It's not just susceptibility to exploits, though: you're also concerned about the stability of the system. What's the uptime like? What are the chances of the system crashing at a crucial moment? How long is the troubleshooting/resolution cycle? Which components need to be redundant? &c. For most shipboard systems, I'd imagine stability and reliability are much more important than security.
Look at it another way: the Air Force probably isn't too worried about someone rooting the navigation system on their stealth fighter, but they damn well care about the stability of that component!
True, true. When my buddy's PS2 broke, he was having trouble deciding what to replace it with. While we were debating the issue, we saw a commercial for the Cube that showed SSX:Tricky. I almost had him convinced to cross over for that and SSBM, but in the end he couldn't give up GTAIII and GTIII.
As soon as I can figure out how to explain the presence of a second console to my girlfriend, I'll be stocking a Cube for sure, though.
I understand SSX, SSX:Tricky, FFX, and GT3 also plug the earholes quite nicely.
I bought the PS2 for SSX alone, and that by itself was worth the money I spent.
Re:Yet Another Trekkie Moment
on
Hack in Space
·
· Score: 2
Actually, they would've reconfigured the main deflector to emit a tachyon pulse. And the solution would've been completed in 1/4th the time NASA took.
Okay, but how are all these Chinese invaders supposed to get here?
Boats? Great! Where are all the boats coming from? And how are they supposed to keep the invasion secret? Any attempt to ship an invasion force across the Pacific is doomed.
And even if they do manage to get some percentage of their troops on shore in California (or Oregon, or Mexico, or Canada, or wherever), then what? They're promptly going to overrun the entire U.S.? Highly doubtful, with every Police force, National Guard unit, and gun-toting militia in the way. Even if they transplanted their entire population (armed and combat-ready, of course), they'd still be spread pretty thin across North America.
North America? Sure! You think Canada's going to sit back and watch?
And let's not forget that if China did transplant even a significant percentage of its Army (let alone its entire population as a militia force), Russia, Korea, and possibly Japan would promptly move in on the defenseless nation. Your troops may be willing to die, but their leaders are probably not interested in trading their homeland for a hostile environment thousads of miles away.
Describing the obvious problems involved in staging the invasion from Alaska are left as an exercise to the reader (Hint: they're mostly the same problems as the seaborne invasion scenario).
And all this is without even discussing in detail how thoroughly well-equipped the U.S. Navy (as well as most other navies in the world) is to deal with a massive flotilla of converted freighters full of Chinese militia-men.
Well, maybe it is highly relevant to/. After all, it does get linked a lot. I remember when it started, too. The article about the new.cx TLD domain was featured, and/. promptly predicted that it would only be a matter of time before someone registered "goatse.cx". I don't think a week passed before the first goatse.cx link appeared on the site.
Obviously, he has some reason to be here. My question is "what is that reason?". He gives a lot of good reasons for him not to be here, and mentions not one redeeming quality. My curiosity was piqued, and I responded accordingly.
What value does Slashdot add, that outweighs the catalog of faults he lists? I'm still waiting to find out.
Maybe he does. I know I do. But he doesn't say that, either originally or in response to my question ("Why are you still here?"). He says nothing positive at all, and what he says specifically about the discussion forum is that it is a "dime a dozen" service--i.e., it's nothing special, and he could get just as good elsewhere.
And things being fun are not correlated with how much one is willing to pay for them. I enjoy playing frisbee in the park.
You don't see me asking you why you play frisbee in the park, do you? You've made it clear that you find value in the activity. It was this lack of clear motivation in the parent post that prompted me to ask for, well... clarification.
On a different note, I'll not dispute your "right" to block ads; we should all keep in mind, however, that crippling Slashdot's only source of revenue is a great way to kill something we like--assuming, of course, that we do actually like it.
You can't find anything good in Slashdot (instead, you provide a rather comprehensive catalog of its faults), but hey, it's free, so you'll condescend to stick around.
What I'm wondering is why you're not over at K5, or Salon, or one of the other free sites that doesn't have all the negative elements you've identified here?
I mean, you seem to be making a pretty solid argument for abandoning Slashdot right now in favor of something better. Hell, you almost have me convinced, and I'm pretty much a blue-sky Slashdot optomist. But you'll lose your credibility pretty soon here if you don't fuck off to some other free site.
Or are you trying, in some sort of curmudgeonly, misanthropic way, to say that Slashdot is the best free site of its kind, and there's no other place you'd rather be?
Behold! One day, my parents had sex. No egg was fertilized. As a result, my sibling has never been born. How do you think my sibling feels about this?
On another note, I've managed to inherit clinical depression from both of my parents. Am I proud of my genetic diversity? Fuck no. It's a huge pain in the ass, believe me. Besides, why should I be proud of my genes? It's not like I had anything to do with the planning or implementation of my beautiful green eyes; taking credit for them would be pretty tacky, don't you think?
Well, you're only partially right. I'm happy to admit that Slashdot practices censorship-as-in-beer, but they certainly don't practice censorship-as-in-speech.
Observe: Do the Slashdot editors sometimes suppress opinions posted on the site? Sure. For definition's sake, let's agree to call this practice "censorship-as-in-beer", or "beer censorship". But why call it beer censorship? Why, to distinguish it from the much more important
Censorship-as-in-speech: When a government abridges an individual's inalienable right to freely express their opinions to the public, that's censorship of speech--"speech censorship".
If you don't like the way Slashdot regulates your speech, go speak somewhere else. When you have nowhere else to speak, then complain about censorship.
Complaining about beer censorship is complaining about being kicked out of a movie theater for talking too loud. Pretending beer censorship is actually speech censorship is pure FUD.
Come now! There's a difference between being "based on the Roman model" and being "influenced by the Greek model". I don't think the original poster was trying to prove the latter false, merely asserting that the former was true.
And where is your proof of the "fact" that 17th-century British common law conflicts with modern Australian law? For someone who takes reputation so seriously, you seem to be staking yours on emphatic statements on a subject you seem to know little or nothing about. In fact, you're making a prediction about the outcome of future events--something none of us can know anything about!
Finally, on what basis are you asserting that the parent is not anonymous, but a coward? Are all ACs cowards? Or just the ones that claim some expertise in the field under discussion? Would you be happier if the parent poster made no claim, but simply posted their statements claim-free? None of us can verify each others' credentials in any meaningful way; all we can do is judge the posts on their own merits, indepentently of outside context--the claim is irrelevant, the quality and presentation of the data is all that matters.
The tone of my posts reflects my own judgement of your posts, just as your tone reflects your judgement of the parent.
Funny. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the fair rule of British law was being systematically denied to the North American colonies. Restoring the rule of law in the colonies was one of the more significant motivations for the American revolution. This is why British common law underpins modern American law: the founders wanted it that way.
Not that this has anything to do with the American government (which, as has also been pointed out--notably in the post you replied to--was based on a modified variant of the Roman republic). How we administer our laws is separate from the body of laws we administer. Except, of course, for those laws that govern the administration of laws. However, given your obvious discomfort with more basic concepts, the idea of meta-laws (and meta-governance) might be a little too esoteric for you.
Which is better? An AC who makes thoughtful, well-written arguments in support of a position, or a registered user who writes complete nonsense and is rude as well? I know which "expert" has more credibility in my book.
Well, like Pekka Himanen says, there's a paradigm shift that's taken place in certain sectors, replacing the "work isn't supposed to be fun" concept with a "life--including work--should be fulfilling" concept.
I thought that made sense. It has certainly made the whole idea of working much more bearable, now that I know it's okay have these feelings of wanting a fulfilling job.
Not necessarily. The "beowulf cluster of foo" joke is pretty old and tired. I applied it here because it amused me to imagine a "Beowulf cluster" of lone people in tiny offices. I found the idea especially flavorful, since that's essentially what any big company is: a cluster of individuals in individual workspaces, give or take an overstrained metaphor.
All told, my comment started with a Score of 1 and received 7 moderations for a current score of 2. So if by "instant karma" you mean "posting prominently near the top of a thread and receiving 7 moderations and 1 reply for a total of +1 Karma", then you're apparently right. Not magical at all, but amusing to me, at least.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Read Link 2. Post 3. Smoke Crack 4. Profit!
It's not just susceptibility to exploits, though: you're also concerned about the stability of the system. What's the uptime like? What are the chances of the system crashing at a crucial moment? How long is the troubleshooting/resolution cycle? Which components need to be redundant? &c. For most shipboard systems, I'd imagine stability and reliability are much more important than security. Look at it another way: the Air Force probably isn't too worried about someone rooting the navigation system on their stealth fighter, but they damn well care about the stability of that component!
True, true. When my buddy's PS2 broke, he was having trouble deciding what to replace it with. While we were debating the issue, we saw a commercial for the Cube that showed SSX:Tricky. I almost had him convinced to cross over for that and SSBM, but in the end he couldn't give up GTAIII and GTIII.
As soon as I can figure out how to explain the presence of a second console to my girlfriend, I'll be stocking a Cube for sure, though.
I understand SSX, SSX:Tricky, FFX, and GT3 also plug the earholes quite nicely. I bought the PS2 for SSX alone, and that by itself was worth the money I spent.
Actually, they would've reconfigured the main deflector to emit a tachyon pulse. And the solution would've been completed in 1/4th the time NASA took.
Okay, but how are all these Chinese invaders supposed to get here?
Boats? Great! Where are all the boats coming from? And how are they supposed to keep the invasion secret? Any attempt to ship an invasion force across the Pacific is doomed.
And even if they do manage to get some percentage of their troops on shore in California (or Oregon, or Mexico, or Canada, or wherever), then what? They're promptly going to overrun the entire U.S.? Highly doubtful, with every Police force, National Guard unit, and gun-toting militia in the way. Even if they transplanted their entire population (armed and combat-ready, of course), they'd still be spread pretty thin across North America.
North America? Sure! You think Canada's going to sit back and watch?
And let's not forget that if China did transplant even a significant percentage of its Army (let alone its entire population as a militia force), Russia, Korea, and possibly Japan would promptly move in on the defenseless nation. Your troops may be willing to die, but their leaders are probably not interested in trading their homeland for a hostile environment thousads of miles away.
Describing the obvious problems involved in staging the invasion from Alaska are left as an exercise to the reader (Hint: they're mostly the same problems as the seaborne invasion scenario).
And all this is without even discussing in detail how thoroughly well-equipped the U.S. Navy (as well as most other navies in the world) is to deal with a massive flotilla of converted freighters full of Chinese militia-men.
Well, maybe it is highly relevant to /. After all, it does get linked a lot. I remember when it started, too. The article about the new .cx TLD domain was featured, and /. promptly predicted that it would only be a matter of time before someone registered "goatse.cx". I don't think a week passed before the first goatse.cx link appeared on the site.
1. Catalog all species
2. ???
3. Profit!
The hell? I though Canada was ".ca.uk", or possibly ".ca.fr". Everyone knows that ".ca" is California!
What value does Slashdot add, that outweighs the catalog of faults he lists? I'm still waiting to find out.
Maybe he does. I know I do. But he doesn't say that, either originally or in response to my question ("Why are you still here?"). He says nothing positive at all, and what he says specifically about the discussion forum is that it is a "dime a dozen" service--i.e., it's nothing special, and he could get just as good elsewhere.
And things being fun are not correlated with how much one is willing to pay for them. I enjoy playing frisbee in the park.
You don't see me asking you why you play frisbee in the park, do you? You've made it clear that you find value in the activity. It was this lack of clear motivation in the parent post that prompted me to ask for, well... clarification.
On a different note, I'll not dispute your "right" to block ads; we should all keep in mind, however, that crippling Slashdot's only source of revenue is a great way to kill something we like--assuming, of course, that we do actually like it.
So let me see if I understand this:
You can't find anything good in Slashdot (instead, you provide a rather comprehensive catalog of its faults), but hey, it's free, so you'll condescend to stick around.
What I'm wondering is why you're not over at K5, or Salon, or one of the other free sites that doesn't have all the negative elements you've identified here?
I mean, you seem to be making a pretty solid argument for abandoning Slashdot right now in favor of something better. Hell, you almost have me convinced, and I'm pretty much a blue-sky Slashdot optomist. But you'll lose your credibility pretty soon here if you don't fuck off to some other free site.
Or are you trying, in some sort of curmudgeonly, misanthropic way, to say that Slashdot is the best free site of its kind, and there's no other place you'd rather be?
If that's how you feel, why are you even here?
Yes, but the community still needs a leader. Personally, I vote for Colonel Kurtz.
Two, in fact. But if I'm you, then who are you?
Oh, well if you mean "do I like who I am?", then by all means, yes! Depression, green eyes, and all, I wouldn't trade me for anybody else on earth :)
2) Test for other traits such as height and eye color, etc.
3) Profit!!!
Behold! One day, my parents had sex. No egg was fertilized. As a result, my sibling has never been born. How do you think my sibling feels about this?
On another note, I've managed to inherit clinical depression from both of my parents. Am I proud of my genetic diversity? Fuck no. It's a huge pain in the ass, believe me. Besides, why should I be proud of my genes? It's not like I had anything to do with the planning or implementation of my beautiful green eyes; taking credit for them would be pretty tacky, don't you think?
Thanks! I'm rather proud of it myself :)
Observe: Do the Slashdot editors sometimes suppress opinions posted on the site? Sure. For definition's sake, let's agree to call this practice "censorship-as-in-beer", or "beer censorship". But why call it beer censorship? Why, to distinguish it from the much more important
Censorship-as-in-speech: When a government abridges an individual's inalienable right to freely express their opinions to the public, that's censorship of speech--"speech censorship".
If you don't like the way Slashdot regulates your speech, go speak somewhere else. When you have nowhere else to speak, then complain about censorship.
Complaining about beer censorship is complaining about being kicked out of a movie theater for talking too loud. Pretending beer censorship is actually speech censorship is pure FUD.
And where is your proof of the "fact" that 17th-century British common law conflicts with modern Australian law? For someone who takes reputation so seriously, you seem to be staking yours on emphatic statements on a subject you seem to know little or nothing about. In fact, you're making a prediction about the outcome of future events--something none of us can know anything about!
Finally, on what basis are you asserting that the parent is not anonymous, but a coward? Are all ACs cowards? Or just the ones that claim some expertise in the field under discussion? Would you be happier if the parent poster made no claim, but simply posted their statements claim-free? None of us can verify each others' credentials in any meaningful way; all we can do is judge the posts on their own merits, indepentently of outside context--the claim is irrelevant, the quality and presentation of the data is all that matters.
The tone of my posts reflects my own judgement of your posts, just as your tone reflects your judgement of the parent.
Not that this has anything to do with the American government (which, as has also been pointed out--notably in the post you replied to--was based on a modified variant of the Roman republic). How we administer our laws is separate from the body of laws we administer. Except, of course, for those laws that govern the administration of laws. However, given your obvious discomfort with more basic concepts, the idea of meta-laws (and meta-governance) might be a little too esoteric for you.
Which is better? An AC who makes thoughtful, well-written arguments in support of a position, or a registered user who writes complete nonsense and is rude as well? I know which "expert" has more credibility in my book.
Well, like Pekka Himanen says, there's a paradigm shift that's taken place in certain sectors, replacing the "work isn't supposed to be fun" concept with a "life--including work--should be fulfilling" concept. I thought that made sense. It has certainly made the whole idea of working much more bearable, now that I know it's okay have these feelings of wanting a fulfilling job.
Was I the only one that read the headline as "Penny Arcade Supreme Court"?
All told, my comment started with a Score of 1 and received 7 moderations for a current score of 2. So if by "instant karma" you mean "posting prominently near the top of a thread and receiving 7 moderations and 1 reply for a total of +1 Karma", then you're apparently right. Not magical at all, but amusing to me, at least.