Actually, they have my admiration. Storm is an amazing piece of work, and for some reason I like the idea that it took criminals to implement something so genius.
Hot bitches sucking their cocks on demand is what they don't deserve.
Ever since somebody decided "Web 2.0" existed, there's been a big slew of these awful new "IT stuff" sites that look like they've been designed using a checklist of Web 2.0 mainstays and buzzwords. User ratings? Check. Submit news? Check. Blogs? Check. Annoying multipage articles? Check. Attention whoring abuse of social bookmarking sites at the end of every article? Check. More banner ads than content on any given page? Check. User comments? Check. Half of it is actually a decade old and was pioneered by Slashdot, but thanks to the magic of buzzwords, everything old is new.
And with all of this stuff in place, they invariably fail to even attempt the final hurdle: creating decent content. Instead of picking one of the two available routes (create good content vs Slashdot-style aggregation), they seem to like to go halfway, with awkward "stories" like this half-boiled Red Hat GRUB HOWTO masquerading as "Breaking News".
Sure, maybe these are probably all honest people trying to kick-start their journalism careers. But if so, what the hell are they doing throwing this crap around? Even Katz was more interesting than this trash.
Seriously, it has a known, fatal design flaw. Why doesn't anybody but me see how awful this is? You fix that, and give me some way to guarantee that I will receive a fixed version of the console, and maybe I'll consider buying. Until then, it'd be pretty fucking stupid to spend hundreds of dollars on something that might become a paperweight after a month. I just don't get why MS didn't jump all over this and fix it immediately and issue a big press release about how awesome they were and so on.
Their article, and to a greater extent the inflammatory Slashdot article, incorrectly portray these statistics as some universal truth handed down from the gods. In fact, if you look at the article, you'll see that they're merely talking about their own browser user-agent statistics. In other words, they pulled them out of their ass last time they stuck their head up there (perpetually about one minute ago according to the site).
Ubuntu is king of the Linux desktop, and Ubuntu users get the vast majority of their software through Synaptic, a genius piece of software which if introduced in Windows would put "Softpedia" out of business within a year. In fact, I can't think of any reason for a user of any major Linux distribution to need anything from "Softpedia's" website. We have our own more community-centric sources in every case.
There are laws against abuse of monopoly and laws against collusion between what should be competitors. A net neutrality law would be along the same lines.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, they have my admiration. Storm is an amazing piece of work, and for some reason I like the idea that it took criminals to implement something so genius.
Hot bitches sucking their cocks on demand is what they don't deserve.
Ever since somebody decided "Web 2.0" existed, there's been a big slew of these awful new "IT stuff" sites that look like they've been designed using a checklist of Web 2.0 mainstays and buzzwords. User ratings? Check. Submit news? Check. Blogs? Check. Annoying multipage articles? Check. Attention whoring abuse of social bookmarking sites at the end of every article? Check. More banner ads than content on any given page? Check. User comments? Check. Half of it is actually a decade old and was pioneered by Slashdot, but thanks to the magic of buzzwords, everything old is new.
And with all of this stuff in place, they invariably fail to even attempt the final hurdle: creating decent content. Instead of picking one of the two available routes (create good content vs Slashdot-style aggregation), they seem to like to go halfway, with awkward "stories" like this half-boiled Red Hat GRUB HOWTO masquerading as "Breaking News".
Sure, maybe these are probably all honest people trying to kick-start their journalism careers. But if so, what the hell are they doing throwing this crap around? Even Katz was more interesting than this trash.
Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh
Check it out. Owned, bitch.
Dude cant even touch up six lines of text without introducing new errers. What chance does he have with a couple hundred page's?
It was a low bandwidth activity. Had you told the truth to your ISP, they likely wouldn't have given a shit.
Seriously, it has a known, fatal design flaw. Why doesn't anybody but me see how awful this is? You fix that, and give me some way to guarantee that I will receive a fixed version of the console, and maybe I'll consider buying. Until then, it'd be pretty fucking stupid to spend hundreds of dollars on something that might become a paperweight after a month. I just don't get why MS didn't jump all over this and fix it immediately and issue a big press release about how awesome they were and so on.
Their article, and to a greater extent the inflammatory Slashdot article, incorrectly portray these statistics as some universal truth handed down from the gods. In fact, if you look at the article, you'll see that they're merely talking about their own browser user-agent statistics. In other words, they pulled them out of their ass last time they stuck their head up there (perpetually about one minute ago according to the site).
Ubuntu is king of the Linux desktop, and Ubuntu users get the vast majority of their software through Synaptic, a genius piece of software which if introduced in Windows would put "Softpedia" out of business within a year. In fact, I can't think of any reason for a user of any major Linux distribution to need anything from "Softpedia's" website. We have our own more community-centric sources in every case.
Fuck Softpedia.
There are laws against abuse of monopoly and laws against collusion between what should be competitors. A net neutrality law would be along the same lines.
Any interest in doing something in the north-west of the United Kingdom? Manchester? Liverpool?