One thing I've noticed about/. postings is that the headline text usually reflects the/. bias, rather than the actual facts of the article. It's sometimes quite startling to compare the reality of the article with the headline text. I mean different planet startling.
They had a leak. they investigated the leak. They presented findings to the board. One board member objected to the investigation and presentation process and resigned. They didn't disclose the full details of the resignation to the SEC.
It's not like they poisoned Bhopal, killed a bunch of pets, or murdered everyone in Hama.
Ohhhhhhh. I get it. Big company. Definitely deserving of all the flea bites the/. fanboy readership can inflict.
I've been in this room for eight years now, Clarice. I know they will never, ever let me out while I'm alive. What I want is a view. I want a window where I can see a tree, or even water. I want to be in a federal institution, far away from Dr. Chilton.
Was the WiFi there to encourage people to come in to the cafe, or was it for private use?
If it was for private use, shouldn't it be the owner pressing charges? I mean, that's the person nominally injured. And it's not like this was, say, a murder.
I think you've pretty much identified why Linux is where it is, and will remain that way.
Most people see computers as appliances. They don't want to see the guts of the machine, they just want to see a browser, and software that will allow them to interoperate with other users.
I can't tell you how many times I've see a question like "What's the best linux for a newbie?" or "Will linux run on my laptop?" answered by a fair amount of mockery, and the advice to "Try it, and see what happens."
Kid insults teacher, teacher whacks kid. End of discussion. You know. Like in the non-medication solution to ADD on South Park.
Dr. Shay: (on video) Hello, I'm Dr. Richard Shay, here to tell you about my exciting new drug-free treatment for children with Attention Deficit Disorder. (Several hyper and rambling children) This treatment is fast and effective and it doesn't use harmful drugs. Watch closely as I apply treatment to the first child. (SMACK) SIT DOWN AND STUDY! If you would like more information on my bold new treatments, please send away for this free brochure entitled: 'You can either calm down, or I can pop you in the mouth again.'
Food prices rose 10 per cent in 2006, "driven mainly by surging prices of corn, wheat and soybean oil in the second part of the year," the International Monetary Fund said in a report.
"Looking ahead, rising demand for biofuels will likely cause the prices of corn and soybean oil to rise further," the authors wrote in the report released last month.
Food prices rose in 2006, for basic reasons left unspecified. The prices may continue to rise, for a reason that is pure speculation.
"lawmakers are concerned that millions of dollars will have gone to waste that could have been better spent on roads or crime-fighting."
No, not that millions of dollars will have gone to waste. That "lawmakers are concerned" bit. It gets me every time.
I mean, they took the money from someone, to give to someone else. They're not feeling the pain, and they're not really feeling the benefit. Build the matrix:
Well, ok. Here's the deal, however: once you start multiplying causes, well, you're on your way to some sort of paranoid hell, aren't you?
I mean, the article cites pressure on other displays from veterans, and...nobody in particular. Later on, there's mention of not wanting to offend unnamed Congress people. *After* a mention that nobody from the White House attempted to influence the display.
Given the content of the article the summary was, on its face, misleading.
And what am I supposed to do? Assume "Skull and Bones", or somesuch every time anyone says the White House claims not to be involved?
Anyway, thanks for the thoguhtful response, and apologies for the initial flamethrowing response.
"The changes, including removal of scientist conclusions and muddying of displayed data, were made to ensure that the exhibit would not offend the Congress or the White House."
The article's example about Hiroshma mentions veterans, while the bit on ANWR mentions...nobody in particular.
In particular there was no mention of preempting anything.
I apologize if I took you wrong. On the internet, it's nard to tell who's a nutroot. I refer you, for an example, to the post some places down from here, from a foaming-at-the-mouth type with less than 1% of my wit and charm.
I'll grant you that the US public is largely scientifically illiterate. All the more reason then to be careful not just about graphs and tables of numbers, but also about out-of-context pictures of polar bears on tiny ice floes.
It's easy to stampeded an uninformed mob. For myself, I see too much faith and too little science in the current "debate," (I mean, Jeeeezus! do you ever listen to the BBC World Service? Oy!) so I'm inclined to be hightly skeptical.
On this particulat/. entry, my bullshit meter pegged when the summary claimed pressure on the "Global Warming" exhibit from the Congress and Whitehouse, with no support for that statement in the actual article.
That said, there is a difference between, say, a graph of average temperatures or average high and low tides, and sn out-of-context picture of a slowly-dessicating harp seal pup, with those huuuuuuuuuuuuge soulful eyes, or an equally sn out-of-context picture of a polar bear floating on a tiny ice floe, either of them looking directly at the camerman as if to say "Why have you done this to me?"
That was a worthy effort, though you did miss out on some bits. Let me prompt you: "Halliburtion," "Cheney," "Rove," "WMDs," and "blood for oil." Oh, and "Ashcroft." Oh, and "John Bolton," "chemtrails," "WTC 7", "fire can't melt steel," and "the Jooooooooooooooos were told to stay home."
Phew! It must be pretty tiring in there. I mean, so much to track.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the note.
/. postings is that the headline text usually reflects the /. bias, rather than the actual facts of the article. It's sometimes quite startling to compare the reality of the article with the headline text. I mean different planet startling.
One thing I've noticed about
They had a leak. they investigated the leak. They presented findings to the board. One board member objected to the investigation and presentation process and resigned. They didn't disclose the full details of the resignation to the SEC.
/. fanboy readership can inflict.
It's not like they poisoned Bhopal, killed a bunch of pets, or murdered everyone in Hama.
Ohhhhhhh. I get it. Big company. Definitely deserving of all the flea bites the
Thank you for playing. Next!
Tax your ass? YAY!!!!!!
The Iranians want nukes so they can take out Israel in its entirety. Then the muslim world will have its first...first.
Oh, the pride.
...Atlanta police decided the most important thing on their plate was to confiscate every dildo in the city.
Laughed out of that, they started up on killing old women during no-knock drug raids.
Was the WiFi there to encourage people to come in to the cafe, or was it for private use?
If it was for private use, shouldn't it be the owner pressing charges? I mean, that's the person nominally injured. And it's not like this was, say, a murder.
Still, lesson learned.
The next time a newbie asks what's the best Linux, there's the answer.
subject line says it all...
I think you've pretty much identified why Linux is where it is, and will remain that way.
Most people see computers as appliances. They don't want to see the guts of the machine, they just want to see a browser, and software that will allow them to interoperate with other users.
For such people, MS Windows is the safe choice.
Sometimes the purpose of your life is just to be a counter-example to others.
I can't tell you how many times I've see a question like "What's the best linux for a newbie?" or "Will linux run on my laptop?" answered by a fair amount of mockery, and the advice to "Try it, and see what happens."
This is not reassuring to the average user.
But yeah, it's all about biofuels.
I think I got the original line from The Simpsons. Your picture fits more with The Family Guy. But I like it.
"lawmakers are concerned that millions of dollars will have gone to waste that could have been better spent on roads or crime-fighting."
No, not that millions of dollars will have gone to waste. That "lawmakers are concerned" bit. It gets me every time.
I mean, they took the money from someone, to give to someone else. They're not feeling the pain, and they're not really feeling the benefit. Build the matrix:
Take from me Take from someone else
Give to me Meh! Yay!
Give to someone else Hey! Meh!
Concerned. My ass.
All POTC has is a buch of special effects!
Well, ok. Here's the deal, however: once you start multiplying causes, well, you're on your way to some sort of paranoid hell, aren't you?
I mean, the article cites pressure on other displays from veterans, and...nobody in particular. Later on, there's mention of not wanting to offend unnamed Congress people. *After* a mention that nobody from the White House attempted to influence the display.
Given the content of the article the summary was, on its face, misleading.
And what am I supposed to do? Assume "Skull and Bones", or somesuch every time anyone says the White House claims not to be involved?
Anyway, thanks for the thoguhtful response, and apologies for the initial flamethrowing response.
The summary said:
"The changes, including removal of scientist conclusions and muddying of displayed data, were made to ensure that the exhibit would not offend the Congress or the White House."
The article's example about Hiroshma mentions veterans, while the bit on ANWR mentions...nobody in particular.
In particular there was no mention of preempting anything.
I apologize if I took you wrong. On the internet, it's nard to tell who's a nutroot. I refer you, for an example, to the post some places down from here, from a foaming-at-the-mouth type with less than 1% of my wit and charm.
There really ought to be a new version of Godwin's law, as regards the current administration and the nutroots crowd.
Thing is, it works both ways.
/. entry, my bullshit meter pegged when the summary claimed pressure on the "Global Warming" exhibit from the Congress and Whitehouse, with no support for that statement in the actual article.
I'll grant you that the US public is largely scientifically illiterate. All the more reason then to be careful not just about graphs and tables of numbers, but also about out-of-context pictures of polar bears on tiny ice floes.
It's easy to stampeded an uninformed mob. For myself, I see too much faith and too little science in the current "debate," (I mean, Jeeeezus! do you ever listen to the BBC World Service? Oy!) so I'm inclined to be hightly skeptical.
On this particulat
That said, there is a difference between, say, a graph of average temperatures or average high and low tides, and sn out-of-context picture of a slowly-dessicating harp seal pup, with those huuuuuuuuuuuuge soulful eyes, or an equally sn out-of-context picture of a polar bear floating on a tiny ice floe, either of them looking directly at the camerman as if to say "Why have you done this to me?"
That was a worthy effort, though you did miss out on some bits. Let me prompt you: "Halliburtion," "Cheney," "Rove," "WMDs," and "blood for oil." Oh, and "Ashcroft." Oh, and "John Bolton," "chemtrails," "WTC 7", "fire can't melt steel," and "the Jooooooooooooooos were told to stay home."
Phew! It must be pretty tiring in there. I mean, so much to track.
Amiri Baraka is proud of you.