I had an inept group of moderators assign some of my posts -1 recently for no apparent reason. I suppose that instead of "modding" intelligent posts up, they'd rather mod people down to exercise their five point ego.;)
But, yeah, they're rampant around here. I'm glad to see that you aren't one of them.:)
One of my primary gripes about the OpenSSH project is that they expect everybody to be operating with the latest Linux distribution. This mentality is reflected in their RPMs, where they are only providing them for RedHat 7.2 users.
Yes, it's easy enough to compile it yourself, but not for a complete Linux newbie...
Here is the method I use to upgrade OpenSSH (using the RedHat directory structure):
Open a terminal connection to your machine. wget ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/OpenSSH/portable/openssh-3.1p1.tar.gz tar xvfz openssh-3.1p1.tar.gz ./configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc/ssh make make install /etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd restart
Pardon my inability to articulate, the endorphines still occupy my bloodstream.:)
Given the parent posting's author's Slashdot history, I find it very unlikely that he is a troll. I respectfully ask anybody browsing with moderation points to assign his post +1, underrated.
CmdrTaco and Hemos had addressed my question previously (whoever maintained the queue asked it twice) with a somewhat negative view of my suggestions. They believed that there would be prodigious overhead in tracking bandwidth used by person. I don't believe so; you can estimate the amount of bandwidth used by multiplying the number of pageviews by the approximate bandwidth used by each one. I stress that this method could prove inaccurate due to the fact that Slashdot's images are variable in size. (There are ways around this, but they require considerable amounts of overhead themselves.)
I agree with your opinion of a "subscribers only" tree; I would suggest a scheme where everybody would be allowed to view it, but only subscribers given write access.
Disney is ingenious. According to this Wired article (I believe another Slashdotter got to this before I did), they're also beginning to manipulate their television programs so that they include anti-piracy messages.
"If we can't stop the current generation from benefitting from fair use, we can certainly instill 'revenue increasing morals' on those generations to come!" It's a bit ironic considering that Disney is notorious for plagiarizing a superior artist's work and releasing it as their own.
I can only imagine the army of influenced five year olds uninstalling their older brother's copy of [Napster|Grokster|Kazaa|Morpheus|WinMX]. "But Rob, Goofy said that it was bad not to purchase a RIAA licensed copy of that CD!" "Garsh," Disney sucks.
Because it's more than fair to pirate a satellite signal. After all, they intrude on my property by broadcasting!
[/sarcasm]
This is the most common argument given by satellite pirates. $50/mo. for over three-hundred channels is not going to break the average consumer, especially those with enough money to be investing in satellite hacking equipment.
Guess where DirecTV receives the funding to launch their satellites? That's right, the consumer who pays for their service. I'm not an advocate of the DMCA or SSSCA. In fact, I am strongly opposed to both, as well as the latest copy protection methods. However, by pirating DirecTV, you're merely depriving a person like yourself of an income.
That's right, freeloader. CEOs aren't the ones laid off due to lack of funding. You aren't benevolent to society; if anything, you're keeping the cost of DirecTV higher. With more subscribers, they can provide you with more content and keep costs lower.
Inevitably, somebody will respond to this comment with "how is this any different with the RIAA?" It is. DirecTV is merely a content provider; they don't generate it (except for channels 100, 200, 201, and the other DirecTV customer information channels) and you certainly get something for your money when you subscribe (instead of the RIAA, where you pay $18 for a CD that costs $1 to manufacture comprised of filler plus one single that you actually like). Also, my DTV receiver doesn't restrict me in any way from recording my favorite TV shows.
In conclusion, as a DirecTV subscriber since 1997, I've experienced nothing but friendly, competent people working at their company. People who are negligably different from yourself; people who certainly aren't deservant of losing their primary source of income because of thousands of penny pinching freeloaders.
Thank you for having the balls to point that out. Had this been a week ago, your post would most likely be at -1, Flamebait.
However, since Slashdot is beginning to charge for access, the community's view on the editors' inability to employ proper grammar/spelling may very well be changing.
Princess Mononoke was released by Disney's mature entertainment division, Miramax. You're correct, its dub was excellent; I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I've been anticipating Disney's entry into anime (using their original name, of course). After all, they're an American Entertainment Conglomerate (tm). And what is the most common philosophy adopted by American Entertainment Conglomerates? If you can't reproduce its quality, buy it out. Disney's formula is obsolete, it's that simple. They must take action to ensure that they maintain their grasp on the market.
When it's released in the States, the film will invariably have been Disneyfied beyond recognition. Maybe they'll even hire Pixar to add a few cute, computer generated creatures to it.:)
And Slashdot, should we or should we not support Disney? After all, they are the primary advocates of The Root of All Evil (tm), the SSSCA. (I loathe the SSSCA, for your information.)
I am certainly not adverse to Slashdot's decision to charge us for access, especially considering it's completely optional. OSDN must be reimbursed for Slashdot's overhead somehow. However, they should begin treating us as customers instead of "the flock."
If we pay for the access, you'd better not restrict M2 simply because we moderated your bait as "interesting." No more $rtbling or "behind the scenes" censorship. We are now customers and expect to be treated as such.
I was worried that Slashdot's new ad formats may have included pop-unders and similarly ridiculous setups. While Slashdot users do indeed provide almost all of the site's content, OSDN does deserve to be reimbursed for the bandwidth costs.
I recently cancelled an AOL account that I used to access the Internet when I was away from home. Apparently, "no thanks" isn't adequate to cancel an AOL account, either.
I began receiving letters via snail mail from AOL. They essentially begged my return, even offering One Month Free (tm). Some of the more humorous gems were:
"We will do anything if you'll return to our service!" "Be a part of America's number one ISP!" "Reclaim your place on America's coolest online service today!" "Upgrade to AOL 7.0, the easiest AOL yet!" "We miss you!"
And now they're beginning to inundate me with AOL CDs. If you're reading this, I miss the maudlin, "I miss you and love you" letters, AOL.
The primary issue is that there are so many variables that must be synced among the hosts. Moderation and metamoderation are two of the most prominent issues. Considering neither of the two hosts in a hypothetical transaction would have authority over each other, it's likely that Slashdot's karma system would be rendered unusable. Also, syncing the servers would probably use quite an amount of bandwidth, negating the purpose of this hypothetical software.
Don't get me wrong; I'm not adverse to the idea. In fact, I'm attempting to create something similar to the concept we're discussing.:) I just believe that you should be made aware of the various issues I've encountered in devising such a system.
As for the Slashcode, I've been told (and observed) that it's rather bulky. While a massive rewrite isn't impossible, it'd most likely be a daunting prospect to undertake.
For those of you who are complaining about Slashdot's newly announced subscription plan, things could be worse. CmdrTaco and company could have attempted to charge you for access to "special articles" written by "Slashdot's in-house journalists."
That's right. Slashdot won't accept your refund when you figure out you've just paid $30 for archives of JonKatz.
Then again, it's not a bad idea; it keeps those who worship JonKatz away from the general Slashdot population while ensuring that the unpaid weblog is devoid of all things JonKatz. After all, his articles are "special," you know.
That'd be great if Slashdot were a simple, static web site. However, Slashdot is a relatively intricate operation driven by a single MySQL database server.
Of course, it's possible to add a "queuing" and "information sharing" feature to this theoretical Akamai-esque setup, but most people are too impatient to wait a day or two for their comments to propagate between Slashdot client-servers. There'd be no instantaneous uniformity without a single host mirroring the content to every client-server.
It's a wonderful concept without an efficient method of execution.:/
I pay you and my ISP exorbitant amounts of money (for licensing and bandwidth, respectively) so that I'm given the privilege of publicizing your artists.
Not to mention, the "license to license" alone costs $500 yearly. The RIAA is manipulating our government so that they can prevent the general population from innovating, broadcasting, or even listening to stations not influenced by them.
An example of these unfair regulations restricting the masses is a project of mine called laconica [sic] (it will soon have a web page further detailing it here; initialized.org's development is behind schedule). Conceptually, it allows the listeners to control the stream by vote, comment on the music, create their own playlists (if the playlist is voted high enough, it begins streaming the next hour), and even upload their own music.
Considering the fact that initialized is not for profit and we'd still pay for bandwidth by the gigabyte *after* the RIAA fees, our own laconica stream will most likely fail to become a reality. (We still plan to continue developing and release the software as open source, though.)
Slashdot Mirror
I had an inept group of moderators assign some of my posts -1 recently for no apparent reason. I suppose that instead of "modding" intelligent posts up, they'd rather mod people down to exercise their five point ego. ;)
:)
But, yeah, they're rampant around here. I'm glad to see that you aren't one of them.
Oops, it appears that in my haste I overlooked a critical step of installation.
:)
After executing the command "tar xvfz openssh-3.1p1.tar.gz", you must then type "cd openssh-3.1p1" (without quotations).
One of my primary gripes about the OpenSSH project is that they expect everybody to be operating with the latest Linux distribution. This mentality is reflected in their RPMs, where they are only providing them for RedHat 7.2 users.
e /openssh-3.1p1.tar.gz
Yes, it's easy enough to compile it yourself, but not for a complete Linux newbie...
Here is the method I use to upgrade OpenSSH (using the RedHat directory structure):
Open a terminal connection to your machine.
wget ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/OpenSSH/portabl
tar xvfz openssh-3.1p1.tar.gz
./configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc/ssh
make
make install
/etc/rc.d/init.d/sshd restart
:)
I'm sure that this book will be most helpful. After all, who better to learn from than the staple of application security?
Those laws are just Mickey Mouse.
... that Slashdot is still considering accepting donations even though they're now technically a commercial entity.
Of course, I can see that some people may want to 'donate' without subscribing, but that's still akin to RedHat requesting donations.
Pardon my inability to articulate, the endorphines still occupy my bloodstream. :)
Given the parent posting's author's Slashdot history, I find it very unlikely that he is a troll. I respectfully ask anybody browsing with moderation points to assign his post +1, underrated.
CmdrTaco and Hemos had addressed my question previously (whoever maintained the queue asked it twice) with a somewhat negative view of my suggestions. They believed that there would be prodigious overhead in tracking bandwidth used by person. I don't believe so; you can estimate the amount of bandwidth used by multiplying the number of pageviews by the approximate bandwidth used by each one. I stress that this method could prove inaccurate due to the fact that Slashdot's images are variable in size. (There are ways around this, but they require considerable amounts of overhead themselves.)
I agree with your opinion of a "subscribers only" tree; I would suggest a scheme where everybody would be allowed to view it, but only subscribers given write access.
Thank you (and Taco/Hemos) for your response(s).
Disney is ingenious. According to this Wired article (I believe another Slashdotter got to this before I did), they're also beginning to manipulate their television programs so that they include anti-piracy messages.
"If we can't stop the current generation from benefitting from fair use, we can certainly instill 'revenue increasing morals' on those generations to come!" It's a bit ironic considering that Disney is notorious for plagiarizing a superior artist's work and releasing it as their own.
I can only imagine the army of influenced five year olds uninstalling their older brother's copy of [Napster|Grokster|Kazaa|Morpheus|WinMX]. "But Rob, Goofy said that it was bad not to purchase a RIAA licensed copy of that CD!" "Garsh," Disney sucks.
[sarcasm]
Because it's more than fair to pirate a satellite signal. After all, they intrude on my property by broadcasting!
[/sarcasm]
This is the most common argument given by satellite pirates. $50/mo. for over three-hundred channels is not going to break the average consumer, especially those with enough money to be investing in satellite hacking equipment.
Guess where DirecTV receives the funding to launch their satellites? That's right, the consumer who pays for their service. I'm not an advocate of the DMCA or SSSCA. In fact, I am strongly opposed to both, as well as the latest copy protection methods. However, by pirating DirecTV, you're merely depriving a person like yourself of an income.
That's right, freeloader. CEOs aren't the ones laid off due to lack of funding. You aren't benevolent to society; if anything, you're keeping the cost of DirecTV higher. With more subscribers, they can provide you with more content and keep costs lower.
Inevitably, somebody will respond to this comment with "how is this any different with the RIAA?" It is. DirecTV is merely a content provider; they don't generate it (except for channels 100, 200, 201, and the other DirecTV customer information channels) and you certainly get something for your money when you subscribe (instead of the RIAA, where you pay $18 for a CD that costs $1 to manufacture comprised of filler plus one single that you actually like). Also, my DTV receiver doesn't restrict me in any way from recording my favorite TV shows.
In conclusion, as a DirecTV subscriber since 1997, I've experienced nothing but friendly, competent people working at their company. People who are negligably different from yourself; people who certainly aren't deservant of losing their primary source of income because of thousands of penny pinching freeloaders.
Thank you for having the balls to point that out. Had this been a week ago, your post would most likely be at -1, Flamebait.
However, since Slashdot is beginning to charge for access, the community's view on the editors' inability to employ proper grammar/spelling may very well be changing.
Princess Mononoke was released by Disney's mature entertainment division, Miramax. You're correct, its dub was excellent; I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I've been anticipating Disney's entry into anime (using their original name, of course). After all, they're an American Entertainment Conglomerate (tm). And what is the most common philosophy adopted by American Entertainment Conglomerates? If you can't reproduce its quality, buy it out. Disney's formula is obsolete, it's that simple. They must take action to ensure that they maintain their grasp on the market.
When it's released in the States, the film will invariably have been Disneyfied beyond recognition. Maybe they'll even hire Pixar to add a few cute, computer generated creatures to it. :)
And Slashdot, should we or should we not support Disney? After all, they are the primary advocates of The Root of All Evil (tm), the SSSCA. (I loathe the SSSCA, for your information.)
I am certainly not adverse to Slashdot's decision to charge us for access, especially considering it's completely optional. OSDN must be reimbursed for Slashdot's overhead somehow. However, they should begin treating us as customers instead of "the flock."
If we pay for the access, you'd better not restrict M2 simply because we moderated your bait as "interesting." No more $rtbling or "behind the scenes" censorship. We are now customers and expect to be treated as such.
Thank you.
... and without CmdrTaco and co.'s time spent programming Slashcode, there would be no Slashdot.
Without OSDN fitting the bill for bandwidth, there'd be no Slashdot.
Very good, Hemos.
I was worried that Slashdot's new ad formats may have included pop-unders and similarly ridiculous setups. While Slashdot users do indeed provide almost all of the site's content, OSDN does deserve to be reimbursed for the bandwidth costs.
I recently cancelled an AOL account that I used to access the Internet when I was away from home. Apparently, "no thanks" isn't adequate to cancel an AOL account, either.
I began receiving letters via snail mail from AOL. They essentially begged my return, even offering One Month Free (tm). Some of the more humorous gems were:
"We will do anything if you'll return to our service!"
"Be a part of America's number one ISP!"
"Reclaim your place on America's coolest online service today!"
"Upgrade to AOL 7.0, the easiest AOL yet!"
"We miss you!"
And now they're beginning to inundate me with AOL CDs. If you're reading this, I miss the maudlin, "I miss you and love you" letters, AOL.
Err, oops. I thought that you were inquiring about OpenBeOS's license.
My mistake.
OBOS is distributed under the OSI approved MIT license.
... by making it a DDoS! You know, because DDoS just *looks* better than DoS. :p
The primary issue is that there are so many variables that must be synced among the hosts. Moderation and metamoderation are two of the most prominent issues. Considering neither of the two hosts in a hypothetical transaction would have authority over each other, it's likely that Slashdot's karma system would be rendered unusable. Also, syncing the servers would probably use quite an amount of bandwidth, negating the purpose of this hypothetical software.
:) I just believe that you should be made aware of the various issues I've encountered in devising such a system.
Don't get me wrong; I'm not adverse to the idea. In fact, I'm attempting to create something similar to the concept we're discussing.
As for the Slashcode, I've been told (and observed) that it's rather bulky. While a massive rewrite isn't impossible, it'd most likely be a daunting prospect to undertake.
For those of you who are complaining about Slashdot's newly announced subscription plan, things could be worse. CmdrTaco and company could have attempted to charge you for access to "special articles" written by "Slashdot's in-house journalists."
That's right. Slashdot won't accept your refund when you figure out you've just paid $30 for archives of JonKatz.
Then again, it's not a bad idea; it keeps those who worship JonKatz away from the general Slashdot population while ensuring that the unpaid weblog is devoid of all things JonKatz. After all, his articles are "special," you know.
That'd be great if Slashdot were a simple, static web site. However, Slashdot is a relatively intricate operation driven by a single MySQL database server.
:/
Of course, it's possible to add a "queuing" and "information sharing" feature to this theoretical Akamai-esque setup, but most people are too impatient to wait a day or two for their comments to propagate between Slashdot client-servers. There'd be no instantaneous uniformity without a single host mirroring the content to every client-server.
It's a wonderful concept without an efficient method of execution.
It's wouldn't be a difficult task to embed time synchronization into the signal and pass it off as a "feature." :)
If your IP address is static as opposed to dynamic, Microsoft may possess the ability to compare it to the one used to register Windows XP.
I pay you and my ISP exorbitant amounts of money (for licensing and bandwidth, respectively) so that I'm given the privilege of publicizing your artists.
Not to mention, the "license to license" alone costs $500 yearly. The RIAA is manipulating our government so that they can prevent the general population from innovating, broadcasting, or even listening to stations not influenced by them. An example of these unfair regulations restricting the masses is a project of mine called laconica [sic] (it will soon have a web page further detailing it here; initialized.org's development is behind schedule). Conceptually, it allows the listeners to control the stream by vote, comment on the music, create their own playlists (if the playlist is voted high enough, it begins streaming the next hour), and even upload their own music.
Considering the fact that initialized is not for profit and we'd still pay for bandwidth by the gigabyte *after* the RIAA fees, our own laconica stream will most likely fail to become a reality. (We still plan to continue developing and release the software as open source, though.)