Last time anybody tried anything radical as far as the internet, we all remember so well :
"On February 1, 1995, Senator James Exon (D-Neb.) attempted to do what had never been done before--regulate speech on the Internet.(3) Introducing the Communications Decency Amendment (CDA), Senator Exon declared a danger to society: Barbarian pornographers are at the gate and they are using the Internet to gain access to the youth of America. Senator Exon proclaimed:
The information superhighway should not become a red light district. This legislation will keep that from happening and extend the standards of decency which have protected telephone users to new telecommunications devices. "
It was struck down on several fronts. As everybody points out, Bush/Republicans are pro-business, and any type of censorship of the internet impacts a lot of businesses. I'd be willing to bet they are hands off. They will talk about morals, but beyond that, don't expect any type of censorship or anything like that Senator from Nebraska tried.
http://www.cybertelecom.org/cda/cannon2.htm
if anybody is curious/doesn't remember.
The Crusoe will mean something to me when...
on
Crusoe As Server CPU
·
· Score: 1
The Crusoe will mean something to me when I can buy one on pricewatch w/mobo and all and see for myself what all it can do.
We can read about it and hear about it all we want, but until we can get one in our hands (that isn't in a lapotp) we'll never know:-/
Those folks in California could probably use a few;-)
I think slashdot isn't as good as it used to be because of articles such as katz's review of snatch. There seems to be a correlation between the two, eh?
a year ago, katz's review of snatch would not have made it onto slashdot:-/
slashdot does seem to be almost trying to go mainstream at times.
who really wants to read about what katz thinks of snatch anyways, we all have our own theories/views of how good snatch is or isn't (whether it stinks or you give it a thumb's up) and where you'd rather see snatch at, whether it be in some big public setting (most people here seem to have seen snatch with several of their friends)or in the privacy of your own home. some of us paid $7 to see snatch, others got to see it for free.
personally, what katz thinks of snatch belongs on drruth.com, not slashdot.
How will multiplayer work for Q3/Arena for ipaq?
on
Quake For The iPaq
·
· Score: 1
How are they going to deal with lag on the ipaq when Quake III/Arena is released for it?
Re:Katz just wanted to say 'Snatch'
on
'Snatch'
·
· Score: 1
"Another thing: Change happens. Just like any site,/. has to remain in flux in order to not only keep the open sores wimps but to attract new "geeks." "
If you attract new geeks/viewers/whatever, while alienating your old geeks/viewers/whatever, you end up screwing yourself.
Last time I checked, this was not a movie review site, nor was it salon.com or movies.com or cnn.com. This type of article/review of a non-geek type movie can be found on half a dozen bigger sites that deal with this kind of thing.
If you try an attract a new crowd from other sites, you :
a) become like those other sites, thereby you lose your uniqueness
b) you lose your original crowd that made the site in the first place.
Katz just wanted to say 'Snatch'
on
'Snatch'
·
· Score: 1
That's the only thing I can think of.
Oh well, that's what filters are for, unless your looking forward to his review of the next Rugrats movie (which actually would probably interest more of us than most of the stuff he seems to be writing these days)
I think he is getting paid per article.
What's next? Family Man? Castaway? Rugrats?
on
'Snatch'
·
· Score: 2
I'm sorry, but Katz is starting to review movies that just, I dunno, well, let's just say most of us probably skip over katz articles these days.
I had to comment, because a review of Snatch on/. can only be topped by maybe katz's review of
the next Rugrats movie, or perhaps Castaway or Family Man (for all I know he may already have reviewed those and I skipped them).
Dungeons and Dragons, Antitrust, StarWars, X-Men, etc., I can see those reviews on here totally. But Snatch? How about Erin Brockovitch or whatever? Let's face it, some reviews belong on salon.com (their stock could use the help).
Is katz getting paid per article? If so that would explain a hell of a lot.
Katz didn't tell me anything
on
Author Unknown
·
· Score: 1
Katz didn't tell me anything I couldn't get from the back of the book cover or the book jacket.
Same with his movie reviews. Why can't he talk about various subjects without sounding like he's taking some 5-line review and expanding it, or copying a review off of amazon or imdb.
"Seriously. I always start reading posts without looking at the author. I'll get about 1.5 sentences in and say, "Ah, shit, is this a JonKatz article?", then look at the author. I'm always right"
Is this because it's a topic/movie review/whatever that only katz would touch?
The moment the movie review of the next Rugrats movie hits slashdot (at the way they are connecting movies to the slashdot audience don't be surprised to see one) I'll know immediatly it's katz without even reading the article.
Slashdot Mirror
Last time anybody tried anything radical as far as the internet, we all remember so well :
"On February 1, 1995, Senator James Exon (D-Neb.) attempted to do what had never been done before--regulate speech on the Internet.(3) Introducing the Communications Decency Amendment (CDA), Senator Exon declared a danger to society: Barbarian pornographers are at the gate and they are using the Internet to gain access to the youth of America. Senator Exon proclaimed:
The information superhighway should not become a red light district. This legislation will keep that from happening and extend the standards of decency which have protected telephone users to new telecommunications devices. "
It was struck down on several fronts. As everybody points out, Bush/Republicans are pro-business, and any type of censorship of the internet impacts a lot of businesses. I'd be willing to bet they are hands off. They will talk about morals, but beyond that, don't expect any type of censorship or anything like that Senator from Nebraska tried.
http://www.cybertelecom.org/cda/cannon2.htm
if anybody is curious/doesn't remember.
The Crusoe will mean something to me when I can buy one on pricewatch w/mobo and all and see for myself what all it can do.
We can read about it and hear about it all we want, but until we can get one in our hands (that isn't in a lapotp) we'll never know
Those folks in California could probably use a few
I think slashdot isn't as good as it used to be because of articles such as katz's review of snatch. There seems to be a correlation between the two, eh?
:-/
a year ago, katz's review of snatch would not have made it onto slashdot
slashdot does seem to be almost trying to go mainstream at times.
who really wants to read about what katz thinks of snatch anyways, we all have our own theories/views of how good snatch is or isn't (whether it stinks or you give it a thumb's up) and where you'd rather see snatch at, whether it be in some big public setting (most people here seem to have seen snatch with several of their friends)or in the privacy of your own home. some of us paid $7 to see snatch, others got to see it for free.
personally, what katz thinks of snatch belongs on drruth.com, not slashdot.
How are they going to deal with lag on the ipaq when Quake III/Arena is released for it?
"Another thing: Change happens. Just like any site, /. has to remain in flux in order to not only keep the open sores wimps but to attract new "geeks." "
If you attract new geeks/viewers/whatever, while alienating your old geeks/viewers/whatever, you end up screwing yourself.
Last time I checked, this was not a movie review site, nor was it salon.com or movies.com or cnn.com. This type of article/review of a non-geek type movie can be found on half a dozen bigger sites that deal with this kind of thing.
If you try an attract a new crowd from other sites, you :
a) become like those other sites, thereby you lose your uniqueness
b) you lose your original crowd that made the site in the first place.
That's the only thing I can think of. Oh well, that's what filters are for, unless your looking forward to his review of the next Rugrats movie (which actually would probably interest more of us than most of the stuff he seems to be writing these days) I think he is getting paid per article.
I'm sorry, but Katz is starting to review movies that just, I dunno, well, let's just say most of us probably skip over katz articles these days. I had to comment, because a review of Snatch on /. can only be topped by maybe katz's review of
the next Rugrats movie, or perhaps Castaway or Family Man (for all I know he may already have reviewed those and I skipped them).
Dungeons and Dragons, Antitrust, StarWars, X-Men, etc., I can see those reviews on here totally. But Snatch? How about Erin Brockovitch or whatever? Let's face it, some reviews belong on salon.com (their stock could use the help).
Is katz getting paid per article? If so that would explain a hell of a lot.
Katz didn't tell me anything I couldn't get from the back of the book cover or the book jacket. Same with his movie reviews. Why can't he talk about various subjects without sounding like he's taking some 5-line review and expanding it, or copying a review off of amazon or imdb.
"Seriously. I always start reading posts without looking at the author. I'll get about 1.5 sentences in and say, "Ah, shit, is this a JonKatz article?", then look at the author. I'm always right"
Is this because it's a topic/movie review/whatever that only katz would touch?
The moment the movie review of the next Rugrats movie hits slashdot (at the way they are connecting movies to the slashdot audience don't be surprised to see one) I'll know immediatly it's katz without even reading the article.