That's his opinion. I disagree. I find the fact that the Slashdot editors can't be bothered to read their own site far, far more lame than people who demand better service than that.
We're not getting it for free. We perform a service to them by looking at their ads, and they compensate us with their content.
What makes Slashdot valuable? Why was Rob able to sell his site for big big bucks? Where was the value? In some Perl code? No. In his editing skills? Hell no. Journalism? Nope. It's our brains and eyeballs. Us. The community. We made them rich by hanging out on their website. They owe us.
Look at/. and k5. k5 is much better run. I wish the/. community would, all at once and together, move over to k5. But i personally don't read k5. Why? Because i don't have time to read both/. and k5, and i'm forced to choose/., despite the fact that it sucks, because they have the community mindshare.
How about you stop putting all kinds of stupid links in the writeup, so we can find the actual story without having to go to dragonslair.com and a geometry page first?
Equally annoying is when you say, "An article on CNN says...
We know how to get to cnn.com without a link to the main page. Just link to actual story, that's what we're interested in. That way we can immediately see where we're supposed to click.
Re:Why can't anyone see the implications of this?
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Sorry, not all of us are familiar with the OSI Licensing scene -- what are the three rejected licenses? It's kinda hard to get into the story when it assumes you already know what it's talking about.
Anyone care to enumerate the other three licenses?
Please post your "This sucks.. hey, that's just my opinion! Ha! Get it? I'm on a message board, and i'm posting an opinion! Bet nobody else thought of making a joke like that!" messages as replies to this one, so the rest of us can ignore them more easily.
I recall hearing something once about the homebrew computer club @ Cal back in the 70's doing something like this using an Altair and a radio to play The Beatles' classic, "Fool on the Hill".
And if they did it today, they'd get sued by the RIAA.:)
Technology like Microsoft's Secure Audio Path (and the video equivalent) keep the data encrypted from the point of download or purchase all the way through to the speakers or monitor. You cannot write your own driver -- hardware and software overlays are out of the question. And i've been programming long enough to know that a high-level hack based on watching the application window and somehow determining what point in the movie you're on would have horrid sync issues and be terribly flaky.
If you want to make this happen, you need to write an enhancement to a media player. The only ones that i know of which you can do this with are open-source, which means they can't legally license the DVD decryption algorithms. So they have to reverse-engineer the DVD decryption code, which is illegal under the DMCA.
That's ridiculous. First, as others have pointed out, they are using the WTO's trademarked logo. Second, it's not clearly satire. Look at the site -- it looks just like the real thing.
If i post a bunch of messages, claiming to be you, and then say, "Well, it's satire -- people should have been able to understand that the real Alan Cox wouldn't have said such crazy stuff," that's no defense, and it's fraud.
If the site was obviously a parody, i'd support them. But it's not, and i don't.
Be sure to play Spider and Web by Andrew Plotkin. There's just about nothing i can say which wouldn't be a spoiler, but the game makes the best use of the IF medium that i've ever seen. It is a kind of genius that simply could not be expressed in a book or movie or anything else.
The real problem is that most of the root servers are still maintained by the ad-hoc volunteer network of the 1980s Internet. As a result many of the 'root servers' are hosted on drinking straws rather than pipes.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like to hack into Slashdot, and add a bit of code so that when Timothy attempts to post a dupe story, it says:
Slow down, cowboy!
You already posted this story 1004235436 seconds ago! No need to post it again!
That's his opinion. I disagree. I find the fact that the Slashdot editors can't be bothered to read their own site far, far more lame than people who demand better service than that.
We're not getting it for free. We perform a service to them by looking at their ads, and they compensate us with their content.
What makes Slashdot valuable? Why was Rob able to sell his site for big big bucks? Where was the value? In some Perl code? No. In his editing skills? Hell no. Journalism? Nope. It's our brains and eyeballs. Us. The community. We made them rich by hanging out on their website. They owe us.
It's too late -- it's a chicken-and-egg problem.
/. and k5. k5 is much better run. I wish the /. community would, all at once and together, move over to k5. But i personally don't read k5. Why? Because i don't have time to read both /. and k5, and i'm forced to choose /., despite the fact that it sucks, because they have the community mindshare.
Look at
Classic network effects - competitors can't reach critical mass.
How about you stop putting all kinds of stupid links in the writeup, so we can find the actual story without having to go to dragonslair.com and a geometry page first?
...
Equally annoying is when you say, "An article on CNN says
We know how to get to cnn.com without a link to the main page. Just link to actual story, that's what we're interested in. That way we can immediately see where we're supposed to click.
Does IT run Linux?
;)
Sorry, not all of us are familiar with the OSI Licensing scene -- what are the three rejected licenses? It's kinda hard to get into the story when it assumes you already know what it's talking about.
Anyone care to enumerate the other three licenses?
And still we have hands-free device laws in exactly zero states.
Not true.
Please post your "This sucks.. hey, that's just my opinion! Ha! Get it? I'm on a message board, and i'm posting an opinion! Bet nobody else thought of making a joke like that!" messages as replies to this one, so the rest of us can ignore them more easily.
Can someone give a explanation of "cloaking" that's not dumbed down to the point of uselessness?
We want IBM reliability, IBM support, and IBM accountability.
And you can get it, with IBM eServers running Linux.
I recall hearing something once about the homebrew computer club @ Cal back in the 70's doing something like this using an Altair and a radio to play The Beatles' classic, "Fool on the Hill".
:)
And if they did it today, they'd get sued by the RIAA.
The backstroke?
Then the user clicks Pause and everything breaks.
Are you trolling?
Technology like Microsoft's Secure Audio Path (and the video equivalent) keep the data encrypted from the point of download or purchase all the way through to the speakers or monitor. You cannot write your own driver -- hardware and software overlays are out of the question. And i've been programming long enough to know that a high-level hack based on watching the application window and somehow determining what point in the movie you're on would have horrid sync issues and be terribly flaky.
If you want to make this happen, you need to write an enhancement to a media player. The only ones that i know of which you can do this with are open-source, which means they can't legally license the DVD decryption algorithms. So they have to reverse-engineer the DVD decryption code, which is illegal under the DMCA.
That's a great idea -- and yet another shining example of great innovation that the DMCA outlaws.
If you really want to push this idea, post it to the mailing lists of the most popular Free media players.
That's ridiculous. Total overkill, a Rube-Goldberg-like contraption that's completely unnecessary.
Wheeled batteries will work just fine.
But a reasonable person could glance through the gatt.org site and not realize what was going on.
That's ridiculous. First, as others have pointed out, they are using the WTO's trademarked logo. Second, it's not clearly satire. Look at the site -- it looks just like the real thing.
If i post a bunch of messages, claiming to be you, and then say, "Well, it's satire -- people should have been able to understand that the real Alan Cox wouldn't have said such crazy stuff," that's no defense, and it's fraud.
If the site was obviously a parody, i'd support them. But it's not, and i don't.
When you're done, check out Adam Cadre's Lost Anaheim Hills. It's good for a chuckle.
Be sure to play Spider and Web by Andrew Plotkin. There's just about nothing i can say which wouldn't be a spoiler, but the game makes the best use of the IF medium that i've ever seen. It is a kind of genius that simply could not be expressed in a book or movie or anything else.
Dude, that doesn't make any sense. You need the estate's approval to do any of this.
(He's dead so he can't sue)
Are you a troll? His family can certainly sue.
The real problem is that most of the root servers are still maintained by the ad-hoc volunteer network of the 1980s Internet. As a result many of the 'root servers' are hosted on drinking straws rather than pipes.
Bullshit. See RFC 2870.
DNS does not provide authentication. [...] ICANN should be [...] telling the IETF the characteristics of the security protocol it really needs.
They are. It's called DNSSEC, and there's tremendous work and buzz going on about it throughout the IETF.
THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE UNLESS I INVITE THEM IN
Someone didn't read their EULA.