Jesus, man, just point him to a dictionary site like dictionary.msn.com/find/entry.asp?search=virus where he can see the proper plural form within three seconds, rather than wallowing through that mental masturbatory dreck that Mr. Christiansen wrote. I hope he's not reading this, 'cause I'm not looking to offend him, but after skimming that page, I can see why people don't exactly consider Mr. Christiansen to be "well-liked."
I'd tell you, but I have a personal policy against helping lazy luddites who think they're taking some kind of principled stand because they don't visit sites that use <img> tags. At least read the damn FAQ linked to on their home page.
Sure thing, man. I guess Playboy doesn't know anything about finding hotties to put in their magazine. But hey, I guess you know beauty better than they do, right? Mind if I ask about your qualifications are for thinking you could do a better job picking out women that millions of guys would pay to see? Her old pics were very cute, but they definitely wouldn't be selling any magazines or web hits.
'Sides, you're not fooling anyone -- we all know that when it comes to nerds like you, your atrophied little pud would be spraying in your shorts so fast if she ever came on to you.
Next Katz article: Blonds with implants are dummies -- good stereotype. Outcasts in black trenchcoats are a ticking time bomb -- evil stereotype.
The domain wasn't available. When he paid the fee, he didn't own the domain in any way whatsoever. Therefore, he didn't give it back. Your comment that he "considered it not to be fair to keep the domain" is completely bogus, since he never had it to begin with.
So, he most certainly could not have "struggled to keep it or sell it to someone else," since he'd have to own it first, nor could he have "settled for a good amount of cash," since Microsoft didn't owe him a single penny.
You make the point of the guy you responded to. You're giving him credit for playing fair simply because he wasn't unfair to them. Just like the guy said, just because it wasn't "unethical" doesn't make it "ethical." His only two options in this situation were (1) pay the bill, or (2) not pay the bill. There was nothing to be fair or unfair about.
And seeing how much publicity he's gotten from his 35 bucks, I'd say it's a Hell of an investment, but no more ethical (or unethical) than playing the stock market.
Hey, don't worry about actually reading the story or anything. Ya know, the part where it says, "Neither firm will pay any termination fees.":P
And actually the $29 million part was only if the Inprise board nixed the deal. If the Inprise shareholders voted the deal down (as has seemed very likely for the last few months -- there's been a pretty strong movement against the merger by a faction of Inprise shareholders), then there'd be no $29 million penalty. I think Corel realized that they wouldn't get the shareholder votes and decided to just end the whole mess before the humiliation of a vote.
I don't blame Borland folks for not wanting to be consumed by the likes of Corel and Cowpland, but I think the breakdown of this deal hurts both companies. Corel's screwed, but Inprise isn't in great shape, either.
Whenever the whole "Can you be profitable when you're in the free software business?" debate comes up, I've yet to see the "Yes" side fail to bring up Cygnus. The only problem is, it also seems to be the only company that they ever mention. Is Cygnus really the only profitable Free Software-related company out there? (Not dissing Cygnus, I've always been a big fan.)
Cheers, ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Re:Why there's no article about /. getting DoS'ed
on
SGI's New Linux Boxes
·
· Score: 2
Hey zico, you know that the VA/Andover merger isn't final until the SEC approves it right? After that you are free to spin conspiracies
Awww c'mon, Chris, you know I'm gonna hafta call you on that one. Since when did actual lack of company ownership ever keep a loyal Slashdotter from spinning conspiracy theories between Microsoft and just about any other company out there? You gotta gimme something better to work with to quell this particular conspiracy yarn.;-)
You not only whined about having your post included without your permission
I did? Where? Seriously, can you read? I said nothing about needing my permission to include my post. I wondered aloud if, because I didn't receive an email asking for it, if that meant that my post wasn't included. In turn, leading to the second question, "Is it because I didn't join the pity party?"
You also whine about not having your post included, because that would immediately make it a "one-sided pity party
Exactly which part of "And no, I don't mean by me necessarily [...]" do you not understand? It's all about letting dissenters be heard, whether I'm the dissenter in particular or not. If Katz wants to portray all these "outcast" kids (for lack of a better term) as innocent victims, then he's being dishonest. If he's going to portray to the world outside of Slashdot, by removing dissenting posts, that everyone here also feels that way, then he ought to be ashamed. And no, I'm not accusing him of doing it beforehand -- I expect him to have greater integrity than that -- I'd just like it cleared up, which was the reason for my original post, which didn't attack anyone.
Oh yeah, and I can remember posting some positive comments from time to time on Slashdot. Most of it was of the tough love genre, like pointing out subtle screwups which have lowered people's enjoyment of the site over the years, or how to make your point at this site or elsewhere without making Slashdotters look like a bunch of uninformed and rabid cretins to people on the outside looking in.
I ask, because I never received an email asking if publishing my post would be okay. I realize that you haven't contacted everyone, and I hope that's the case in my situation, rather than because my post wasn't set for publication.
I'm just a bit concerned, and I think with good reason, that the whole project is going to be a one-sided pity party along the lines of "those kind of guys picked on me when I was in school, so I don't blame Dylan and (whoever) for murdering 20+ people." I really hope that you aren't leaving out posts from those of us out in the real world familiar with both sides of the coin. For instance, NPR contacted me to add a counterpoint to the common sentiment around here. I hope Katz/Slashdot are planning to do the same thing instead of only giving one side of the story. And no, I don't mean by me necessarily, but by anyone who disagrees with the Slashdot mainstream on this subject.
Cheers, ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Why there's no article about /. getting DoS'ed
on
SGI's New Linux Boxes
·
· Score: 4
why isn't there a story about last weeks DDOS attack?
VA Linux wants to keep it as quiet as possible how easy it is to knock their web properties (e.g., Slashdot) off-line. And we all know how VA Linux hates to see bad news reported by a "news" site that they own. Just like when the stock market was tanking, particularly the Linux stocks, and Slashdot mysteriously didn't have a single word to say about it -- well, not until they got rightfully flamed to a crisp by their readership and caved in to the demands of an article about it.
Slashdot just hates admitting it whenever there's a problem in Linux/Apacheland. You see, it makes them look like major fools for constantly and mindlessly bashing the alternatives when they can't get their own stuff to work. (Which reminds me, did Slashdot ever run a story about when they got hacked?)
Oh well, those are the reasons that come to mind at first blush. There might be others, but either way, don't count on it ever being reported here, despite the fact that it is a big story to readers here. (Anyone want to try to argue that it's not a huge story to the people who actually visit this site? I'd love to hear it.) Of course, Slashdot will probably say that they're in the business of reporting news, not reporting about Slashdot itself -- shortly before they publish their 8th story about Microsoft lawyers sending letters to Slashdot.
Firstly, most Australians didn't have firearms anyway so claiming that restricting ownership of guns has a direct correllation to an increase in overall crime is tenuous.
Uh-huh. Maybe it was due to global warming, or perhaps the planets were aligned in a bad way. Now why do I get the sneaking suspicion that if crime had instead gone down, the knee-jerks who took away you guns would be patting themselves on the back over it? Regardless, your statement shows your lack of understanding of the issue. Even if few people owned guns, John Q. Criminal was aware that he might get a bullet in the face the next time he tried to rob somebody. Now that your government has disarmed its law-abiding citizens, the criminals no longer have to worry about it, and they're loving it.
Secondly, firearms-related offences went down which is exactly what the majority of the population wanted to see happen.
Hello, if someone robs me, I don't give a shit whether it was with a gun or an ice pick. But hey, I'm sure those extra 20% that are now getting robbed are just tickled pink. I can only guess how they must feel so warm and fuzzy inside as they're handing all their money over to a thug.
MAME already runs on the Windows CE devices -- it hasn't crashed on me, but the current 0.2 version still needs a lot of work cleaning up the performance and range of supported games. Legalities aside, it seems like someone could use embedded CE that works with the DreamCast to create a loader for MAME along with a ton of ROM files on a CD-ROM. I'm not sure if things are directly portable between the PDA version of CE and the embedded version that works with the DreamCast, but the source is out there, and, well, it would be cool as Hell to be able to run those games on the home entertainment system instead of just the ol' computer. (I don't own a DreamCast, but if anyone did it, it'd definitely make me think hard about getting one.)
It's the political correct thing to say when what you really mean is "I want that information to be free." And I agree with you -- it gets a 10 out of 10 on my banality scale.
Agreed, well at least from checking out the screenshots, anyway (I'm away from home and don't have my Palm with me to actually try it out). I think I'm too spoiled after the sweet sound and graphics of DoomCE (Splashscreen and aniGIF of different screens) -- Dreadling just looks so blocky and drab now. Plus, I really gotta give Casio major props for their cursor control, which I wish Handspring or some other Palm knockoff would steal -- I'm surprised that HP didn't catch on to their usefulness and steal 'em for their new devices. Now if only the MAME-CE guy would hurry up and come out with version 0.3 already! >:-(
Yeah, but when the Linux fad, like bell-bottoms before it, dies down, you can still format your hard drives and throw Win2K on there, assuming that you're not one of the few non-x86 Linux users. If you got a Mac, though, you're kinda screwed.;)
As anyone in the security biz knows, it's called a computer running RedHat Linux. Someone have files you want, and they're running RedHat? Not a problem.:)
Well, nowadays, they pretty much demand it. Just look at what they've done to the gun and tobacco industry. Once this is over with, they can start firing up the lawsuits over SUVs.
Just as a side note, anyone else played around with the new Windows Media Player 7 beta? I noticed a section in the options which lets the users set their permissions on their music directory, allowing them to give read-only or more access to that directory, for giving other people and applications access to them. Sounds like Microsoft will be coming out with their own take on Napster and multimedia trading, although I'm sure they'll put in some of the rights management hooks, too. It definitely doesn't hurt that the new media player is cool as all get out, either.
I've got to question the defense's legal tactics of presenting no other witnesses or information besides a tape recording loop of Shawn Fanning screaming, "You can't stop the technology!" over and over.
Would that be at all like picking up some guy's book and falling for it hook, line, and sinker, then running to your computer to churn out an article to spread the book's wisdom for all to see?
I mean, maybe it's the most fabulous book ever written, but you couldn't find one little point over which to disagree with him? Do you think you might be contributing to the herd mentality by showering it with praise while challenging none of Mr. Shiller's ideas? Jimmy Jones and L. Ron Hubbard could hardly have asked for any better PR than you gave Mr. Schiller.
Look, if you're going to get frosted over people who (to you) misuse the word "hacker", why on Earth would you turn right around and start misappropriating the word "cracker?" Cracker, as it relates to computers, never had the meaning that the annoyed hackers are trying to foist on it.
It's a little past time to realize that words change over time, and that the war on this word is lost, so I definitely don't have much energy for this sqabble. But please, if you're going to carry on with it, at least show a little consistency.
Because I'm not really into wasting time (Slashdot posting excluded;) ). Actually, although the Palm's a great PIM, if you're interested in going outside the box, like with the stuff mentioned in this article, you're much better served going with a real PDA computer, like a PocketPC or EPOC device, or at the very least one of the PalmOS-based Handsprings.
And as for the the dozen commands, it's called exaggeration, nothing to get worked up about. The fact is that it's a pain in the ass to get the Palm going under Linux than compared to the same under Windows. And yes, I've done both. Anyone saying otherwise must not've read the article, which is pretty accurate.
When I read your article about Metallica and Napster yesterday, the message that came through loud and clear was, "We have got to stop Metallica's evil ways for the children!" It seemed more than a little hypocritical, and just more evidence of how so few people manage to resist dragging out irrelevant, emotional arguments to bolster their cases when they've got a weak one. Sure, I expect the mainstream media to shout "for the children!" at the top of their lungs as often as they can, but I've gotta admit that I never expected it from you, Jon.
Slashdot Mirror
Jesus, man, just point him to a dictionary site like dictionary.msn.com/find/entry .asp?search=virus where he can see the proper plural form within three seconds, rather than wallowing through that mental masturbatory dreck that Mr. Christiansen wrote. I hope he's not reading this, 'cause I'm not looking to offend him, but after skimming that page, I can see why people don't exactly consider Mr. Christiansen to be "well-liked."
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Yes. The word you're looking for is "anal."
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
I'd tell you, but I have a personal policy against helping lazy luddites who think they're taking some kind of principled stand because they don't visit sites that use <img> tags. At least read the damn FAQ linked to on their home page.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Dude, she ain't smart or beautiful
Sure thing, man. I guess Playboy doesn't know anything about finding hotties to put in their magazine. But hey, I guess you know beauty better than they do, right? Mind if I ask about your qualifications are for thinking you could do a better job picking out women that millions of guys would pay to see? Her old pics were very cute, but they definitely wouldn't be selling any magazines or web hits.
'Sides, you're not fooling anyone -- we all know that when it comes to nerds like you, your atrophied little pud would be spraying in your shorts so fast if she ever came on to you.
Next Katz article: Blonds with implants are dummies -- good stereotype. Outcasts in black trenchcoats are a ticking time bomb -- evil stereotype.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
There's always been a big link between nerds and enormous breasts. Haven't you ever seen Eric S. Raymond before? :)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
The domain wasn't available. When he paid the fee, he didn't own the domain in any way whatsoever. Therefore, he didn't give it back. Your comment that he "considered it not to be fair to keep the domain" is completely bogus, since he never had it to begin with.
So, he most certainly could not have "struggled to keep it or sell it to someone else," since he'd have to own it first, nor could he have "settled for a good amount of cash," since Microsoft didn't owe him a single penny.
You make the point of the guy you responded to. You're giving him credit for playing fair simply because he wasn't unfair to them. Just like the guy said, just because it wasn't "unethical" doesn't make it "ethical." His only two options in this situation were (1) pay the bill, or (2) not pay the bill. There was nothing to be fair or unfair about.
And seeing how much publicity he's gotten from his 35 bucks, I'd say it's a Hell of an investment, but no more ethical (or unethical) than playing the stock market.
Hey, don't worry about actually reading the story or anything. Ya know, the part where it says, "Neither firm will pay any termination fees." :P
And actually the $29 million part was only if the Inprise board nixed the deal. If the Inprise shareholders voted the deal down (as has seemed very likely for the last few months -- there's been a pretty strong movement against the merger by a faction of Inprise shareholders), then there'd be no $29 million penalty. I think Corel realized that they wouldn't get the shareholder votes and decided to just end the whole mess before the humiliation of a vote.
I don't blame Borland folks for not wanting to be consumed by the likes of Corel and Cowpland, but I think the breakdown of this deal hurts both companies. Corel's screwed, but Inprise isn't in great shape, either.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Whenever the whole "Can you be profitable when you're in the free software business?" debate comes up, I've yet to see the "Yes" side fail to bring up Cygnus. The only problem is, it also seems to be the only company that they ever mention. Is Cygnus really the only profitable Free Software-related company out there? (Not dissing Cygnus, I've always been a big fan.)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Hey zico, you know that the VA/Andover merger isn't final until the SEC approves it right? After that you are free to spin conspiracies
Awww c'mon, Chris, you know I'm gonna hafta call you on that one. Since when did actual lack of company ownership ever keep a loyal Slashdotter from spinning conspiracy theories between Microsoft and just about any other company out there? You gotta gimme something better to work with to quell this particular conspiracy yarn. ;-)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
I did? Where? Seriously, can you read? I said nothing about needing my permission to include my post. I wondered aloud if, because I didn't receive an email asking for it, if that meant that my post wasn't included. In turn, leading to the second question, "Is it because I didn't join the pity party?"
Exactly which part of "And no, I don't mean by me necessarily [...]" do you not understand? It's all about letting dissenters be heard, whether I'm the dissenter in particular or not. If Katz wants to portray all these "outcast" kids (for lack of a better term) as innocent victims, then he's being dishonest. If he's going to portray to the world outside of Slashdot, by removing dissenting posts, that everyone here also feels that way, then he ought to be ashamed. And no, I'm not accusing him of doing it beforehand -- I expect him to have greater integrity than that -- I'd just like it cleared up, which was the reason for my original post, which didn't attack anyone.
Oh yeah, and I can remember posting some positive comments from time to time on Slashdot. Most of it was of the tough love genre, like pointing out subtle screwups which have lowered people's enjoyment of the site over the years, or how to make your point at this site or elsewhere without making Slashdotters look like a bunch of uninformed and rabid cretins to people on the outside looking in.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
I ask, because I never received an email asking if publishing my post would be okay. I realize that you haven't contacted everyone, and I hope that's the case in my situation, rather than because my post wasn't set for publication.
I'm just a bit concerned, and I think with good reason, that the whole project is going to be a one-sided pity party along the lines of "those kind of guys picked on me when I was in school, so I don't blame Dylan and (whoever) for murdering 20+ people." I really hope that you aren't leaving out posts from those of us out in the real world familiar with both sides of the coin. For instance, NPR contacted me to add a counterpoint to the common sentiment around here. I hope Katz/Slashdot are planning to do the same thing instead of only giving one side of the story. And no, I don't mean by me necessarily, but by anyone who disagrees with the Slashdot mainstream on this subject.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Could be any number of reasons, such as:
Oh well, those are the reasons that come to mind at first blush. There might be others, but either way, don't count on it ever being reported here, despite the fact that it is a big story to readers here. (Anyone want to try to argue that it's not a huge story to the people who actually visit this site? I'd love to hear it.) Of course, Slashdot will probably say that they're in the business of reporting news, not reporting about Slashdot itself -- shortly before they publish their 8th story about Microsoft lawyers sending letters to Slashdot.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Uh-huh. Maybe it was due to global warming, or perhaps the planets were aligned in a bad way. Now why do I get the sneaking suspicion that if crime had instead gone down, the knee-jerks who took away you guns would be patting themselves on the back over it? Regardless, your statement shows your lack of understanding of the issue. Even if few people owned guns, John Q. Criminal was aware that he might get a bullet in the face the next time he tried to rob somebody. Now that your government has disarmed its law-abiding citizens, the criminals no longer have to worry about it, and they're loving it.
Hello, if someone robs me, I don't give a shit whether it was with a gun or an ice pick. But hey, I'm sure those extra 20% that are now getting robbed are just tickled pink. I can only guess how they must feel so warm and fuzzy inside as they're handing all their money over to a thug.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
MAME already runs on the Windows CE devices -- it hasn't crashed on me, but the current 0.2 version still needs a lot of work cleaning up the performance and range of supported games. Legalities aside, it seems like someone could use embedded CE that works with the DreamCast to create a loader for MAME along with a ton of ROM files on a CD-ROM. I'm not sure if things are directly portable between the PDA version of CE and the embedded version that works with the DreamCast, but the source is out there, and, well, it would be cool as Hell to be able to run those games on the home entertainment system instead of just the ol' computer. (I don't own a DreamCast, but if anyone did it, it'd definitely make me think hard about getting one.)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
It's the political correct thing to say when what you really mean is "I want that information to be free." And I agree with you -- it gets a 10 out of 10 on my banality scale.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Agreed, well at least from checking out the screenshots, anyway (I'm away from home and don't have my Palm with me to actually try it out). I think I'm too spoiled after the sweet sound and graphics of DoomCE (Splashscreen and aniGIF of different screens) -- Dreadling just looks so blocky and drab now. Plus, I really gotta give Casio major props for their cursor control, which I wish Handspring or some other Palm knockoff would steal -- I'm surprised that HP didn't catch on to their usefulness and steal 'em for their new devices. Now if only the MAME-CE guy would hurry up and come out with version 0.3 already! >:-(
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Inquiring minds want to know. It was in Perl, wasn't it? :)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Yeah, but when the Linux fad, like bell-bottoms before it, dies down, you can still format your hard drives and throw Win2K on there, assuming that you're not one of the few non-x86 Linux users. If you got a Mac, though, you're kinda screwed. ;)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
As anyone in the security biz knows, it's called a computer running RedHat Linux. Someone have files you want, and they're running RedHat? Not a problem. :)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Well, nowadays, they pretty much demand it. Just look at what they've done to the gun and tobacco industry. Once this is over with, they can start firing up the lawsuits over SUVs.
Just as a side note, anyone else played around with the new Windows Media Player 7 beta? I noticed a section in the options which lets the users set their permissions on their music directory, allowing them to give read-only or more access to that directory, for giving other people and applications access to them. Sounds like Microsoft will be coming out with their own take on Napster and multimedia trading, although I'm sure they'll put in some of the rights management hooks, too. It definitely doesn't hurt that the new media player is cool as all get out, either.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
I've got to question the defense's legal tactics of presenting no other witnesses or information besides a tape recording loop of Shawn Fanning screaming, "You can't stop the technology!" over and over.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Would that be at all like picking up some guy's book and falling for it hook, line, and sinker, then running to your computer to churn out an article to spread the book's wisdom for all to see?
I mean, maybe it's the most fabulous book ever written, but you couldn't find one little point over which to disagree with him? Do you think you might be contributing to the herd mentality by showering it with praise while challenging none of Mr. Shiller's ideas? Jimmy Jones and L. Ron Hubbard could hardly have asked for any better PR than you gave Mr. Schiller.
Irrational exuberance, indeed.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Look, if you're going to get frosted over people who (to you) misuse the word "hacker", why on Earth would you turn right around and start misappropriating the word "cracker?" Cracker, as it relates to computers, never had the meaning that the annoyed hackers are trying to foist on it.
It's a little past time to realize that words change over time, and that the war on this word is lost, so I definitely don't have much energy for this sqabble. But please, if you're going to carry on with it, at least show a little consistency.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Because I'm not really into wasting time (Slashdot posting excluded ;) ). Actually, although the Palm's a great PIM, if you're interested in going outside the box, like with the stuff mentioned in this article, you're much better served going with a real PDA computer, like a PocketPC or EPOC device, or at the very least one of the PalmOS-based Handsprings.
And as for the the dozen commands, it's called exaggeration, nothing to get worked up about. The fact is that it's a pain in the ass to get the Palm going under Linux than compared to the same under Windows. And yes, I've done both. Anyone saying otherwise must not've read the article, which is pretty accurate.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
When I read your article about Metallica and Napster yesterday, the message that came through loud and clear was, "We have got to stop Metallica's evil ways for the children!" It seemed more than a little hypocritical, and just more evidence of how so few people manage to resist dragging out irrelevant, emotional arguments to bolster their cases when they've got a weak one. Sure, I expect the mainstream media to shout "for the children!" at the top of their lungs as often as they can, but I've gotta admit that I never expected it from you, Jon.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com