unrelated (but, IMO, equally damning) advertisement feature on their platform.
According to him it was supposed to bump the advertised pages in the "following" list of their followers to the top. In order to do so it required removing it from the current position and reinserting at the top, as (again, according to him) the "following list" is not kept whole in whatever data structure it is stored.
I say equally damning because it reinforces the idea (common in here, not so common out there) that the user is not actually the customer but the product to be sold and "monetized" the harder it can be done without scaring him out.
This should be the definite proof of that (both the bugged and the intended feature) but people will happily trade their social influence for an easy to access technological soapbox.
No judgement being passed or merit being discussed on this post, just an observation of the current standing of the whole situation.
Don't know if behind paywall, got there via Google so if it doesn't work google the title and read it.
The heavily redacted 480-page report - published on Tuesday - covered the treatment of around 100 suspects rounded up by US operatives between 2001 and 2009 on terrorism charges.
The full 6,200-page report remains classified. Ahead of the publication of the report, the US had tightened security at its embassies across the globe.
Can you imagine what is on the other 6000Â pages? If this is what they decided to release imagine what they decided to keep hidden.
Slashdot Mirror
That's one way to look at it. Here is another perspective:
The complaint is about the difference in the treatment of two similar problem subreddits: FPH and SRS, along with the current batch of banned ones.
The former got banned (according to the official explanation) not because of their ideas but because of the behaviour of their members (doxxing, harassing). The current batch was banned because (according to the official explanation) they "are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else".
SRS exhibits the same behaviour that got FPH banned (brigading, harassing) and arguably exhibits the same behaviour that was used to justify the banishment of the current batch: existing "solely to annoy other redditors".
The above posted explanation from the admin admits SRS is a problem but only touches the brigading and anti brigading measures.
It gives the impression that existing "solely to annoy other redditors" was not the real reason for banning the current batch and that "doxxing and harassing" was not the real reason for banning FPH.
As mentioned in another comment the behaviour of that subreddit goes way beyond simply brigading but in the realm of raiding, doxxing and harassing individual users.
The difference in remedies here is what makes this interesting: if Reddit is not banning for ideas but for behaviour what is the difference between SRS and FPH that justifies the difference in treatment?
His party didn't win he election with full majority and is part of a coalition. His coalition partner, Panos Kamennos, is both the founder of the right wing party that allows the coalition to govern and also the Defence Minister.
Yes, why not. Play by play below, italicizes are my asides. Sorry but no TL;DR of the TL;DR, it was hard enough to summarize the whole thing.
1st paragraph: asks Greece to keep their promise this time.
To be read with German accent as it was most likely added by Germany. It echoes the statement by Merkel this weekend that says "The most important currency has been lost and that is trust".
2nd paragraph: tell Greece it is either both ESF and IMF or nothing.
Meaning Greece will most likely have to agree to another set of measures imposed by IMF.
3rd paragraph, pages 2 and 3, first item on page 4: sets the first measures to be taken and its deadlines.
Some must be voted into law by 15 July (72 hours after the meeting) and some by 22 July, next week. They are more or less the same measures that triggered the referendum last week but with a notable absence: cuts in the military
pages 4 and 5, aditional measures:
- model for privatization.
Instead of going to the public coffers it will go to a fund (managed by Greece, supervised by Europe). The assets (estimated 50B) will be split: 50/25/25. 50% to recapitalize the banks, 25B to repay loans, 25B for investiments.
- model for the supervision: all draft legislation will be subject of their (EU and IMF) consult and agreement. Greece has until 20 July to ask to be helped.
- reversal of anti austerity legislation: all of them, except the humanitarian crisis bill, must be reexamined and either reversed or replaced by an equivalent measure.
SOP for "troika" (as in group of three, EU, ECB and IMF) technicians to become the fourth power in the country during the program duration. Happened in Portugal and Ireland
end of page 5: states that Greece will need between 82 and 86B, unless it can collect more taxes or privatize better. 7 of those billion euros are needed before 20 July and 5 more before mid August. Also states that greece needs to "clear its arrears" to IMF and Bank of Greece
Sibling post has it right, this part is "Greece, pay denbts"
page 6: states that Greece either accepts the deal or banks won't reopen. Also, that it is syriza's )and whoever was its predecessor) fault by easing the policies during the last 12 months and that Eurozone can reconsider "longer grace and payment periods" but that will be "no haircuts"
Again, "Greece, stop screwing up, pay denbts, all of it"
page 7: states that if Greece accepts the deal the deal will go forward. Also, that in the next 3-5 years 35B will be mobilized to fund investment and economic activity (including SME) via EU programmes
This must be the concession Tsipras is talking about, 35B for investment including small and medium-sized entrerprises not counting towards the loan but via EU investment.
A very important link was left out: the agreement text (PDF).
...
Read it, it is only 7 pages long and, although it mentions other documents, the gist of it is there.
Commenting on the agreement without reading it is engaging in mindless speculation colored by your own misconceptions and ideological leaning
Oh, who am I kidding, this is slashdot, nobody RTFA.
In a code as simple as that it is easy to spot but in more complex code this simple verification may be done in more steps or split in many different operations like:
where some_function(speed1, speed2), built by other team has:
Now, how this question was accepted as legitimate in an advanced forum like this it is amazing. Rock bottom.
Fellow slashdot webdevs, please don't test in production. Below is how it looks like on Safari for Mac.
http://s7.postimg.org/5rhru2q6z/image.png
http://s7.postimg.org/qacnz544b/image.png
Not to spoil but the main problems are:
1. People that remained on classic Slashdot theme expects just that: the classic theme. Please don't change it. Considering that the main elements of the articles didn't change much (title, summary, number of comments, submitter, link, etc), the same going for the comments (title, score, commenter, date, etc) it shouldn't be hard to make a separate theme for this (admittedly stubborn) users and leave it alone.
2. The new "cartoon balloon" showing the number of comments is overlapping when the article is collapsed (see first screenshot above)
3. Seems like the old way to show the number of comments was forgotten below the cartoon balloon (see first screenshot above)
4. In the sidebar, seems like "This day on Slashdot" was completely forgotten in the new style (see second screenshot above)
5. It's really acceptable after being bought by Dice to show "Latest Tech Jobs" prominently in the sidebar, we understand that's one of the perks of being the owner. But at least put back the Poll above the fold and push Slashdot Deals and Featured Videos below the fold. 6. It may not have been the intention but it feels really underhanded to replace the (probable) most clicked link in the homepage (Read More) and replace it with the "Share" button. That will more likely to be the main complain, will cost Slashdot a lot of old timers and probably will be as loudly rejected as Beta.
And most important of all: please to eat the comments. I tried to post this exact comment, it went through and suddenly it disappeared (see below). As I had the submitted comments in another window I managed to take the screenshots and to save the text I wrote so carefully
http://s1.postimg.org/5e5aqjjnj/image.png
http://s1.postimg.org/3l2e27ygv/image.png
Fellow slashdot webdevs, please don't test in production. Below is how it looks like on Safari for Mac.
http://s7.postimg.org/5rhru2q6z/image.png
http://s7.postimg.org/qacnz544b/image.png
Not to spoil but the main problems are:
1. People that remained on classic Slashdot theme expects just that: the classic theme. Please don't change it. Considering that the main elements of the articles didn't change much (title, summary, number of comments, submitter, link, etc), the same going for the comments (title, score, commenter, date, etc) it shouldn't be hard to make a separate theme for this (admittedly stubborn) users and leave it alone.
2. The new "cartoon balloon" showing the number of comments is overlapping when the article is collapsed (see first screenshot above)
3. Seems like the old way to show the number of comments was forgotten below the cartoon balloon (see first screenshot above)
4. In the sidebar, seems like "This day on Slashdot" was completely forgotten in the new style (see second screenshot above)
5. It's really acceptable after being bought by Dice to show "Latest Tech Jobs" prominently in the sidebar, we understand that's one of the perks of being the owner. But at least put back the Poll above the fold and push Slashdot Deals and Featured Videos below the fold. 6. It may not have been the intention but it feels really underhanded to replace the (probable) most clicked link in the homepage (Read More) and replace it with the "Share" button. That will more likely to be the main complain, will cost Slashdot a lot of old timers and probably will be as loudly rejected as Beta.
Please put Read More back where it was, I'm sure you guys already realised we are not much a sharing bunch, privacy concerns and all that.
The 2nd amendment was not created to rectify a corrupt and unjust government but (along with the proposal of a weak "standing army") to prevent one from falling into corruption and injustice.
For all intents and purposes the current law enforcement apparatus is the equivalent of the standing army of that time. There was no public police force before the 19th century, the task of enforcing the law and keeping the peace war performed by the same forces that fought the wars.
See, for instance, the part played by the British Army in the 1768 Boston Massacre and compare to the current events:
The second amendment is supposed to be a deterrent, the insurance that prevents a tyrannical government to defraud the "consent of the governed", the ticket to last option.
Option that, when redeemed, consists by definition in treason against ones government and the name for its use is revolution.
Advocating for giving the 2nd amendment rights to a country where corruption is already an issue, where the injustice of the government (at least in the level discussed in the article) is already present and where a standing army is already formed and loyal to the government (in the article case, the police force) is the exactly same as calling for a armed uprising against the government.
One should be very cautious of that because in some countries (India, for instance), it is a crime to incite or even support such revolutions, even online.
I have no idea why, in a technical and privacy oriented forum as ours, the focus of the accepted submission was not on the fact that this is an "Adblocker app enabler" move instead of a "Google killer move".
Also missing from the article but something potentially change your interpretation of it:
1. It's there implicitly but it's worth to make explicit: "when I was 17, I went with my mother to the local bank" means that this delightful anedote happened in 1974, a long time ago both in years and in differences in tuition prices and legislation around student loans.
2. There will be a lot of talk about federally guaranteed students loans but his loans where unsubsidized private loans with a private bank.
The whole article is flamebait because it piggybacks in the current perception that the student loan system in the U.S. is flawed but offers an anecdote from a very different time and background than ours.
This and many other examples like
- PETA euthanizing more animals than they shelter
- UNICEF expenses of 52 million dollars (pdf) in expenses related to management and fundraising (out of a 600 million dollars budget, and that's one of the best managed ones out there)
show that it is much more efficient to donate time or money locally instead of to big organizations.
Donate to your local food bank, soup kitchen, volunteer some time in the retirement home, the satisfaction will be the same and the effects will be much more efficient. Or, at the very least, don't screw people over, it is more than enough if you can do that.
Why should you donate anything to help someone in the other side of the world while people needs your help in your own neighbourhood?
Concerning to the main point:
1. The original title stated that he lost control of "Nmap Sourceforge Account" and not his own
and it was very clear that by having the project page erased outside his control meant that he lost control of it.
2. The submission was not about SourceForge (as they were, as you say, pretty much similar to the what was discussed in the previous story) but about the reaction of a prominent figure of the IT world. By editing it for factual accuracy the point of the submission was lost (as what was kept after the edit was not Fyodor's reaction anymore).
I don't agree that those other two points were satisfactorily addressed either and here is for what reason.
1. The entire quote was copied verbatim from the update made by T on the SourceForge and GIMP article. Assuming it was relevant enough to be included there by the Slashdot staff itself I don't see why it is not relevant to be included in a similar article referring to the same subject.
2. The rest of Fyodor quote served to illustrate his opinion that, despite not bundling the installation files with "easy to decline third party offers" (to borrow an eufemism sometimes used by the industry, referred by Fyodor as "trojaned"), it is still risky to download nmap from SourceForge mirror. There are very confusing download buttons on that page that link to those same kind of third party offers instead of to the unmodified installer (referred as "fake download buttons").
it is very misleading to have a submission accepted, altered for factual accuracy but to kept as if it were submitted as is by the original submiter:
It would be better to either accept the submission as is (with the minor gramatical mistakes corrected) with a "Note of the Editor (NE)" appended or to reject the submission as factually incorrect.
No, it's not. See the difference between the original submission and how it was changed below.
To summarize, it was changed from "Fyodor accuses Sourceforge of hijacking nmap account" to "Fyodor warns that he doesn't control Sourceforge nmap mirror", among other things.
The original title was "Sourceforge Hijacks the Nmap Sourceforge Account" and it was the same title Fyodor used on its post to the maillist. Losing the original Sourceforge original nmap account (created by nmap developers themselves) is not the same news as him not controlling "nmap SourceForge Mirror". The same expression was also changed in the submission body.
Two other important parts from the the original submission removed by the editor:
1. The statement by SourceForge themselves that (emphasis mine):
2. The reference by Fyodor that even if Sourceforge still isn't bundling anything on nmap, the page is designed to mislead the users with fake download buttons:
Below I repost the original submission so you can compare:
What surprises me is the similarity between both introductions not the completely different conclusion between both summaries. It is almost like there was an attempt to control the discussion of these leaks in the context of personal privacy (and of course it is an important part) but also burying the content of the leak itself and its political, social and economical implications.
In a post on a similar article posted on the Hacker News a twitter employee explains that it was a bug in an unrelated (but, IMO, equally damning) advertisement feature on their platform.
According to him it was supposed to bump the advertised pages in the "following" list of their followers to the top. In order to do so it required removing it from the current position and reinserting at the top, as (again, according to him) the "following list" is not kept whole in whatever data structure it is stored.
I say equally damning because it reinforces the idea (common in here, not so common out there) that the user is not actually the customer but the product to be sold and "monetized" the harder it can be done without scaring him out.
This should be the definite proof of that (both the bugged and the intended feature) but people will happily trade their social influence for an easy to access technological soapbox.
No judgement being passed or merit being discussed on this post, just an observation of the current standing of the whole situation.
Don't know if behind paywall, got there via Google so if it doesn't work google the title and read it.
Can you imagine what is on the other 6000Â pages? If this is what they decided to release imagine what they decided to keep hidden.