It was David. If your point is that not everyone in the Bible is perfect, and they eventually face consequences for their actions (like David does in that story), then I guess you're right.
You're missing an important point, though: Linux is free. The choice isn't between buying Microsoft's OS and buying IBM's OS, it's between buying an OS and not buying an OS. The only reason I have Windows on my hard drive is to play games; if there were a reliable way to do without it, I'd never buy (or pirate;) Windows again. OS/2 had to be substantially better to get people to buy it instead, whereas Linux just has to be interesting enough to spend a couple hours getting it installed and getting used to it.
Unfortunately, you missed entire genres in music by your classification of bands as either RIAA-associated or unsigned. There are hundreds of bands making music on independant labels making music a hundred times more vital and creative than the schlock the RIAA labels push on the preteen and middle-aged housewife markets. For the anarchists out there, search Napster for "The Man Don't Give A Fuck" by the Super Furry Animals. Or the post-apocalyptic rock of "Helicon 1" by Mogwai. Or anything by Pavement, Death Cab for Cutie, Sloan, or any number of other bands. Open your eyes. There's much more to music than what your local "alternative" station plays.
I emailed the beeb as soon as I went to story (using the factual error form), but as it's been revealed that this was an AP story, is there a way to email them? Do they have a factual error address to write?
The "homo" in "homosexual" is not Latin homo "man" as in Homo sapiens, it's Greek homo "same" as in "homogeneous," so "homosexual" would be an appropriate term. If the "homo" in "homosexual" meant "man," then wouldn't straight women be homosexual?
Ok, people, this is quite obviously a troll. It's written as if the author had the Troll-HOWTO sitting on his desk while he did it.
First, notice the subject material - the morality of killing animals. Clearly intended to stir up unendable controversy by posing a question that has no agreeable answer. Second, the emotional pleas: "If you cut tuna, do they not bleed?" (As a poster above noted, no they don't, they don't have blood).
And third, and most telling, the way it starts off normal and well-reasoned, then drifts into absolute lunacy at the end (because moderators only read the first couple paragraphs). At the beginning, it's a perfectly reasonable discussion of intelligence and the relative worth of species, at the end, he's trying to suggest using dolphins for undersea exploration. Hello! Wake up, moderators. This is utterly impossible because A) communication will never be at the point where dolphins can give scientific reports and B) dolphins can't handle the pressure 10,000 feet under the surface any more than we can.
With moderating like this, it's no wonder slashdot is becoming a joke.
What's great about this version is that all the English grammar imperfections are translated right into Latin - witness "Scitis quid vos agens." It should be "Scitis quod ages," but just like the English is screwed up (You know what you doing?), so is the Latin. My hat is off to you, Anonymous Classicist! I have moderator points, but now I can't help you out with them because I just posted. Damn.
I'd just like to say that everything on the Atari ST was amazing. It's been so long now, I can't even remember the names of most of the games, but the machine was incredible; about 2-3 years ahead of IBM-compatible machines. Their Finest Hour, Sam & Ed Basketball, those were the games that my young life revolved around. Of course, GFA Basic ruined my programming habits forever...
Look here, you pedantic prick, "its" is not a possessive pronoun, it's a possessive adjective.
Grammar lesson:
My, your, his, her, its: Possessive Adjectives
Mine, yours, his, hers: Possessive Pronouns
Don't fuck with me. I have a National Science Foundation Grant to study historical syntax with regards to possession.
Of course, none of this changes the fact that there should not be apostrophes in the original post.
Re:Next time you have to go to the bathroom at wor
on
Nike: Just Don't Do It
·
· Score: 1
Rumor is at the heart of all the anti-Nike allegations, and it's spread by casual activists who like to appear hip by "protesting," even when they don't understand the issues they're protesting in the least. A story about an infamous sweatshop spread around a group of young urban professional hippies quickly - in the manner of an urban legend - evolves from an isolated horror story to the norm at Nike factories around the world. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!
You're absolutely right about that. Some people on Slashdot get hung up on the black and white of politics and forget that it doesn't always work that way. Just because a politician has views that you disagree with (i.e. Hatch is pro-life, and I'm not) doesn't mean that some shady corporation is paying him to have those views, any more than pro-choice politicians are the helpless pawns of the NOW. When or not you agree with him on everything, Hatch is a very honest man who does not compromise himself. You don't have to agree with a person to respect him.
I think it's tremendously unfair to blame Hatch for the DMCA. At its heart, the intent of the DMCA is good, it's the implementation that's bad. The DMCA was intended to stimulate online dissemination of content, while alleviating the content providers' fear of having it stolen when they did so. Hatch, however, was misled by the RIAA and the MPAA, who carefully crafted the language so as to allow them to maintain their respective oligopolies, and now he's trying to right that wrong. Did Hatch make a mistake? Yes. Is he now trying to correct it? Yes. And, in my opinion, that does make him the good guy.
Re:I have to question the point of this exercise.
on
GeekCorps v2.0
·
· Score: 3
Patronizing? Patronizing?! If there's one word to describe this post, that's it. "How could those poor Africans possibly learn anything about computers? They need to spend 200 years in a dark industrial age first." Right. Every time this subject comes up, people moralize about the need to send food over there before computers, without considering any sort of economic reality, namely, that all the humanitarian aid in the world isn't going to do any sort of long term good without an economic base for them to build on.
Doesn't it strike anybody else that this whole exercise is patronising and absurd? Jesus, save the technical talk and trying to bring them into the 21st century - lets bring them into the 19th century first.
You talk about the excercise being "patronizing," then say that we need to "bring them into the 19th century." Don't those two statements strike you as a little odd? That you accuse people of trying to establish computer literacy and an internet infrastructure in a developing country of being patronizing, then say that said country needs to be brought into the 19th century?
Your offhanded and incoherent slam at Americans - "save it for your Imperial dreams" - comes off as very ironic, considering the problems in these countries stems from 19th century British imperialism. Exploiting these countries for the resources Britain needed in the industrial age is what ruined their economies and political systems - building new mines there isn't going to help anything.
This is exactly why I will never pay to use Napster. Often people assume it's because I'm a jackass freeloader who thinks I have a right to take and copy anything I want, but that's not it at all. The reason is that I don't want MegaUniversalSony making money off of the fantastic artists like Death Cab For Cutie, Super Furry Animals, Arab Strap, and others that I use Napster for. The giant RIAA companies most likely aren't going to help out their own artists with the cash from the deal, much less give money to independent label artists. People need to wise up and realize that most of the best music out there is on smaller independent labels like Flydaddy and Jetset, and Napster isn't giving them a cent. So what do I do? Always buy these artists' cds, go to shows, buy shirts, etc. But screw Napster. Until they sign a deal with the independent labels whose artists I enjoy, I'm going to continue to be a "music pirate."
Good point. XSL is hardly an "expensive" protocol by any definition of the word. First of all, it's an open W3C standard. Second, it has free implementations in various languages from Apache. Third, it's not even hard to learn. I bought a book about XML for $20 and was comfortable with it within a week. I have no idea how this obvious troll got modded up.
Somebody please insert obigatory "First they laugh at you" Gandhi quote here.
Re:Who really cares about market penetration?
on
eWeek on Linux
·
· Score: 2
Those of us who are looking for jobs and use/love Linux care about market penetration. I personally find working with Linux much more fun and rewarding than aimlessly clicking boxes in Microsoft's server software. I personally am a Java developer, and with more market penetration comes more software offerings from the likes of IBM that make it easier for me to do get the job done using Linux and other open source products and not have to rely on Microsoft.
This asp.net thing you're talking about is the one cool thing I see coming of out.net. Does anybody know if there's a Java and/or open source effort anything like this? I know Cocoon uses XSLT to deliver differently-formatted content to different browsers, but it's not the same as the event-driven stuff asp.net does.
...is that they apparently have an actual patent on the:-(. Go to their page, they have a link to the uspto.org patent server, and they have registered it. So much for those who think the patent system isn't broken.
This man is absolutely right. Since the presidential race began, I've seen nothing but irrational "we hate that big scary George Bush" stuff here on Slashdot. All these people who pride themselves on openmindedness ought to get a clue and look at what they're really afraid of. Come back when you know something you didn't "learn" on bushwatch.com
First of all, your logic makes no sense: Bush got elected because Californians are underrepresented, and because they didn't vote for him and aren't going to in the future, he's ignoring them. Fine enough conspiracy theory, until you talk about him allowing the government to buy the Northeast heating oil. Hello! The Northeast didn't vote for Bush, either, with the lone exception of New Hampshire. If he were trying to force energy crises on his political enemies, he would stop subsidizing heating oil as well.
Beyond that, though, the reason Bush and the rest of the country are (relatively) apathetic to the California situation is that they brought it on themselves. Why do Californians think that energy production for them should be done in other states? The not-in-my-backyard attitude Californians have taken to power plants is unlikely to engender pity among neighboring states, who are producing power full-out to sell to them anyway. The fact of the matter is that a power production capacity below necessary levels and a poorly thought out energy "deregulation" have put California in this situation, and maybe it should be California's job to clean it up.
A couple comments on this: first, blaming the Republicans (or any one politician or political group) for this is senseless. The deregulation passed the state legislature unanimously, not by a narrow majority, and not by some sneaky back-room political deal to get a couple opposition legislators to trade their votes to pass it. The fact that it was unanimous is significant: this was a completely bipartisan effort, not led by Naderesque "Republican plutocrat carpetbaggers from Texas oil wells."
I agree with you about energy sources, though. The answer isn't coal, the answer is more power plants, period. California is basically what happens when you play SimCity and you don't build any power plants because you want high-class people to move into your city. Works great for a while, but then the brownouts and blackouts start. Uh oh! The neighboring states and federal government are perfectly right in being less than sympathetic to California's plight. How sympathetic would you be if New York whined about piled-up trash but refused to build any landfills? Not very. The fact that the yuppies prefer non-power-plant-obstructed skies doesn't mean the rest of us should put generators in our backyards to keep their computers running.
...this administration won't concentrate on technology issues. AND THANK GOD FOR THAT! There are many problems in this country that require more attention than standardizing internet protocols, among them (first and foremost IMHO) education. JonKatz's position that technology education may be more important in the long run than "traditional" education smacks of someone whose entire reading of political coverage during the campaign came from newsforge.com. If he would wake up from his dreamworld in which the Microsoft trial is the most riveting and decisive decision in American history, he would realized that technology issues are largely irrelevant when compared with everything else.
Slashdot Mirror
It was David. If your point is that not everyone in the Bible is perfect, and they eventually face consequences for their actions (like David does in that story), then I guess you're right.
You're missing an important point, though: Linux is free. The choice isn't between buying Microsoft's OS and buying IBM's OS, it's between buying an OS and not buying an OS. The only reason I have Windows on my hard drive is to play games; if there were a reliable way to do without it, I'd never buy (or pirate ;) Windows again. OS/2 had to be substantially better to get people to buy it instead, whereas Linux just has to be interesting enough to spend a couple hours getting it installed and getting used to it.
Unfortunately, you missed entire genres in music by your classification of bands as either RIAA-associated or unsigned. There are hundreds of bands making music on independant labels making music a hundred times more vital and creative than the schlock the RIAA labels push on the preteen and middle-aged housewife markets. For the anarchists out there, search Napster for "The Man Don't Give A Fuck" by the Super Furry Animals. Or the post-apocalyptic rock of "Helicon 1" by Mogwai. Or anything by Pavement, Death Cab for Cutie, Sloan, or any number of other bands. Open your eyes. There's much more to music than what your local "alternative" station plays.
I emailed the beeb as soon as I went to story (using the factual error form), but as it's been revealed that this was an AP story, is there a way to email them? Do they have a factual error address to write?
The "homo" in "homosexual" is not Latin homo "man" as in Homo sapiens, it's Greek homo "same" as in "homogeneous," so "homosexual" would be an appropriate term. If the "homo" in "homosexual" meant "man," then wouldn't straight women be homosexual?
Pedantics aside, good point.
Ok, people, this is quite obviously a troll. It's written as if the author had the Troll-HOWTO sitting on his desk while he did it.
First, notice the subject material - the morality of killing animals. Clearly intended to stir up unendable controversy by posing a question that has no agreeable answer. Second, the emotional pleas: "If you cut tuna, do they not bleed?" (As a poster above noted, no they don't, they don't have blood).
And third, and most telling, the way it starts off normal and well-reasoned, then drifts into absolute lunacy at the end (because moderators only read the first couple paragraphs). At the beginning, it's a perfectly reasonable discussion of intelligence and the relative worth of species, at the end, he's trying to suggest using dolphins for undersea exploration. Hello! Wake up, moderators. This is utterly impossible because A) communication will never be at the point where dolphins can give scientific reports and B) dolphins can't handle the pressure 10,000 feet under the surface any more than we can.
With moderating like this, it's no wonder slashdot is becoming a joke.
What's great about this version is that all the English grammar imperfections are translated right into Latin - witness "Scitis quid vos agens." It should be "Scitis quod ages," but just like the English is screwed up (You know what you doing?), so is the Latin. My hat is off to you, Anonymous Classicist! I have moderator points, but now I can't help you out with them because I just posted. Damn.
I'd just like to say that everything on the Atari ST was amazing. It's been so long now, I can't even remember the names of most of the games, but the machine was incredible; about 2-3 years ahead of IBM-compatible machines. Their Finest Hour, Sam & Ed Basketball, those were the games that my young life revolved around. Of course, GFA Basic ruined my programming habits forever...
Look here, you pedantic prick, "its" is not a possessive pronoun, it's a possessive adjective.
Grammar lesson:
My, your, his, her, its: Possessive Adjectives
Mine, yours, his, hers: Possessive Pronouns
Don't fuck with me. I have a National Science Foundation Grant to study historical syntax with regards to possession.
Of course, none of this changes the fact that there should not be apostrophes in the original post.
Rumor is at the heart of all the anti-Nike allegations, and it's spread by casual activists who like to appear hip by "protesting," even when they don't understand the issues they're protesting in the least. A story about an infamous sweatshop spread around a group of young urban professional hippies quickly - in the manner of an urban legend - evolves from an isolated horror story to the norm at Nike factories around the world. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!
You're absolutely right about that. Some people on Slashdot get hung up on the black and white of politics and forget that it doesn't always work that way. Just because a politician has views that you disagree with (i.e. Hatch is pro-life, and I'm not) doesn't mean that some shady corporation is paying him to have those views, any more than pro-choice politicians are the helpless pawns of the NOW. When or not you agree with him on everything, Hatch is a very honest man who does not compromise himself. You don't have to agree with a person to respect him.
I think it's tremendously unfair to blame Hatch for the DMCA. At its heart, the intent of the DMCA is good, it's the implementation that's bad. The DMCA was intended to stimulate online dissemination of content, while alleviating the content providers' fear of having it stolen when they did so. Hatch, however, was misled by the RIAA and the MPAA, who carefully crafted the language so as to allow them to maintain their respective oligopolies, and now he's trying to right that wrong. Did Hatch make a mistake? Yes. Is he now trying to correct it? Yes. And, in my opinion, that does make him the good guy.
Patronizing? Patronizing?! If there's one word to describe this post, that's it. "How could those poor Africans possibly learn anything about computers? They need to spend 200 years in a dark industrial age first." Right. Every time this subject comes up, people moralize about the need to send food over there before computers, without considering any sort of economic reality, namely, that all the humanitarian aid in the world isn't going to do any sort of long term good without an economic base for them to build on.
You talk about the excercise being "patronizing," then say that we need to "bring them into the 19th century." Don't those two statements strike you as a little odd? That you accuse people of trying to establish computer literacy and an internet infrastructure in a developing country of being patronizing, then say that said country needs to be brought into the 19th century?
Your offhanded and incoherent slam at Americans - "save it for your Imperial dreams" - comes off as very ironic, considering the problems in these countries stems from 19th century British imperialism. Exploiting these countries for the resources Britain needed in the industrial age is what ruined their economies and political systems - building new mines there isn't going to help anything.
This is exactly why I will never pay to use Napster. Often people assume it's because I'm a jackass freeloader who thinks I have a right to take and copy anything I want, but that's not it at all. The reason is that I don't want MegaUniversalSony making money off of the fantastic artists like Death Cab For Cutie, Super Furry Animals, Arab Strap, and others that I use Napster for. The giant RIAA companies most likely aren't going to help out their own artists with the cash from the deal, much less give money to independent label artists. People need to wise up and realize that most of the best music out there is on smaller independent labels like Flydaddy and Jetset, and Napster isn't giving them a cent. So what do I do? Always buy these artists' cds, go to shows, buy shirts, etc. But screw Napster. Until they sign a deal with the independent labels whose artists I enjoy, I'm going to continue to be a "music pirate."
Good point. XSL is hardly an "expensive" protocol by any definition of the word. First of all, it's an open W3C standard. Second, it has free implementations in various languages from Apache. Third, it's not even hard to learn. I bought a book about XML for $20 and was comfortable with it within a week. I have no idea how this obvious troll got modded up.
Somebody please insert obigatory "First they laugh at you" Gandhi quote here.
Those of us who are looking for jobs and use/love Linux care about market penetration. I personally find working with Linux much more fun and rewarding than aimlessly clicking boxes in Microsoft's server software. I personally am a Java developer, and with more market penetration comes more software offerings from the likes of IBM that make it easier for me to do get the job done using Linux and other open source products and not have to rely on Microsoft.
josh at shenknet dot com
This asp.net thing you're talking about is the one cool thing I see coming of out .net. Does anybody know if there's a Java and/or open source effort anything like this? I know Cocoon uses XSLT to deliver differently-formatted content to different browsers, but it's not the same as the event-driven stuff asp.net does.
You're right. My bad.
...is that they apparently have an actual patent on the :-(. Go to their page, they have a link to the uspto.org patent server, and they have registered it. So much for those who think the patent system isn't broken.
This man is absolutely right. Since the presidential race began, I've seen nothing but irrational "we hate that big scary George Bush" stuff here on Slashdot. All these people who pride themselves on openmindedness ought to get a clue and look at what they're really afraid of. Come back when you know something you didn't "learn" on bushwatch.com
First of all, your logic makes no sense: Bush got elected because Californians are underrepresented, and because they didn't vote for him and aren't going to in the future, he's ignoring them. Fine enough conspiracy theory, until you talk about him allowing the government to buy the Northeast heating oil. Hello! The Northeast didn't vote for Bush, either, with the lone exception of New Hampshire. If he were trying to force energy crises on his political enemies, he would stop subsidizing heating oil as well.
Beyond that, though, the reason Bush and the rest of the country are (relatively) apathetic to the California situation is that they brought it on themselves. Why do Californians think that energy production for them should be done in other states? The not-in-my-backyard attitude Californians have taken to power plants is unlikely to engender pity among neighboring states, who are producing power full-out to sell to them anyway. The fact of the matter is that a power production capacity below necessary levels and a poorly thought out energy "deregulation" have put California in this situation, and maybe it should be California's job to clean it up.
A couple comments on this: first, blaming the Republicans (or any one politician or political group) for this is senseless. The deregulation passed the state legislature unanimously, not by a narrow majority, and not by some sneaky back-room political deal to get a couple opposition legislators to trade their votes to pass it. The fact that it was unanimous is significant: this was a completely bipartisan effort, not led by Naderesque "Republican plutocrat carpetbaggers from Texas oil wells."
I agree with you about energy sources, though. The answer isn't coal, the answer is more power plants, period. California is basically what happens when you play SimCity and you don't build any power plants because you want high-class people to move into your city. Works great for a while, but then the brownouts and blackouts start. Uh oh! The neighboring states and federal government are perfectly right in being less than sympathetic to California's plight. How sympathetic would you be if New York whined about piled-up trash but refused to build any landfills? Not very. The fact that the yuppies prefer non-power-plant-obstructed skies doesn't mean the rest of us should put generators in our backyards to keep their computers running.
Um, yeah. So he didn't actually say that, you just "remembered" what you thought he meant. Way to go, buddy.
...this administration won't concentrate on technology issues. AND THANK GOD FOR THAT! There are many problems in this country that require more attention than standardizing internet protocols, among them (first and foremost IMHO) education. JonKatz's position that technology education may be more important in the long run than "traditional" education smacks of someone whose entire reading of political coverage during the campaign came from newsforge.com. If he would wake up from his dreamworld in which the Microsoft trial is the most riveting and decisive decision in American history, he would realized that technology issues are largely irrelevant when compared with everything else.