I've almost found the opposite. Because I can sysadmin boxes, I'm an added resource. In fact, because of those abilities I may be heading up a very cool project (development, mostly, but tight system/network integration) so I'm thanking my lucky stars I know how to admin on (except for HP) unix platforms.
Most people do more than their job function, learning how to do other related jobs only makes you better in your position. Keep in mind that you are keeping with the real geeks who lost their jobs. The ones who have 12+ node networks at home on a cisco switch. This is why sysadmin experience is wanted -- because they can get it.
Most people in the tech industry are going to fade out. Thus, leaving the majority of workers those who have been around before the.com boom. Bigger salaries and more work, instead of the bloated staff in a lot of IT departments that you saw during the.com boom. Personally, I'm glad to see it. I know plenty of people who shouldn't be in the IT field. Luckily, those are the ones finding other professions or reverting to their previous professions.
As a sysadmin, is there any information anywhere on what sort of machine/connection can handle a slashdot load? I've seen hitcounters of slashdotted sites, and the hits weren't as bad as I was expecting, is it really just that slashdotted servers are 486s in someone's shed?
My goal is to get my server slashdotted so I can monitor and tweak it over the time period to see how it handles the load. Lucky sods...
The West-side Light Rail in Portland cost several billion dollars.
The thing that irks me about the westside rail is that a lot of the stations over here are just plain stupid. They have *huge* park and ride facilities most of which are never even half full. Quetama is the only one that usually fills up, 185th never has above 60% filled. It does this all the way out to downtown Hillsboro for the most part. And coffee shops built in? It seems that the max really is a liability running from the west side. I'd ride the max, if it weren't for all the crazy fucks that ride it along with me. Just not worth it, I try to get to work (in Downtown) and stand a 50/50 chance for some bum going to skidmore to try to start shit with me, or watch them harass some poor 14 year old girls.
They need to have a real ticketing system, not this honor mickey mouse shit that we have on the max.
Yep -- martial arts training was exactly what I was talking about. My normal ritual after class is to go to a starbucks nearby and drink a couple pints of water while I'm there. I'm a regular, so they're ok with me sucking up the free stuff:)
They seem addicted to the act of drinking, rather like smokers are to the act of smoking.
When I'm really active I do this constantly. A friend of mine commented, "I never see you go more than 5 minutes without imbibing a small amount."
The answer is quite simple. If you space drinks out evenly you maintain proper hydration and stabilize it through your body. Everything works better when you are hydrated and stable. Try this, get on a hardcore excercise program. One that makes you sweat, a lot. 3 hours of hard work (not all doing exercises, but *work* to get through the drill) -- try 2 weeks drinking constantly, and then 2 weeks drinking the same amount but spaced differently. You will notice a *huge* difference.
You can breath easier and clearer, you wont get the fuzzy head syndrome (Unless you have blood/sugar problems)
But I can't, because they wouldn't understand. That's the difference between US and THEM. We assume that they have no idea what we're talking about.
I'm hoping that sarcasm. Just because people watch TV and blather on about Survivor doesn't mean they dont' know what kill -9 is. One of the best programmers I know loves TV. Not so much Survivor but he goes on about Buffy and Will and Grace (I think that's what it's called)
Unfortunately not many people read slashdot. Even fewer know how to pronounce leenooks:)
Re:must...avoid...reality tv...
on
The Sims Survivor
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What gets me is how difficult it is to carry on a conversation with people who do watch it (Namely, mass fucking majority). Run into old friend,
"Hey how's it going? How's that cancer that's eating your insides?"
"Fine, hey you catch last Wednesdays Survivor? Ben told Sam that they had to gang up on Scott because he was trying to hook up with Jenny who Ben wants"
"Uhm, wasn't that terminal cancer?"
"Yeah. So you missed it when they voted Sally off the island because she had VD?"
It's a soap opera for the whole family.
I'm at a loss because I don't watch any TV and constantly have to deal with people saying things related to TV, and not having any clue what they are talking about.
And you deny having a preconceived position? The above is it. I'll summarize my position: you have an amazingly narrow view of what Slashdot has to offer. It doesn't matter how long you've been around, if the above is what you think of it, then that's what you'll get out of it, and that's what happens with prejudices and preconceived ideas. Perhaps your ideas about Slashdot come from when it was small - but open your eyes and look around you now.
Please go look up preconveived in a dictionary, and get back to me. I don't have a narrow view of what Slashdot is. You don't know my view, to reiterate. So please stop trying to explain it to me.
What I've gotten out of Slashdot are useful references and insight relating to my professional life (software development), to politics and law, to theoretical topics of interest to me, and quite a bit else. Slashdot adds value to what you get from the usual news media because *some* of the people who post here actually know what they're talking about. Yeah, you have to filter it - the "weekly world news" stuff you talk about, I mostly gloss over. It sounds like that's all you focus on.
So you admit it, and you have just allowed me to "win" -- Slashdot has much to offer in the area of theoretical topics and discussions. Not the headlines that come up. The reason why I spend time on Slashdot is to read the tech releases, and the discussion board because usually I can find a thread dealing with someone in the know of said technology innovation or release. But, you already knew that since you know me so well, right? However, if you look at the sensationalized "journalism" that takes place on here, that accounts for a huge percentage of it. You can't be one or the other, the Weekly World News can have a section that is very accurate and informative. Doesn't mean it isn't a tabloid. You object to may saying Slashdot isn't a news site yet you said the value comes from the discussion. What news streams main value comes from those who contribute to the story? Hmm, let me think about that one.
BTW, where this all started was the idea that real news involves fact, not opinion. I still laugh when I think about that, since probably over 95% of what you see in the mainstream news media is opinion-based, and clear distinctions are not usually drawn. Criticizing/. for using the word "News" is just silly, and shows a total lack of understanding and thought about what "news" is.
Wrong, but that's ok -- you are on a roll why stop now? My stance is that all delivery is based upon perceptions, which are flawed. The news is whatever you take from it, if someone reports whatever story (Whether it be a research article about antigravity devices or an interview with SETI researchers) and laces it with comments that are not grounded by anything closely resembling a factual bit you turn the article into tabloid fodder. Plain and simple. If you can't keep your mouth shut long enough to deliver the facts, find a different profession. Your statistic is way off, as well. 95%? I bet your ass hurts from pulling that one out of it.
Out of order: To relate this back to the point about the regular news media, the point about Slashdot is that biases and misleading articles are often exposed by the comments here, and in many cases, if the subject in question is something unfamiliar, the issues raised would not otherwise have been obvious.
Wrong -- if this was started from Slashdot being biased in the comments, I would have brought it up. I wasn't, if you recall I was talking directly about the headline that they put up, for every fucking viewer to see. Maybe you missed that. Maybe it's you that needs to open their eyes? Or at least realize that other people aren't what you think, and stop trying to know their beliefs without knowing them. Don't worry, it will come with age.
In your earlier message, BTW, you did what you accused me of doing, essentially putting words in my mouth: "I'll still say you are dumb as a post if you think Slashdot represents an unbiased and balanced news site". I didn't say that. What I said is that Slashdot exists on a spectrum of bias and balance, and is by no means the worst. I also explained why that's the case. So your statement was really irrelevant to this discussion.
How is a conditional statement based upon a supposition putting words into your mouth.. let's go back to the comprehension thing a bit shall we?
In fact, reporting gets less and less spin-free the more important to society the topic is. The SETI article was too uncontroversial to really demonstrate the point, although as I showed, it was certainly not free from bias. Try a piece about an important political decision to see much more egregious spin and bias, in even the most revered mainstream media.
Sorry - how did you really show that it was not free from bias? Your argument that I enjoyed the article because I like SETI was debunked by the fact I think SETI is a waste of money. It's about SETI researchers, and was an interview with them. All the spin, as you put it, is put in by the interview -- the SETI researchers themselves, not ABC.
The reason is that you haven't actually thought about it, in the sense of analyzing your premises and their consequences. You've simply accepted pleasant myths that others have managed to get inside your head. As a nice demonstration of this, you even manage to acknowledge the economic biases of news organizations while at the same time denying that journalists put spin on stories. This is classic rationalization, something that you have to do to maintain a belief in your worldview as consistent.
Uh, once again, I never said that news sites and journalists were not unbiased. It's really amusing though, you are so convinced that you know me and my thoughts that you like to spout these "facts" with your own bias. Ironic, isn't it? Unfortunately for your argument, I have thought about this and discussed in depth with people much more apt at debate than yourself these very things. I'll break it down to you one more time. Everything, without a doubt, is biased. Simply because everything written, authored, and viewed is based off perceptions. However, knowing this and allowing that level of grayness to seep in between biased and unbiased reporting you can then say that which falls into the factual reporting is unbiased, and that which falls into hyped, opinionated, uninformed, or sensationalized falls into the biased category. You really should stop saying things like, "belief in [my] worldview as consistent" because it makes you sound like a 14 year old trying to use big words, and is ultimately plain ass stupid to say, because you have no clue whatsoever what my worldview is. Nor do you have any idea if I believe there is such a thing as consistence in a worldview. Just for your information, I don't. Since nothing anyone can know is actually black and white true/false (Read below) nothing can be consistent.
Just as an exercise, try imagining that you're wrong and reconstructing the argument in a different way (not necessarily mine). If you can't do that, you know you've got a problem: you're locked into a single perspective. If your answer to that is "yes, because it's the right perspective", then there's probably not much hope for you.
What's the other side? There is no such thing as unbiased reporting? Define unbiased. Unbiased to the point where it reports facts and only facts? Who determines what is a fact? There are three sides to every story; Yours, Mine, and the Truth. Take that into your amatuer philosophical views and try to understand that nothing is black and white and everything is flawed because it's perceived by flawed devices (ie, you and me)
I'm not even sure what side of the argument you are on. You have failed to make any clear point other than demonstrating the well known fact of life that everyone has biases. In regards to journalism it's finding those stories where the journalist leaves them at the door, which does happen. For all you know ABC may hate SETI, but is running the story to gain tech publicity to challenge CNN. No biases there, just economic struggle. As for my "preconceived idea of what Slashdot is" why don't you go look up what that word means, and then look at my history. I've been around/. before user accounts. Now you tell me what part of that is preconceived. I come here the same reason why people buy Weekly World News. Most the shit is stupid, but it's entertaining. This isn't a news site. If it was, they'd employ journalists, right?
Now, if you think you can disect my psyche a bit more I'd really enjoy to see it. So far you are batting a straight 0. Try to actually get to know the person you are trying to criticize and delve into -- you've jumped into way too many dangerous assumptions. You know nothing about me, yet you assert many claims about my sentiments in life -- purely because I claim that Slashdot falls into the bias side of "reporting" where as many news sites don't. I'll tell you what, go find a news site that reports blatantly assumed headlines from a story just because it follows with their majority mindset. Make sure it's on the front page, or it doesn't count. If you can do that, you've found a news site that is just as bad as Slashdot. For everyone you find, I'll find one that doesn't.
Oh please, that's lame. If you think the article is simply about SETI researchers, your reading comprehension skills are even worse than your ability to step outside your societal programming.
Did I say it was only about SETI researches? Perhaps it is you that should work to improve your comprehension, and perhaps your writing as well. If you think I'm socially programmed, you really have no iota of a clue who I am.
You seem to be having a huge problem understand complex ideas expressed in written form. So let me be very verbose (Just call me Mr. Prolix).
The major news media corporation are, you guessed it, corporations. They have to supply stories that appeal to their reader base. Some people like different major news streams, for various reasons. Therefor, they employ journalists and writers that are able to find stories that appeal to their target audience. This is not bias, it's economics. They are not putting spin, nor are they introducing their own grain-of-salt predictions. They say, "This is what party X said, This is what party Y said." That's reporting. Saying things that slashdot says is not, it's weekly world news mickey mouse journalism. Which, if you'll notice, the editors don't refer to themselves as journalists anymore. Instead, they are editors. They edit news summaries and post them as news headlines. They aren't news headlines, they are forum discussion items. A more apt name for Slashdot would be, "Forums for Nerds." because that's precisely what Slashdot is. In no way shape or form is this actually what a news site is known to be.
Hopefully this made it very clear to you my friend.
In short, this is at best a human interest fluff piece. What few facts there are are presented by the people involved, with no challenges or analysis. If this is what you hold up as unbiased journalism, I can see why you took issue with my statement. You're confusing lack of bias with things that agree with your own biases - you like SETI, so you think this article is unbiased. Please continue in your fantasy world - ignorance is bliss, as you pointed out.
Wow, damn dude. You have some issues. If you actually knew me you would also know I think SETI is dumb. For a lot of different reasons. I disagree with the importance of finding extraterrestrial life, and frankly don't give a damn. However, it was a good article about SETI researchers. Like I said, Seek and ye shall find. I'll still say you are dumb as a post if you think Slashdot represents an unbiased and balanced news site. I didn't realize balance was proclaiming Sony to be a cool company with great shit only to lambast them for being part of the RIAA within a 30 minute timespan. I guess I need to go lookup the definition of balance.
As for my insult, yeah, I insult when I feel like it, don't like it? Don't talk to me.
Give me an example of what you consider a recent unbiased story in one of the media sources I mentioned, and I'll explain what you're missing. Sorry, quote me where I said that they were unbiased. I've said they should strive to be unbiased, but never said such things as you say I said.
Slashdot more than any other "news" site contributes to sheep mentality and sensationalism. This is the Weekly World News for the nerd group.
Just to satisfy you: There is a story on ABCNews.com, about SETI research. Go read it, it's on the front page. It's pretty much an interview, with explanatory summaries. Please find one biast, or spin that they put in the article.
It's a great explanation, dealing with possibilities of being alone or amongst many, and talks about the importance of finding out.
Now, if you would please stop putting words into my mouth and try to just read instead of identifying hidden messages in stories maybe you would be a happier person. "Seek and ye shall find."
The AFJN does not need to know anything about biotech to come to the same conclusions. What they do need to know about is IP law, treaties, and international trade agreements. I can guarantee you that they employ lawyers who are experts in those subjects. BTW: Planting patented corn is a no-no if you don't have a license to do so. Subsistance farmers in Africa will not.
Sorry, but AFJN has no authority or direct knowledge so them speaking about it is is like Slashdot saying that Microsoft is going to be doing some evil menacing plan that is completely off base and ultimately stupid.
Yeah, planting patented corn is a no-no. I'll give you that. You think the Zimbabwean government will care?
US: You planted our corn! Zimbabwe: Uh, yeah. US: You can't do that! Zimbabwe: Why? US:It's patented. Zimbabwe: Oh. What's a patent?
What is the US going to do? Sue Zimbabwe? For what, their children?
In the media spectrum, Slashdot is certainly more balanced and unbiased than anything you'll ever see in any News Corp media, e.g. Fox News or the New York daily papers, for example, or anything you see on news "magazine" programs like 20/20 or 60 Minutes.
Wow, I didn't realize someone could completely discredit any and every point thyey were trying to make with one run-on sentence.
I'd have to say you are absolutely, completely, with out a doubt, short-bus retarded if you think that Slashdot is more balanced and unbiased than main stream corporate media. At least they can hate the same object two stories in a row.
Whether they are concerned or not, they *ought* to be. US companies have a very bad track record here. I may hate MS, but I must admit that they haven't been among the worst of the US companies, especially if you live in a foreign country.
Concern, yes. I said that they are, with good reason. However, their primary concern is their export market.
Well, lets see here. They are exporting corn. So they can buy things with money. So they can possibly afford different food, and perhaps agricultural equipment to enhance productivity.
You'll find that the biotech and US Government reps are saying that it's not a plan to take over the crop world, which is in effect the quote that you posted is saying. You know what? The Africa Faith and Justice Network probably doesn't know jack shit about biotech. That and they are not from the USA side. Maybe branched in Washington, but it's a.. *gasp* African group.
How do you suppose the biotechnicians of the corn are going to verify that all the corn is their IP? Oh, with all the billions of dollars they have to dump into such a dumb ass project.
And what in world do other people's opinions have to do with Slashdot's right to point out interesting stories? I don't care if everyone in the world disagrees, if the slashdot editors (or anyone else) feels they have something to say, they should say it.
Then do not bill it as a news site. Post your opinions all you want, but don't state it as fact. They are saying that planting patented corn is a no-no. Sorry, but that's bunk. They are worried about their economy (narrow scope, excluding the dictators issues). If they want to post their opinion, post it in a comment like everyone else. Not a "headline" as they call it.
Slashdot Mirror
I've almost found the opposite. Because I can sysadmin boxes, I'm an added resource. In fact, because of those abilities I may be heading up a very cool project (development, mostly, but tight system/network integration) so I'm thanking my lucky stars I know how to admin on (except for HP) unix platforms.
Most people do more than their job function, learning how to do other related jobs only makes you better in your position. Keep in mind that you are keeping with the real geeks who lost their jobs. The ones who have 12+ node networks at home on a cisco switch. This is why sysadmin experience is wanted -- because they can get it.
Most people in the tech industry are going to fade out. Thus, leaving the majority of workers those who have been around before the .com boom. Bigger salaries and more work, instead of the bloated staff in a lot of IT departments that you saw during the .com boom. Personally, I'm glad to see it. I know plenty of people who shouldn't be in the IT field. Luckily, those are the ones finding other professions or reverting to their previous professions.
As a sysadmin, is there any information anywhere on what sort of machine/connection can handle a slashdot load? I've seen hitcounters of slashdotted sites, and the hits weren't as bad as I was expecting, is it really just that slashdotted servers are 486s in someone's shed?
My goal is to get my server slashdotted so I can monitor and tweak it over the time period to see how it handles the load. Lucky sods...
The West-side Light Rail in Portland cost several billion dollars.
The thing that irks me about the westside rail is that a lot of the stations over here are just plain stupid. They have *huge* park and ride facilities most of which are never even half full. Quetama is the only one that usually fills up, 185th never has above 60% filled. It does this all the way out to downtown Hillsboro for the most part. And coffee shops built in? It seems that the max really is a liability running from the west side. I'd ride the max, if it weren't for all the crazy fucks that ride it along with me. Just not worth it, I try to get to work (in Downtown) and stand a 50/50 chance for some bum going to skidmore to try to start shit with me, or watch them harass some poor 14 year old girls.
They need to have a real ticketing system, not this honor mickey mouse shit that we have on the max.
Isn't it "Curiosity killed the cat, satisfaction brought it back"?
Yep -- martial arts training was exactly what I was talking about. My normal ritual after class is to go to a starbucks nearby and drink a couple pints of water while I'm there. I'm a regular, so they're ok with me sucking up the free stuff :)
They seem addicted to the act of drinking, rather like smokers are to the act of smoking.
When I'm really active I do this constantly. A friend of mine commented, "I never see you go more than 5 minutes without imbibing a small amount."
The answer is quite simple. If you space drinks out evenly you maintain proper hydration and stabilize it through your body. Everything works better when you are hydrated and stable.
Try this, get on a hardcore excercise program. One that makes you sweat, a lot. 3 hours of hard work (not all doing exercises, but *work* to get through the drill) -- try 2 weeks drinking constantly, and then 2 weeks drinking the same amount but spaced differently. You will notice a *huge* difference.
You can breath easier and clearer, you wont get the fuzzy head syndrome (Unless you have blood/sugar problems)
But I can't, because they wouldn't understand. That's the difference between US and THEM. We assume that they have no idea what we're talking about.
I'm hoping that sarcasm. Just because people watch TV and blather on about Survivor doesn't mean they dont' know what kill -9 is. One of the best programmers I know loves TV. Not so much Survivor but he goes on about Buffy and Will and Grace (I think that's what it's called)
Unfortunately not many people read slashdot. Even fewer know how to pronounce leenooks :)
What gets me is how difficult it is to carry on a conversation with people who do watch it (Namely, mass fucking majority). Run into old friend,
"Hey how's it going? How's that cancer that's eating your insides?"
"Fine, hey you catch last Wednesdays Survivor? Ben told Sam that they had to gang up on Scott because he was trying to hook up with Jenny who Ben wants"
"Uhm, wasn't that terminal cancer?"
"Yeah. So you missed it when they voted Sally off the island because she had VD?"
It's a soap opera for the whole family.
I'm at a loss because I don't watch any TV and constantly have to deal with people saying things related to TV, and not having any clue what they are talking about.
And you deny having a preconceived position? The above is it. I'll summarize my position: you have an amazingly narrow view of what Slashdot has to offer. It doesn't matter how long you've been around, if the above is what you think of it, then that's what you'll get out of it, and that's what happens with prejudices and preconceived ideas. Perhaps your ideas about Slashdot come from when it was small - but open your eyes and look around you now.
/. for using the word "News" is just silly, and shows a total lack of understanding and thought about what "news" is.
Please go look up preconveived in a dictionary, and get back to me. I don't have a narrow view of what Slashdot is. You don't know my view, to reiterate. So please stop trying to explain it to me.
What I've gotten out of Slashdot are useful references and insight relating to my professional life (software development), to politics and law, to theoretical topics of interest to me, and quite a bit else. Slashdot adds value to what you get from the usual news media because *some* of the people who post here actually know what they're talking about. Yeah, you have to filter it - the "weekly world news" stuff you talk about, I mostly gloss over. It sounds like that's all you focus on.
So you admit it, and you have just allowed me to "win" -- Slashdot has much to offer in the area of theoretical topics and discussions. Not the headlines that come up. The reason why I spend time on Slashdot is to read the tech releases, and the discussion board because usually I can find a thread dealing with someone in the know of said technology innovation or release. But, you already knew that since you know me so well, right? However, if you look at the sensationalized "journalism" that takes place on here, that accounts for a huge percentage of it. You can't be one or the other, the Weekly World News can have a section that is very accurate and informative. Doesn't mean it isn't a tabloid.
You object to may saying Slashdot isn't a news site yet you said the value comes from the discussion. What news streams main value comes from those who contribute to the story? Hmm, let me think about that one.
BTW, where this all started was the idea that real news involves fact, not opinion. I still laugh when I think about that, since probably over 95% of what you see in the mainstream news media is opinion-based, and clear distinctions are not usually drawn. Criticizing
Wrong, but that's ok -- you are on a roll why stop now? My stance is that all delivery is based upon perceptions, which are flawed. The news is whatever you take from it, if someone reports whatever story (Whether it be a research article about antigravity devices or an interview with SETI researchers) and laces it with comments that are not grounded by anything closely resembling a factual bit you turn the article into tabloid fodder. Plain and simple. If you can't keep your mouth shut long enough to deliver the facts, find a different profession. Your statistic is way off, as well. 95%? I bet your ass hurts from pulling that one out of it.
Out of order:
To relate this back to the point about the regular news media, the point about Slashdot is that biases and misleading articles are often exposed by the comments here, and in many cases, if the subject in question is something unfamiliar, the issues raised would not otherwise have been obvious.
Wrong -- if this was started from Slashdot being biased in the comments, I would have brought it up. I wasn't, if you recall I was talking directly about the headline that they put up, for every fucking viewer to see. Maybe you missed that. Maybe it's you that needs to open their eyes? Or at least realize that other people aren't what you think, and stop trying to know their beliefs without knowing them. Don't worry, it will come with age.
In your earlier message, BTW, you did what you accused me of doing, essentially putting words in my mouth: "I'll still say you are dumb as a post if you think Slashdot represents an unbiased and balanced news site". I didn't say that. What I said is that Slashdot exists on a spectrum of bias and balance, and is by no means the worst. I also explained why that's the case. So your statement was really irrelevant to this discussion.
/. before user accounts. Now you tell me what part of that is preconceived. I come here the same reason why people buy Weekly World News. Most the shit is stupid, but it's entertaining. This isn't a news site. If it was, they'd employ journalists, right?
How is a conditional statement based upon a supposition putting words into your mouth.. let's go back to the comprehension thing a bit shall we?
In fact, reporting gets less and less spin-free the more important to society the topic is. The SETI article was too uncontroversial to really demonstrate the point, although as I showed, it was certainly not free from bias. Try a piece about an important political decision to see much more egregious spin and bias, in even the most revered mainstream media.
Sorry - how did you really show that it was not free from bias? Your argument that I enjoyed the article because I like SETI was debunked by the fact I think SETI is a waste of money. It's about SETI researchers, and was an interview with them. All the spin, as you put it, is put in by the interview -- the SETI researchers themselves, not ABC.
The reason is that you haven't actually thought about it, in the sense of analyzing your premises and their consequences. You've simply accepted pleasant myths that others have managed to get inside your head. As a nice demonstration of this, you even manage to acknowledge the economic biases of news organizations while at the same time denying that journalists put spin on stories. This is classic rationalization, something that you have to do to maintain a belief in your worldview as consistent.
Uh, once again, I never said that news sites and journalists were not unbiased. It's really amusing though, you are so convinced that you know me and my thoughts that you like to spout these "facts" with your own bias. Ironic, isn't it? Unfortunately for your argument, I have thought about this and discussed in depth with people much more apt at debate than yourself these very things. I'll break it down to you one more time. Everything, without a doubt, is biased. Simply because everything written, authored, and viewed is based off perceptions. However, knowing this and allowing that level of grayness to seep in between biased and unbiased reporting you can then say that which falls into the factual reporting is unbiased, and that which falls into hyped, opinionated, uninformed, or sensationalized falls into the biased category. You really should stop saying things like, "belief in [my] worldview as consistent" because it makes you sound like a 14 year old trying to use big words, and is ultimately plain ass stupid to say, because you have no clue whatsoever what my worldview is. Nor do you have any idea if I believe there is such a thing as consistence in a worldview. Just for your information, I don't. Since nothing anyone can know is actually black and white true/false (Read below) nothing can be consistent.
Just as an exercise, try imagining that you're wrong and reconstructing the argument in a different way (not necessarily mine). If you can't do that, you know you've got a problem: you're locked into a single perspective. If your answer to that is "yes, because it's the right perspective", then there's probably not much hope for you.
What's the other side? There is no such thing as unbiased reporting? Define unbiased. Unbiased to the point where it reports facts and only facts? Who determines what is a fact? There are three sides to every story; Yours, Mine, and the Truth. Take that into your amatuer philosophical views and try to understand that nothing is black and white and everything is flawed because it's perceived by flawed devices (ie, you and me)
I'm not even sure what side of the argument you are on. You have failed to make any clear point other than demonstrating the well known fact of life that everyone has biases. In regards to journalism it's finding those stories where the journalist leaves them at the door, which does happen. For all you know ABC may hate SETI, but is running the story to gain tech publicity to challenge CNN. No biases there, just economic struggle.
As for my "preconceived idea of what Slashdot is" why don't you go look up what that word means, and then look at my history. I've been around
Now, if you think you can disect my psyche a bit more I'd really enjoy to see it. So far you are batting a straight 0. Try to actually get to know the person you are trying to criticize and delve into -- you've jumped into way too many dangerous assumptions. You know nothing about me, yet you assert many claims about my sentiments in life -- purely because I claim that Slashdot falls into the bias side of "reporting" where as many news sites don't. I'll tell you what, go find a news site that reports blatantly assumed headlines from a story just because it follows with their majority mindset. Make sure it's on the front page, or it doesn't count. If you can do that, you've found a news site that is just as bad as Slashdot. For everyone you find, I'll find one that doesn't.
Oh please, that's lame. If you think the article is simply about SETI researchers, your reading comprehension skills are even worse than your ability to step outside your societal programming.
Did I say it was only about SETI researches? Perhaps it is you that should work to improve your comprehension, and perhaps your writing as well. If you think I'm socially programmed, you really have no iota of a clue who I am.
You seem to be having a huge problem understand complex ideas expressed in written form. So let me be very verbose (Just call me Mr. Prolix).
The major news media corporation are, you guessed it, corporations. They have to supply stories that appeal to their reader base. Some people like different major news streams, for various reasons. Therefor, they employ journalists and writers that are able to find stories that appeal to their target audience. This is not bias, it's economics. They are not putting spin, nor are they introducing their own grain-of-salt predictions. They say, "This is what party X said, This is what party Y said." That's reporting. Saying things that slashdot says is not, it's weekly world news mickey mouse journalism. Which, if you'll notice, the editors don't refer to themselves as journalists anymore. Instead, they are editors. They edit news summaries and post them as news headlines. They aren't news headlines, they are forum discussion items. A more apt name for Slashdot would be, "Forums for Nerds." because that's precisely what Slashdot is. In no way shape or form is this actually what a news site is known to be.
Hopefully this made it very clear to you my friend.
So I was perusing the articles in Google, came across the Cold Fusion and some of the corresponding threads.
Someone makes a point, "From cold fusion it's not a far step for 750 terrorist cells to begin making H-Bombs in their kitchen"
Ironic that the H-Bombs are available first, eh?
In short, this is at best a human interest fluff piece. What few facts there are are presented by the people involved, with no challenges or analysis. If this is what you hold up as unbiased journalism, I can see why you took issue with my statement. You're confusing lack of bias with things that agree with your own biases - you like SETI, so you think this article is unbiased. Please continue in your fantasy world - ignorance is bliss, as you pointed out.
Wow, damn dude. You have some issues. If you actually knew me you would also know I think SETI is dumb. For a lot of different reasons. I disagree with the importance of finding extraterrestrial life, and frankly don't give a damn. However, it was a good article about SETI researchers. Like I said, Seek and ye shall find. I'll still say you are dumb as a post if you think Slashdot represents an unbiased and balanced news site. I didn't realize balance was proclaiming Sony to be a cool company with great shit only to lambast them for being part of the RIAA within a 30 minute timespan. I guess I need to go lookup the definition of balance.
As for my insult, yeah, I insult when I feel like it, don't like it? Don't talk to me.
Give me an example of what you consider a recent unbiased story in one of the media sources I mentioned, and I'll explain what you're missing.
Sorry, quote me where I said that they were unbiased. I've said they should strive to be unbiased, but never said such things as you say I said.
Slashdot more than any other "news" site contributes to sheep mentality and sensationalism. This is the Weekly World News for the nerd group.
Just to satisfy you: There is a story on ABCNews.com, about SETI research. Go read it, it's on the front page. It's pretty much an interview, with explanatory summaries. Please find one biast, or spin that they put in the article.
It's a great explanation, dealing with possibilities of being alone or amongst many, and talks about the importance of finding out.
Now, if you would please stop putting words into my mouth and try to just read instead of identifying hidden messages in stories maybe you would be a happier person. "Seek and ye shall find."
The AFJN does not need to know anything about biotech to come to the same conclusions. What they do need to know about is IP law, treaties, and international trade agreements. I can guarantee you that they employ lawyers who are experts in those subjects. BTW: Planting patented corn is a no-no if you don't have a license to do so. Subsistance farmers in Africa will not.
Sorry, but AFJN has no authority or direct knowledge so them speaking about it is is like Slashdot saying that Microsoft is going to be doing some evil menacing plan that is completely off base and ultimately stupid.
Yeah, planting patented corn is a no-no. I'll give you that. You think the Zimbabwean government will care?
US: You planted our corn!
Zimbabwe: Uh, yeah.
US: You can't do that!
Zimbabwe: Why?
US:It's patented.
Zimbabwe: Oh. What's a patent?
What is the US going to do? Sue Zimbabwe? For what, their children?
In the media spectrum, Slashdot is certainly more balanced and unbiased than anything you'll ever see in any News Corp media, e.g. Fox News or the New York daily papers, for example, or anything you see on news "magazine" programs like 20/20 or 60 Minutes.
Wow, I didn't realize someone could completely discredit any and every point thyey were trying to make with one run-on sentence.
I'd have to say you are absolutely, completely, with out a doubt, short-bus retarded if you think that Slashdot is more balanced and unbiased than main stream corporate media. At least they can hate the same object two stories in a row.
Whether they are concerned or not, they *ought* to be. US companies have a very bad track record here. I may hate MS, but I must admit that they haven't been among the worst of the US companies, especially if you live in a foreign country.
Concern, yes. I said that they are, with good reason. However, their primary concern is their export market.
So they can get money, you need more than food to survive in this day and age. Economics 101.
Well, lets see here. They are exporting corn. So they can buy things with money. So they can possibly afford different food, and perhaps agricultural equipment to enhance productivity.
maybe Mugabe figures he has a surplus of citizens, not a food deficiancy...
That's not a far stretched idea. Granted, you can't do anything about it but I'd say not accepting corn is the least of Zimbabwe's concerns.
RTFA a bit more.
You'll find that the biotech and US Government reps are saying that it's not a plan to take over the crop world, which is in effect the quote that you posted is saying. You know what? The Africa Faith and Justice Network probably doesn't know jack shit about biotech. That and they are not from the USA side. Maybe branched in Washington, but it's a.. *gasp* African group.
How do you suppose the biotechnicians of the corn are going to verify that all the corn is their IP? Oh, with all the billions of dollars they have to dump into such a dumb ass project.
And what in world do other people's opinions have to do with Slashdot's right to point out interesting stories? I don't care if everyone in the world disagrees, if the slashdot editors (or anyone else) feels they have something to say, they should say it.
Then do not bill it as a news site. Post your opinions all you want, but don't state it as fact. They are saying that planting patented corn is a no-no. Sorry, but that's bunk. They are worried about their economy (narrow scope, excluding the dictators issues). If they want to post their opinion, post it in a comment like everyone else. Not a "headline" as they call it.
It always is more broad, but losing their export business is more important than current food supply.
Feed a man a fish type argument. That was mostly the point I was making.
is it the patent they care about? or some sort of anti-gm food policy?
Yeah, but being anti-gm wouldn't make a good Slashdot headline.