Which only exists because the Nordic countries have small populations and significant revenue from North Sea Oil.
They've got an answer for every point I make spoon fed to them by those same billionaires.
Frankly, you're not much better, between repeating what you've been spoonfed and your "holier than thou and smarter than them" attitude. No [censored] wonder they won't listen to you.
I rather think it's the opposite - it's a sign of a well run tech site when it assumes it's readers either a) pay attention to the world around them and know what is going on, or b) have the wit to hit up Google for stuff they don't understand. Spoonfeeding is a sign of crappy journalism and ill educated readers.
BBCode should also probably be on that list as an input option, ideally with a nice button-based interface for people who don't want to have to mess with typing markup while they write comments.
You can use a button interface with HTML too... but yes, this needs to be fixed. Along with it's general unfriendliness to anything that isn't a desktop browser, Slashdot's infrastructure is trapped in 1997.
*Wow* I hadn't checked out SN in a while, but yeah... that's not a site I want to spend much time on. (Even if it didn't have such a hideous eye-bleeding colors.)
It's not a guaranteed -1 flamebait anymore, no. But it's still not likely to be heard unless the reader is browsing a +1 or +2 (essentially reading the unmoderated posts).
But it's not just Gamergate and feminism. (The latter is still likely to be moderated down./. really is a He-man Woman Haters Club most days.) It's politics (conservatives, even if not of the flaming nutjob variety), and philosophy (don't dare question FOSS), and cults of personality (don't even think about not gushing about Musk), and... so many other things. Etc.. etc...
Meta-moderation, over the long run, hasn't really made things better - because the inmates are running the asylum either way.
How is this achieved? Is it some clever aerodynamics where the chute has two stable configurations and a 'catastrophic' transition? Is there some rope which constrains the aperture early on and then is somehow severed to allow fully deployment?
The process is called reefing.
Rings of cable woven into the parachute hold it in the "sausage" shape, they're then cut with explosive cutters (or released by explosive releases) and the parachute expands to it's final configuration.
AC, that's what killed Slashdot in the first place - it went from being "News for Nerds" to being "News for a particular philosophical and political subset of Nerds". You're not going to bring back the 'glory days' by replicating the mistakes that ended them in the first place.
The same goes for "original content". Sure, there were a few pieces from Jon Katz that appealed to a narrow segment of the userbase, but there were also endless maunderings by Dvorak, the Bennet Hazelton of his day. Interviews, Ask Slashdot, Slashback, these are things that could work. But more maunderings and appealing to narrow audiences, not so much.
Let me continue to beat this dead horse: all that Slashdot really has going for it is a (minority) smart readership
If by that you mean a minority of Slashdot readers are smart, sure. Otherwise not so much. Most Slashdot readers aren't nearly as smart as they or other Slashdot readers think they are - and that's one of the keys to understanding the decline.
I say that also with the idea in mind that so many people prefer to live in their own echo chamber such that they are not often look for an educated discussion, rather just a way to be a part of their flavor of groupthink. (And/. has been guilty of that as well of course.)
I was about to say... Part of the reason I'm not on/. so much anymore is that it has become an echo chamber and intolerant of those who don't follow the herd and think according to the groupthink.
It's neither beta.slashdot nor Dice that killed Slashdot, it's that it failed to remain relevant and increasingly become hostile. As more and more places offered forums or mailing lists or even blog comments... people left Slashdot because "news for nerds" had become "cultism for nerds".
As my mum always said, finish the project you're doing before you go start another one.
This isn't about projects - this about Musk keeping Musk in the public eye. On top of being a showman, Musk seems to have a real need to keep people talking about and listening to him.
He's still pissed off about it. It was a purely political decision to launch that day. The engineers said they shouldn't and said there was an unnecessary risk due to exact problem that ended up happening. But because it was already delayed several times before, they were pressured to launch against the engineer's recommendations. Because of that people needlessly died.
But, as Paul Harvey says, there's the rest of the story... The engineers leave out the part where they designed a flawed joint in the first place. And the part where it leaked despite specifications that said "no leaks". And the part where the worst leakage prior to the accident (bad enough that it came within a few seconds of complete failure) occurred with a launch temperature of 80ÂF. And the part where they assured management that since it had never actually completely failed it was safe to continue to fly...
The joint rotation problem that lead to seal blow by was exacerbated by the cold, but in truth it was a bad design and a ticking time bomb that could have killed any crew at any time. There's a lot of blame to pass around in the Challenger accident, and not all of it falls on the shoulders of management.
"So is there any chance for me to learn robotics even if I don't have the hardware? Is it possible to program a robot using pure software simulation?"
Learning how to write a simulator and then program inside of it is pretty interesting and a particularly useful skill itself. Not being able to translate it into hardware and test against real world truth sucks, but the experience is not to be spurned.
What do you think the Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act are? They're cases of government providing for recognition of basic rights of minorities.
Having a philosophical preference for Linux is not a disability, and not catering to that preference is neither discrimination nor harassment or persecution.
The alternative is to require all citizens to deal with a particular for-profit company, and I thought the government had moved away from that policy in the mid-1980s when it broke up AT&T.
Um, no. The government has never had a policy of not requiring citizens to deal with a particular for-for-profit company.
We had similar problems when I was in the Navy. Under the deck in the Missile Control Center was a rats nest of cables... probably half of them unused leftovers from previous generations of fire control system. (When I served aboard 655, she was on her third generation.) The cables were simply terminated and left in place because once the cables were installed and the fire control system installed above them, there was no practical and economic way to remove them during later upgrades, modifications, and backfits. The only real way to do so involved removing all the fire control equipment to gain access to the space underneath*, which was very expensive and very time consuming and risked effing other things up. (The old cables were very neatly labeled for potential future re-use, though with the passage of time not all labels were completely legible.)
* The space was very shallow, only about eight or nine inches, and there was ventilation ducting and ship's cabling underneath there as well. It was thus both cramped and confusing.
I don't think anyone's asking you to pick up the banner and fight the power, but don't denigrate the people who are trying to push the government to move to better systems.
If they were trying to push the government onto a better system, that would be a valid point. But that's not what they're pushing for. They're pushing the government to change to a system that's not only more 'convenient' for a minority, but also fits that minority's particular philosophical and political beliefs.
Oh, and besides all of this, TFS says these conspiracies would unravel in a MINIMUM of 3-4 years (and perhaps as long as decades). While the Manhattan Project got started in 1939, it didn't really get going in force until around 1942, and it was revealed in 1945. So, it's not like the "secret" phase of the project lasted even much longer than the MINIMUM predicted by this model.
What you say is true, but...
On the other hand the secrets produced by the secret program themselves remained secret (at least to the general public) for periods from years to decades. One key item, the initiator, remains largely secret to this day. (We know it exists, we know the theoretical principles, but unlike the rest of the bomb the engineering details remain unknown.)
Well said Sir. Far too many of the/. demographic are too young to have any experience or knowledge of the world prior to the Digital Revolution. Heck, when I was a (personal) computer salesman in 1992, I was still having to explain to dubious and suspicious Stan and Suzy Suburbia why having a PC was a good thing - especially if they had school age kids. (That a decent system was still north of $2k at that point, when $2k was a still a lot of money, didn't help.)
Consider yourself virtually modded up (since I have no points today).
When you follow the instructions, the process works just fine. It didn't work for the article author because he didn't follow the instructions because he's a special snowflake.
I have no sympathy for special snowflakes. (Especially snowflakes who regard something like Windows 7, six years old and two versions behind, as 'recent'.)
And if their problem is that they are "swimming in money" why the aggressive year-after-year fundraising goals of 10-20% growth every single year? That is the growth plan of an aggressive for-profit start-up, not a non-profit.
Have you actually read their financials? [PDF link] (What you link to is their annual plan, which isn't a financial document.) They've millions of dollars in cash and short term investments on hand - far in excess of their annual costs of operation.
Company paying a person for their work that both parties agree to voluntarily is 'inhumane'?
If the agreement was made on a level playing field, that would be a reasonable question. The problem, as the grandparent point out and you completely ignore, is the playing field isn't level. It's not even close.
Why would an economy without money not work? Just because we and our economic elite are so entrenched in money and free market theories that border on religion that does not automatically mean that other ways of organizing a civilization do not work as well. If you pulled a Roman citizen off the streets of Rome and told him/her that in 2000 year or so people will buy silk (a very expensive luxury back then) with something resembling papyrus money rather than solid gold aurei he/she would have either laughed at you or if they were a kind hearted person offered to escort you to the temple of Apollo so that you might have your lunacy treated by a skilled healer.
Your example however fails to demonstrate that an economy without money would work. While the Roman would have laughed at you or pitied you - only the medium of exchange has changed. The underlying organization of the civilization and economy remains the more or less same, and still relies on money.
Slashdot Mirror
Which only exists because the Nordic countries have small populations and significant revenue from North Sea Oil.
Frankly, you're not much better, between repeating what you've been spoonfed and your "holier than thou and smarter than them" attitude. No [censored] wonder they won't listen to you.
For the same reason the media loves Trump - he gets clicks, shares, and forwards. (Plus haven't you seen the Musk worship here on Slashdot?)
I rather think it's the opposite - it's a sign of a well run tech site when it assumes it's readers either a) pay attention to the world around them and know what is going on, or b) have the wit to hit up Google for stuff they don't understand. Spoonfeeding is a sign of crappy journalism and ill educated readers.
You can use a button interface with HTML too... but yes, this needs to be fixed. Along with it's general unfriendliness to anything that isn't a desktop browser, Slashdot's infrastructure is trapped in 1997.
*Wow* I hadn't checked out SN in a while, but yeah... that's not a site I want to spend much time on. (Even if it didn't have such a hideous eye-bleeding colors.)
Thank you for so eloquently proving my point and why Slashdot is increasingly irrelevant.
It's not a guaranteed -1 flamebait anymore, no. But it's still not likely to be heard unless the reader is browsing a +1 or +2 (essentially reading the unmoderated posts).
But it's not just Gamergate and feminism. (The latter is still likely to be moderated down. /. really is a He-man Woman Haters Club most days.) It's politics (conservatives, even if not of the flaming nutjob variety), and philosophy (don't dare question FOSS), and cults of personality (don't even think about not gushing about Musk), and... so many other things. Etc.. etc...
Meta-moderation, over the long run, hasn't really made things better - because the inmates are running the asylum either way.
The process is called reefing.
Rings of cable woven into the parachute hold it in the "sausage" shape, they're then cut with explosive cutters (or released by explosive releases) and the parachute expands to it's final configuration.
0.o
AC, that's what killed Slashdot in the first place - it went from being "News for Nerds" to being "News for a particular philosophical and political subset of Nerds". You're not going to bring back the 'glory days' by replicating the mistakes that ended them in the first place.
The same goes for "original content". Sure, there were a few pieces from Jon Katz that appealed to a narrow segment of the userbase, but there were also endless maunderings by Dvorak, the Bennet Hazelton of his day. Interviews, Ask Slashdot, Slashback, these are things that could work. But more maunderings and appealing to narrow audiences, not so much.
If by that you mean a minority of Slashdot readers are smart, sure. Otherwise not so much. Most Slashdot readers aren't nearly as smart as they or other Slashdot readers think they are - and that's one of the keys to understanding the decline.
I was about to say... Part of the reason I'm not on /. so much anymore is that it has become an echo chamber and intolerant of those who don't follow the herd and think according to the groupthink.
It's neither beta.slashdot nor Dice that killed Slashdot, it's that it failed to remain relevant and increasingly become hostile. As more and more places offered forums or mailing lists or even blog comments... people left Slashdot because "news for nerds" had become "cultism for nerds".
This isn't about projects - this about Musk keeping Musk in the public eye. On top of being a showman, Musk seems to have a real need to keep people talking about and listening to him.
But, as Paul Harvey says, there's the rest of the story... The engineers leave out the part where they designed a flawed joint in the first place. And the part where it leaked despite specifications that said "no leaks". And the part where the worst leakage prior to the accident (bad enough that it came within a few seconds of complete failure) occurred with a launch temperature of 80ÂF. And the part where they assured management that since it had never actually completely failed it was safe to continue to fly...
The joint rotation problem that lead to seal blow by was exacerbated by the cold, but in truth it was a bad design and a ticking time bomb that could have killed any crew at any time. There's a lot of blame to pass around in the Challenger accident, and not all of it falls on the shoulders of management.
"So is there any chance for me to learn robotics even if I don't have the hardware? Is it possible to program a robot using pure software simulation?"
Learning how to write a simulator and then program inside of it is pretty interesting and a particularly useful skill itself. Not being able to translate it into hardware and test against real world truth sucks, but the experience is not to be spurned.
Having a philosophical preference for Linux is not a disability, and not catering to that preference is neither discrimination nor harassment or persecution.
Um, no. The government has never had a policy of not requiring citizens to deal with a particular for-for-profit company.
We had similar problems when I was in the Navy. Under the deck in the Missile Control Center was a rats nest of cables... probably half of them unused leftovers from previous generations of fire control system. (When I served aboard 655, she was on her third generation.) The cables were simply terminated and left in place because once the cables were installed and the fire control system installed above them, there was no practical and economic way to remove them during later upgrades, modifications, and backfits. The only real way to do so involved removing all the fire control equipment to gain access to the space underneath*, which was very expensive and very time consuming and risked effing other things up. (The old cables were very neatly labeled for potential future re-use, though with the passage of time not all labels were completely legible.)
* The space was very shallow, only about eight or nine inches, and there was ventilation ducting and ship's cabling underneath there as well. It was thus both cramped and confusing.
If they were trying to push the government onto a better system, that would be a valid point. But that's not what they're pushing for. They're pushing the government to change to a system that's not only more 'convenient' for a minority, but also fits that minority's particular philosophical and political beliefs.
What you say is true, but...
On the other hand the secrets produced by the secret program themselves remained secret (at least to the general public) for periods from years to decades. One key item, the initiator, remains largely secret to this day. (We know it exists, we know the theoretical principles, but unlike the rest of the bomb the engineering details remain unknown.)
So when exactly did the 'conspiracy" unravel?
Well said Sir. Far too many of the /. demographic are too young to have any experience or knowledge of the world prior to the Digital Revolution. Heck, when I was a (personal) computer salesman in 1992, I was still having to explain to dubious and suspicious Stan and Suzy Suburbia why having a PC was a good thing - especially if they had school age kids. (That a decent system was still north of $2k at that point, when $2k was a still a lot of money, didn't help.)
Consider yourself virtually modded up (since I have no points today).
When you follow the instructions, the process works just fine. It didn't work for the article author because he didn't follow the instructions because he's a special snowflake.
I have no sympathy for special snowflakes. (Especially snowflakes who regard something like Windows 7, six years old and two versions behind, as 'recent'.)
Have you actually read their financials? [PDF link] (What you link to is their annual plan, which isn't a financial document.) They've millions of dollars in cash and short term investments on hand - far in excess of their annual costs of operation.
Since all you have is airy handwaving, buzzwords, more buzzwords, and yet more buzzwords... I'd say your research is less than valueless.
If the agreement was made on a level playing field, that would be a reasonable question. The problem, as the grandparent point out and you completely ignore, is the playing field isn't level. It's not even close.
Your example however fails to demonstrate that an economy without money would work. While the Roman would have laughed at you or pitied you - only the medium of exchange has changed. The underlying organization of the civilization and economy remains the more or less same, and still relies on money.
First reported on /. back in 2012