Plus I am not so sure the current administration will get voted out. The economy is getting stronger and if jobs start returning that will be more than enough to get bush the votes he needs even if the cognescenti realize how little affect the president has on the economy.
On the positive side, Bush's rating has fallen quite a bit since 9/11 - down to a low of 44%, and Blair, Bush's little sideshow, has taken a real beating in the UK. Granted, Bush's approval has rebounded somewhat, but there aren't any guarantees.
I agree with this assessment, and this has been the reason for my lack of participation. However, in light of recent developments, I may vote just so that I can cast my ballot against any representatives that may have had a hand in the passage of this (and similar) legislation.
All takes is voter participation, an understanding of what's at risk, and why it's important to REMOVE those currently in office who vote in favor of these kinds of messes. For some, I imagine, it will be a difficult proposition as they will need to choose between their freedom, or their welfare check.
If this is an accurate portrayal of the responses you get, this is bizarre...all throughout my education (primarly in public schools), I've learned that this isn't about what HE/SHE feels is right, it's about representing your constituency.
Of course, these days it could easily be about whoever has the fattest campaign wallet.
That's what voters are for. If the politicians behind this aren't in office, they can't keep making stuff like this happen. In fact, the voters COULD replace a significant portion of those currently in office, on the grounds that all the crap that has been put in place since 9/11 with absolutely no justification, be recinded. But that would require a) participation, and b) an understanding of just how dangerous this stuff is.
hy are the tax dollars of the state of Florida and the tuitions of their students being used to pseudo-law-enforcement entity that largely does the bidding of a private industry consortium and lacks the checks and balances of our existing legal infrastructure?
In a word, liability.
That aside, it's their network, and they'll formulate policies that are in line with University objectives.
The only boards I'm aware of that allow post editing are ones that don't use moderation points. There's no moderation points to be abused by post editing on such forums.
Perhaps they don't moderate, but I don't see why moderation poses such an insurmountable problem. As I've suggested before:
1. Allow editing for the first 10 minutes after posting (which is when the vast majority of posts are edited anyway). 2. Edited posts will forfeit any moderation up to that point, unless the moderation is negative.
Be constructive. Tell me why this won't work.
Yet you provide no reasons for your view and no real world examples. You just say they exist and pretend everyone is just going to take your word for it.
I've made it very clear as to why the ability to edit posts would be preferable. It's simple: IT WORKS BETTER. What's so hard to understand?
There is no perfect solution for everything because boards vary. Slashdot has factored in all the variables for this board and yes, not being able to edit posts is the perfect solution.
No, it's not. It's the most expedient, perhaps, but by no means perfect.
I've heard all the arguments, and have responded to them several times in the past. What has become really amusing is something I've come to realize recently - this can be considered, as much as anything else, an interface issue - that is, how the user interacts (or is forced to interact) with the medium set before them. I realize there is a preview button, but so what? If this were the perfect solution (it isn't by a long shot), people wouldn't have problems with it. If it were the perfect solution, one might reason that every web-based forum would be using this method - but they DON'T. Why? Because there are arguably more effective means of implementation that work BETTER.
That having been said, getting around the issues you (and several others) have mentioned is a no-brainer. Other sites that offer the ability to edit posts do just fine.
Being friendly, charismatic, and relatively good-looking had done far more for me than my IT skills ever have or ever will.
What's interesting here is that with someone who is purportedly anti-social, at least you know where you stand with them. Most (but not all) of the charismatic and friendly people I've met are back-stabbing vipers, and their whole persona seems to be comprised of little more than a series of performances tailored to get them what they want. Of the two groups, then, who would you say is more geniune, and by extension, more trustworthy?
As a younger listener, I was well aware of rap music, but it sort of cornered its own market and stayed there. I don't think anyone was prepared for, or could of predicted the massive influx of rap/hip-hop into the mainstream. Personally, it's not my bag of tea (little music is these days). And personally, I don't see what's so prolific about it, other than the fact that a good portion of it has a *very* raw, rebellious overtone that is, for whatever reason, favored by youth. But it's there, it has a huge market, and I find it interesting, if for no other reason than to admire the degree of influence it has had.
Given this, I'm not sure there is any algorithm that can predict what people will decide they like at any given point, as there are so many dynamics at work. As others have pointed out, there is definitely the chance that our music-buying preferences are being manipulated by those at the top telling us what we like. But there are also others - the infamous "what are my friends listening to" I-gotta-be-like-everyone-else mentality. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention another significant consideration, at least with respect to the most of the popular artists: Is there any money in it?
I'm not an Ashcroft fan, but this situation has allowed me to grow a slight bit less angry with this tyrant -- and for good reason.
Ever heard of the "dangling carrot" or "throwing someone a bone"? So now, like good little Americans we sit back, breath a HUGE sigh of relief, and accept the way things have become because, "oh, they caught a few people carrying out e-mail scams. Isn't the government WONDERFUL!" Meanwhile, our rights continue to be undermined by PATRIOT, and other bad legislation.
The argument that people are hurting "the artists" by trading music on the internet is extremely weak. Most active musicians make most of their money by playing live shows.
This is completely irrelevant. The fact still remains that the music belongs to someone else. PERIOD. There's no way to justify theft or unlawful distribution. The music belongs to the parties who created it, and they can do whatever they please with it. If a consumer disagrees with the terms, they simply keep their money and walk away, EMPTY-HANDED, as they would in any other market transaction. If you choose to take matters into your own hands, that's fine - but then you deal with the consequences, as this 15-year-old has now discovered. And not a particularly bright 15-year-old, when you consider all the press surrounding the RIAA's effort to crack down on the illegal distribution of their property.
Linux could do with a few less 37337 coders and a few more artists and graphic designers, people who have an understanding of what colors work together, and most importantly what proportions are pleasing to the eye.
Usability is far more important to me than whether or not a certain font might be a point size too big, or that the color scheme is "correct". So, for both coders and graphic types: make sure it's usable, THEN make it pretty.
It actually was at first. But the availability of braindumps, and a lack of QA on Cisco's part made it easy to get one.
The CCNA actually entails a good deal of background knowledge. While I admit that it's only the ground floor, I'm curious to know how much of what people learn from their CCNA studies, is actually retained - or, if the only objective is to remember what might be on the test, and then forget most of it a week later.
I think they're just fishing for ways to boost revenue. Right on its face, this idea suffers the same problem that plagues many other legislative "solutions" - the only people that are really penalized are going to be the ones that have nothing to do with the problem itself. True to form, it's no different than Bashcroft talking about how the U.S. is going to fight Al-Qaeda and terrorism by spying on every American Citizen and trampling all over the Constitution. In other words, the problem, and the proposed "solution" have nothing in common.
For those that characterize network management as the ability to type a few commands into a router, please find a more suitable calling. The industry is currently polluted with people that know just enough to be dangerous, and certifications like the CCNA have been tremendously devalued as a result.
Working at a smaller business now, I'm beginning to realize that Executives can play the game, but tend to be both insulated from reality and clueless. They tend to live in a world where "Their Word" is right or wrong...and things like ethics, laws, honor just get in the way.
Lest anyone believe that this behavior is confined to executives of larger companies, it's not. You may not have implied otherwise, but I just wanted to clarify that the size of the business has no bearing on how far off-center the so-called company "leadership" can be. I've seen some real nasty behavior by small-company CEOs.
Agreed. And lets' not forget aftermarket upgrades. I still regularly use a PowerTower Pro that I purchased about six years ago. I upgraded the processor to a Sonnet 450Mhz G4, and despite the bus limitations, it's quite a speed bump. It has 384 Mb of RAM (could to more, but I just haven't spent the money), and an 18 GB SCSI hard drive. I've had fewer problems with this machine than the two (Apple) monitors that I've had to replace over the same time period. I can see replacing it a third time in the near future.
I have two other PCs that run Windoze (for games), and Linux, and I upgrade those much more frequently - mainly because I have access to all the internals. Unlike with a Mac, if I want to swap out the motherboard for a newer model, no problem. The same is true for every other component. In fact, it's this level of flexibility, along with good value, that makes me wonder when (or even if), I'll ever buy into a new Apple machine.
Don't give Microsoft more credit than they deserve. Their "wins" are few and far between.
Maybe, but their m.o. nearly always the same: we didn't come up with it, but we intend to build a copy of it, sell it, use it to enhance our market position, and if we can, walk away with it. This is pretty much the story of Microsoft's life from day one. Do you hear that massive sucking sound? That's from the cavernous vacuum created by Microsoft appropriating ideas that were developed by others.
It's interesting how a company so well-founded in image-related technologies can only manage something that looks like it was cobbled together by a secretary.
Security, as most geeks know it, is an issue, but it's an issue because it speaks to a much larger concern: the overall integrity of the system- it is this trait that should worry anyone interested in maintaining a democratic form of government. In other words, it's not that the system is insecure, it's that it's lack of security, in addition to the lack of controls over modifications to the software, hardware maintenance/administration, etc., poses a substantial threat to the integrity of the voting process, and this is why e-voting should be scrapped (at least in its current form). Maybe this is just a semantic game, but referring to the lack of integrity moves it out of the technical realm, and gets at the real issue, which I'd argue, can be more easily understood.
Slashdot Mirror
Plus I am not so sure the current administration will get voted out. The economy is getting stronger and if jobs start returning that will be more than enough to get bush the votes he needs even if the cognescenti realize how little affect the president has on the economy.
On the positive side, Bush's rating has fallen quite a bit since 9/11 - down to a low of 44%, and Blair, Bush's little sideshow, has taken a real beating in the UK. Granted, Bush's approval has rebounded somewhat, but there aren't any guarantees.
I agree with this assessment, and this has been the reason for my lack of participation. However, in light of recent developments, I may vote just so that I can cast my ballot against any representatives that may have had a hand in the passage of this (and similar) legislation.
All takes is voter participation, an understanding of what's at risk, and why it's important to REMOVE those currently in office who vote in favor of these kinds of messes. For some, I imagine, it will be a difficult proposition as they will need to choose between their freedom, or their welfare check.
If this is an accurate portrayal of the responses you get, this is bizarre...all throughout my education (primarly in public schools), I've learned that this isn't about what HE/SHE feels is right, it's about representing your constituency.
Of course, these days it could easily be about whoever has the fattest campaign wallet.
A better question is, who CAN stand up to this?
That's what voters are for. If the politicians behind this aren't in office, they can't keep making stuff like this happen. In fact, the voters COULD replace a significant portion of those currently in office, on the grounds that all the crap that has been put in place since 9/11 with absolutely no justification, be recinded. But that would require a) participation, and b) an understanding of just how dangerous this stuff is.
hy are the tax dollars of the state of Florida and the tuitions of their students being used to pseudo-law-enforcement entity that largely does the bidding of a private industry consortium and lacks the checks and balances of our existing legal infrastructure?
In a word, liability.
That aside, it's their network, and they'll formulate policies that are in line with University objectives.
Yet another red herring. How do you think other forums deal with this?
The only boards I'm aware of that allow post editing are ones that don't use moderation points. There's no moderation points to be abused by post editing on such forums.
Perhaps they don't moderate, but I don't see why moderation poses such an insurmountable problem. As I've suggested before:
1. Allow editing for the first 10 minutes after posting (which is when the vast majority of posts are edited anyway).
2. Edited posts will forfeit any moderation up to that point, unless the moderation is negative.
Be constructive. Tell me why this won't work.
Yet you provide no reasons for your view and no real world examples. You just say they exist and pretend everyone is just going to take your word for it.
I've made it very clear as to why the ability to edit posts would be preferable. It's simple: IT WORKS BETTER. What's so hard to understand?
There is no perfect solution for everything because boards vary. Slashdot has factored in all the variables for this board and yes, not being able to edit posts is the perfect solution.
No, it's not. It's the most expedient, perhaps, but by no means perfect.
I've heard all the arguments, and have responded to them several times in the past. What has become really amusing is something I've come to realize recently - this can be considered, as much as anything else, an interface issue - that is, how the user interacts (or is forced to interact) with the medium set before them. I realize there is a preview button, but so what? If this were the perfect solution (it isn't by a long shot), people wouldn't have problems with it. If it were the perfect solution, one might reason that every web-based forum would be using this method - but they DON'T. Why? Because there are arguably more effective means of implementation that work BETTER.
That having been said, getting around the issues you (and several others) have mentioned is a no-brainer. Other sites that offer the ability to edit posts do just fine.
Being friendly, charismatic, and relatively good-looking had done far more for me than my IT skills ever have or ever will.
What's interesting here is that with someone who is purportedly anti-social, at least you know where you stand with them. Most (but not all) of the charismatic and friendly people I've met are back-stabbing vipers, and their whole persona seems to be comprised of little more than a series of performances tailored to get them what they want. Of the two groups, then, who would you say is more geniune, and by extension, more trustworthy?
As a younger listener, I was well aware of rap music, but it sort of cornered its own market and stayed there. I don't think anyone was prepared for, or could of predicted the massive influx of rap/hip-hop into the mainstream. Personally, it's not my bag of tea (little music is these days). And personally, I don't see what's so prolific about it, other than the fact that a good portion of it has a *very* raw, rebellious overtone that is, for whatever reason, favored by youth. But it's there, it has a huge market, and I find it interesting, if for no other reason than to admire the degree of influence it has had.
Given this, I'm not sure there is any algorithm that can predict what people will decide they like at any given point, as there are so many dynamics at work. As others have pointed out, there is definitely the chance that our music-buying preferences are being manipulated by those at the top telling us what we like. But there are also others - the infamous "what are my friends listening to" I-gotta-be-like-everyone-else mentality. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention another significant consideration, at least with respect to the most of the popular artists: Is there any money in it?
My guess: probably for the same reason that this was ever allowed to happen in the first place. Politics and integrity have nothing in common.
I'm not an Ashcroft fan, but this situation has allowed me to grow a slight bit less angry with this tyrant -- and for good reason.
Ever heard of the "dangling carrot" or "throwing someone a bone"? So now, like good little Americans we sit back, breath a HUGE sigh of relief, and accept the way things have become because, "oh, they caught a few people carrying out e-mail scams. Isn't the government WONDERFUL!" Meanwhile, our rights continue to be undermined by PATRIOT, and other bad legislation.
The argument that people are hurting "the artists" by trading music on the internet is extremely weak. Most active musicians make most of their money by playing live shows.
This is completely irrelevant. The fact still remains that the music belongs to someone else. PERIOD. There's no way to justify theft or unlawful distribution. The music belongs to the parties who created it, and they can do whatever they please with it. If a consumer disagrees with the terms, they simply keep their money and walk away, EMPTY-HANDED, as they would in any other market transaction. If you choose to take matters into your own hands, that's fine - but then you deal with the consequences, as this 15-year-old has now discovered. And not a particularly bright 15-year-old, when you consider all the press surrounding the RIAA's effort to crack down on the illegal distribution of their property.
Linux could do with a few less 37337 coders and a few more artists and graphic designers, people who have an understanding of what colors work together, and most importantly what proportions are pleasing to the eye.
Usability is far more important to me than whether or not a certain font might be a point size too big, or that the color scheme is "correct". So, for both coders and graphic types: make sure it's usable, THEN make it pretty.
It actually was at first. But the availability of braindumps, and a lack of QA on Cisco's part made it easy to get one.
The CCNA actually entails a good deal of background knowledge. While I admit that it's only the ground floor, I'm curious to know how much of what people learn from their CCNA studies, is actually retained - or, if the only objective is to remember what might be on the test, and then forget most of it a week later.
I think they're just fishing for ways to boost revenue. Right on its face, this idea suffers the same problem that plagues many other legislative "solutions" - the only people that are really penalized are going to be the ones that have nothing to do with the problem itself. True to form, it's no different than Bashcroft talking about how the U.S. is going to fight Al-Qaeda and terrorism by spying on every American Citizen and trampling all over the Constitution. In other words, the problem, and the proposed "solution" have nothing in common.
For those that characterize network management as the ability to type a few commands into a router, please find a more suitable calling. The industry is currently polluted with people that know just enough to be dangerous, and certifications like the CCNA have been tremendously devalued as a result.
Working at a smaller business now, I'm beginning to realize that Executives can play the game, but tend to be both insulated from reality and clueless. They tend to live in a world where "Their Word" is right or wrong...and things like ethics, laws, honor just get in the way.
Lest anyone believe that this behavior is confined to executives of larger companies, it's not. You may not have implied otherwise, but I just wanted to clarify that the size of the business has no bearing on how far off-center the so-called company "leadership" can be. I've seen some real nasty behavior by small-company CEOs.
Agreed. And lets' not forget aftermarket upgrades. I still regularly use a PowerTower Pro that I purchased about six years ago. I upgraded the processor to a Sonnet 450Mhz G4, and despite the bus limitations, it's quite a speed bump. It has 384 Mb of RAM (could to more, but I just haven't spent the money), and an 18 GB SCSI hard drive. I've had fewer problems with this machine than the two (Apple) monitors that I've had to replace over the same time period. I can see replacing it a third time in the near future.
I have two other PCs that run Windoze (for games), and Linux, and I upgrade those much more frequently - mainly because I have access to all the internals. Unlike with a Mac, if I want to swap out the motherboard for a newer model, no problem. The same is true for every other component. In fact, it's this level of flexibility, along with good value, that makes me wonder when (or even if), I'll ever buy into a new Apple machine.
Don't give Microsoft more credit than they deserve. Their "wins" are few and far between.
Maybe, but their m.o. nearly always the same: we didn't come up with it, but we intend to build a copy of it, sell it, use it to enhance our market position, and if we can, walk away with it. This is pretty much the story of Microsoft's life from day one. Do you hear that massive sucking sound? That's from the cavernous vacuum created by Microsoft appropriating ideas that were developed by others.
It's interesting how a company so well-founded in image-related technologies can only manage something that looks like it was cobbled together by a secretary.
Have you read the TOS? Nice bandwidth, but there isn't much you can do with it that really matters.
Security, as most geeks know it, is an issue, but it's an issue because it speaks to a much larger concern: the overall integrity of the system- it is this trait that should worry anyone interested in maintaining a democratic form of government. In other words, it's not that the system is insecure, it's that it's lack of security, in addition to the lack of controls over modifications to the software, hardware maintenance/administration, etc., poses a substantial threat to the integrity of the voting process, and this is why e-voting should be scrapped (at least in its current form). Maybe this is just a semantic game, but referring to the lack of integrity moves it out of the technical realm, and gets at the real issue, which I'd argue, can be more easily understood.
You can't have a web server without a host, and it it is the host that responds to PING requests, provided they aren't being blocked by a firewall.