"In the future, the laboratories will be more actively conducting strict surveillance and take counter measures against illegal, inappropriate software and hardware in the market. Moreover, we believe that, based on the recent legislation, legal measures and steps will be taken by copyright holders against such violation of intellectual properties," Mikura wrote.
If you can't solve a problem technologically, do it with legislation. Since encrypting DVDs didn't work it looks like they'll move to the next step, prosecuting the hell out of everyone they catch. Which will most likely be a bunch of kids trading the latest releases. Nothing like harassing kids for good PR.
Sorry, but the Internet makes the control of digital media IMPOSSIBLE. This is a fact, if you want to make big money with digital media you have to understand this fact and move from there. No major media companies have yet acknowledged this and they will fight it until they die or give in. Goes to show you, you can't teach an old dog how to use the Internet.
If Yahoo removes comments they feel are inflammatory, where can one possibly draw the line? Censorship in it's fullest form, selecting individual opinions and removing them from public exposure. I don't know the specifics of this message, but if I use a public website as a facilitator for one-to-one interaction, I respectfully demand that such interfaces are allowed to transpire unmolested. So Rob and Co., leave all our idiotic ramblings and flamebait up for all the world to see, 'cause that's why we put 'em there.
Instead, and without fear tactics or moralist rhetoric, the Government could have instituted a public education campaign informing parents about the need to restrict unsupervised/unfiltered access to the Internet with young children (5-13) and begin a dialogue about personal responsibility and self moderation with older ones (13 and up). As a young person that has grown up in the midst of computers and communication technologies, I believe this would have achieved a much more productive outcome.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. I was having a computer discussion with my somewhat *cough* less computer literate sister. She was discussing how quickly her 4 year old had learned to use their computer. My advice to her was to learn more about the Internet so she could teach her children when the time came. These actions will help keep us from having to legislate behaviour.
The War on Drugs(tm) in the U.S. is a perfect example of how silly it is to try and control content(substances) that your citizens want and will get either way. Fighting against yourself is never productive and leads to a waste of valuable resources. Widely spreading information is the best way to fight these battles, not limiting/controlling/spinning it.
That what I don't like. "If you want to see R-rated content you must give name, age, address and CC#". If you've ever seen that horrible for kids r-rated movie "Stand by Me" then you know why this is silly./. often has r-rated content (and worse if you agree with the MPAA on the Southpark rating).
Does the bill get you if you link to r-rated material?
I do agree with the other poster that established media don't mind erecting more barriers to entry for new content providers, and thus will prove to be more enemy than ally in fighting this legislation.
Install my infinite monkeys client to write pieces for/., and then when we reach enough processing power that it is close enough to infinite to start behaving like those monkeys, we'll axe Rob Malda and have/. articles with no misspellings.
But what will be do with all those articles that have one letter infinitely mispelled?
"To be or not to ble, ohh! Stupid Monkeys" -Krusty the Klown
"If I decide to put up mikenash.com and I want to sell T-Shirts with my picture on them, for something uninteresting like me five CALs is all I need since I probably won't have more than five people buying at one time," Nash predicted.
He is a general manager at M$ so this seems solid. I'd like to get a look at the license since the Office2K EULA is so nasty. After 50 times starting the program and you HAVE to register.
I wonder if there will be more than 2 registry differences (other than price) between the workstation and server flavors this time. Regardless NT4 is working fine for us, I don't see an upgrade here for at least 2 years (and 3 service packs), and hopefully by then Linux will be ready to take over.
Lying about having $100 is a lot different than lying about $10 billion
Maybe to you, not to me.
Since you bit.. Stealing $100=Stealing from 1 person roughly a weeks worth of living expenses is much different than stealing $10,000,000,000 roughly 1,923,076 YEARS worth of food. Those are not the same.
They use legal, not logical or natural means to do so.
>What, pray tell, are "logical" or "natural" means? Besides, what's wrong with legal means?
The only reason M$ is worth money is because it is illegal for me to make copies of their software. I don't believe in the purity of the U.S. legal system. If you believe it is infallible, then we have a different argument. Because of our current setup software is valuable only if it can be made scarce, unnatural since it's reproduction cost is very near zero.
Under a more "natural" setup the value of software would be determined by it widespread distrubution and overall utility (support), rather than some legally forced "unnatural" scarcity. Under such a setup the value of said software would be substantially reduced but easier to support economically without the need for questionable accounting. This is a different notion for determining the value of software, but you asked, so..:)
I was just commenting on your strange observation that Microsoft has [n]o valuable assets.
They are currently valuable but on an unstable foundation. Much of that value is tied up in employees (paying their own salaries from future stock earnings) which can leave the company and take their own "intellectual property" with them.
True. He did seem more worried about the ecomony than direct physical threats. Like he said in the article, how many financtial planners did they need during the Great Depression? Most people don't give up $50, much less billions, without a fight, but it's tough to fight "the books", so sometimes another target is needed.
Er.. No. Microsoft has followed and is following legal, acceptable and very widespread accounting practices. You may question whether these accounting practices are helpful to make reasonable investment decisions, but it is a complaint targeted at FASB, not Microsoft.
So it's legal and ethical to report that you earned 2.5 billion when the actually value of the company decreased by the same amount in 3 months?
That's why it matters how much money they are doing it with. Lying about having $100 is a lot different than lying about $10 billion, especially when people are relying on that $10 billion to feed and house them after they retire.
Funny, you seem to believe that information (such as source code, for example) has no value.
The source code has value to Microsoft only because they can control its distrubution. They use legal, not logical or natural means to do so.
This is a shaky proposition. It turns out their "profits" are built upon the same shaky ground.
Do only physical things have real value to you?
Personal attacks in logical discussions are flames, and are ignored.
Er.. No. Microsoft has followed and is following legal, acceptable and very widespread accounting practices. You may question whether these accounting practices are helpful to make reasonable investment decisions, but it is a complaint targeted at FASB, not Microsoft.
So it's legal and ethical to report that you earned 2.5 billion when the actually value of the company decreased by the same amount in 3 months?
That's why it matters how much money they are doing it with. Lying about having $100 is a lot different than lying about $10 billion, especially when people are relying on that $10 billion to feed and house them after they retire.
Funny, you seem to believe that information (such as source code, for example) has no value.
The source code has value to Microsoft only because they can control its distrubution. They use legal, not logical or natural means to do so. This is a shaky proposition. It turns out their "profits" are built upon the same shaky ground.
Do only physical things have real value to you?
Personal attacks in logical discussions are flames, and are ignored.
The author of the above article is scared. It takes some serious balls to call the richest man in the world a thief and a liar. If you read the whole story (and I suggest you do, if this gets large-scale media attention it could be big) he gets more personal at the end. Mainly the guy has tried for some time to get this story out. No one seems to be refuting it, all of the attacks on the story seem to be directed at the man, not his facts. Perhaps that is why he is so scared.
So now he is putting his own name on, he's got a big whistle and he's blowing it. It mentions in the article that M$'s accountant did the same thing in '96 and got fired for it. He's sending it to everybody. Action has already been taken from PRNewswire (against him). He sounds committed and it often takes serious resolve to change entrenched assumptions. More power too him, I'm gonna send this article to my friends and ask that they do the same. Each may do his part to slay the evil behemoth, if they feel it should die.
It's a slow news day, lets see if we can get this story on CNN tonight. Turn the public's interest and awareness of Microsoft against them. Anybody know (or is) a reporter?
Funny that you should notice one tactic of argument and ignore another...
Because it was blatant and well addressed in the actual article. Kaa's statments basically call the guy a liar to his face since he (parish) repeatedly said in the article that he was not biased for or against M$ in any way and even lauded thier office products while belittling the POS that is Win98.
Gawd, I wish there was a way to tell which posters read the article. This one was particularly long, the Linux comments don't come till near the end, for those of you that just scanned the first 5 pages.
Maybe the guy has a point in that the gullible public should be made more aware of the problem (and I freely concede that this *is* a problem: only not limited to Microsoft, not having such huge importance, and not likely to lead to the financial meltdown of the free world). But financial professionals know the situation quite well. And the measures that he proposes against Microsoft are quite ridiculous.
I disagree, mainly for the large amounts of cash involved. M$ had basically lied, saying they are making 30-50% profit margins when they are not. This keeps raising their stock price (and get's them into indexes and 401k) to a level where they recieve a constant demand. The problem is the value behind the company. Everybody here knows that the only value that M$ has in on paper. Paper that says you can't copy their software, paper that says you must buy a license for every 5 users, etc. They have "nothing" of real value. Take this paper away (or reveal how transparent it is) and you realize that the highest valued company in the world HAS NOTHING OF VALUE. Then you factor in the large number of people whose retirement is tied to that value, and you see the scope of the problem.
Their accounting practices also make themselves look better than other companies and then when John Q. looks at who to invest in, he picks M$. Thus IBM, HP and others, whose accounting is honest, look like crap and they must use the same dishonest technique to create a competitively profitable image. M$ is the image making machine, they have created a huge image of a profitable company that is made out of paper and burning away from the inside.
...and it didn't seem irrelevant. He has his facts in order and the fundamental problem was well put. M$ has been lying extensively for years. I had wondered how a major company could put off MAJOR (NT5) product release indefinitely and still have 40-50% profit margins, now I know.
until somebody fires off a crapload of EMP rockets at the US and fries every circuit.
Didn't l0pht say there are a few "magic" packets that could be used to shut down the 'Net? Anybody know the process? There have to be weakpoints. If a few conscruction workers can cut the thing in half, what can a few well placed bombs do?
Granted, the results are worth it, but how many times have you had a hack go the wrong way, and have nothing to show for it but a pile of chips?
Exactly. How many times has everyone here fscked up a system so bad the only choice is to reinstall? How many times by doing horrendously stupid stuff? Trial and error is a good way to learn, but a bad way to learn to teach. Either way it's more a sign of resourcefulness and stubbornness than intelligence
my only reply to this is that things are changing not changed.
Linux drivers will start coming in hardware boxers, for the simple reason that that last time I went to Best Buy I was *specifically* looking for a box that had the word Linux on it. And so was the guy standing behind me. A Demand is growing, a Supply will follow.
Oh and it's not all about hav[ing] their minds expanded with limitless amounts of wisdom , it's about never having to remember what guy was in what movie or how to spell what word, and a hundred other details.
This thing is just getting rolling. The Internet was the big first step, the spark if you will. I think Linux might be a big log on the fire (free widely distributed quality software). I think it might end at nanotech and quantum mechanics.
We really are moving on to a new and exciting age. Information is power and the Net basically gives every single person (connected to it, an important technicality) a Whole Lotta Power.
Media, as an example, is seeing a huge shift as it becomes easier and easier to become a media gatekeeper or content creator. Truly interactive media (where you create the content) is already here, you're reading it.
One the whole, How People Communicate, is changing and that has wide reaching unforseen consequences (hopefully benificial) on society.
The only profound effect that the net has had on society in general is that Joe User can now look up scores on espn.com instead of watching the little ticker at the bottom of CNN on tv, and buy stuff with one click from amazon as opposed to actually having to go to a store.
That's for people who see the 'Net like a newspaper, not a "Brain Extender(tm)" . Even these things you say are trivial are amazing. Ordering products with the click of a mouse, from ANY store ANYwhere. That's tremendous, especially considering the amount of informational organization that needs to occur to get you your new Antonio Banderas Blow-up Doll overnight.
Or Linux, which wouldn't have existed without the Net. Or the way MP3 are changing the music industry. Entire industries are being obsoleted and created on a monthly basis, and you say the effect isn't profound? I can type up a paper, put it on the server in my apartment and you can read it from ANYwhere in the World, that's profound, even more so because of the content;^)
I could go on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, about this, but I won't. The Internet is cool.
That's a good comic. Go check it out for a bit if you haven't. The site needs some serious usability work but the comedy is dead on. Esp. the M$ bashing Linux slant.
i've even set my users page as home on a couple of systems (quick poll: how many computers do you have with/. as the start page? (4)). Then if you click on a story you have login again.
I e-mailed Rob about this a while back, maybe I should send it to pater@slashdot.org??
(and getting that (no +1 button) back would be nice)
That's the real problem with/.'s moderation system: it incites people to act POLITICALLY CORRECTLY.
Actually, Political Correctness was introduced with Meta-Moderation. If you moderated a "darkly funny" joke up, then get meta-moderated by a tight ass you lose karma. This leads to conservative moderation and ultimately PC behaviour. It's because Rob added a conscience to the system (something above the action that determines if it is good or bad).
Slashdot Mirror
"In the future, the laboratories will be more actively conducting strict surveillance and take counter measures against illegal, inappropriate software and hardware in the market. Moreover, we believe that, based on the recent legislation, legal measures and steps will be taken by copyright holders against such violation of intellectual properties," Mikura wrote.
If you can't solve a problem technologically, do it with legislation. Since encrypting DVDs didn't work it looks like they'll move to the next step, prosecuting the hell out of everyone they catch. Which will most likely be a bunch of kids trading the latest releases. Nothing like harassing kids for good PR.
Sorry, but the Internet makes the control of digital media IMPOSSIBLE. This is a fact, if you want to make big money with digital media you have to understand this fact and move from there. No major media companies have yet acknowledged this and they will fight it until they die or give in. Goes to show you, you can't teach an old dog how to use the Internet.
If Yahoo removes comments they feel are inflammatory, where can one possibly draw the line? Censorship in it's fullest form, selecting individual opinions and removing them from public exposure. I don't know the specifics of this message, but if I use a public website as a facilitator for one-to-one interaction, I respectfully demand that such interfaces are allowed to transpire unmolested. So Rob and Co., leave all our idiotic ramblings and flamebait up for all the world to see, 'cause that's why we put 'em there.
from the conclusion to the above paper
Instead, and without fear tactics or moralist rhetoric, the Government could have instituted a public education campaign informing parents about the need to restrict unsupervised/unfiltered access to the Internet with young children (5-13) and begin a dialogue about personal responsibility and self moderation with older ones (13 and up). As a young person that has grown up in the midst of computers and communication technologies, I believe this would have achieved a much more productive outcome.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. I was having a computer discussion with my somewhat *cough* less computer literate sister. She was discussing how quickly her 4 year old had learned to use their computer. My advice to her was to learn more about the Internet so she could teach her children when the time came. These actions will help keep us from having to legislate behaviour.
The War on Drugs(tm) in the U.S. is a perfect example of how silly it is to try and control content(substances) that your citizens want and will get either way. Fighting against yourself is never productive and leads to a waste of valuable resources. Widely spreading information is the best way to fight these battles, not limiting/controlling/spinning it.
That what I don't like. "If you want to see R-rated content you must give name, age, address and CC#". If you've ever seen that horrible for kids r-rated movie "Stand by Me" then you know why this is silly. /. often has r-rated content (and worse if you agree with the MPAA on the Southpark rating).
Does the bill get you if you link to r-rated material?
I do agree with the other poster that established media don't mind erecting more barriers to entry for new content providers, and thus will prove to be more enemy than ally in fighting this legislation.
With the theme of selling a book entitled: "How to get people to pay you $50 for a Book"
Has anyone gotten it to work with AOL yet?
:-)
Yea..
Step 1: Call 1-800-AOL-USER and say "Cancel My AOL."
Step 2: Get a real ISP.
I know 5 people that have tried this and it worked great for them!!
Install my infinite monkeys client to write pieces for /., and then when we reach enough processing power that it is close enough to infinite to start behaving like those monkeys, we'll axe Rob Malda and have /. articles with no misspellings.
But what will be do with all those articles that have one letter infinitely mispelled?
"To be or not to ble, ohh! Stupid Monkeys" -Krusty the Klown
at least that's what I got from this...
"If I decide to put up mikenash.com and I want to sell T-Shirts with my picture on them, for something uninteresting like me five CALs is all I need since I probably won't have more than five people buying at one time," Nash predicted.
He is a general manager at M$ so this seems solid. I'd like to get a look at the license since the Office2K EULA is so nasty. After 50 times starting the program and you HAVE to register.
I wonder if there will be more than 2 registry differences (other than price) between the workstation and server flavors this time. Regardless NT4 is working fine for us, I don't see an upgrade here for at least 2 years (and 3 service packs), and hopefully by then Linux will be ready to take over.
Lying about having $100 is a lot different than lying about $10 billion
Maybe to you, not to me.
Since you bit.. Stealing $100=Stealing from 1 person roughly a weeks worth of living expenses is much different than stealing $10,000,000,000 roughly 1,923,076 YEARS worth of food. Those are not the same.
They use legal, not logical or natural means to do so.
>What, pray tell, are "logical" or "natural" means? Besides, what's wrong with legal means?
The only reason M$ is worth money is because it is illegal for me to make copies of their software. I don't believe in the purity of the U.S. legal system. If you believe it is infallible, then we have a different argument. Because of our current setup software is valuable only if it can be made scarce, unnatural since it's reproduction cost is very near zero.
Under a more "natural" setup the value of software would be determined by it widespread distrubution and overall utility (support), rather than some legally forced "unnatural" scarcity. Under such a setup the value of said software would be substantially reduced but easier to support economically without the need for questionable accounting. This is a different notion for determining the value of software, but you asked, so..:)
I was just commenting on your strange observation that Microsoft has [n]o valuable assets.
They are currently valuable but on an unstable foundation. Much of that value is tied up in employees (paying their own salaries from future stock earnings) which can leave the company and take their own "intellectual property" with them.
True. He did seem more worried about the ecomony than direct physical threats. Like he said in the article, how many financtial planners did they need during the Great Depression?
Most people don't give up $50, much less billions, without a fight, but it's tough to fight "the books", so sometimes another target is needed.
Er.. No. Microsoft has followed and is following legal, acceptable and very widespread accounting practices. You may question whether these accounting practices are helpful to make reasonable investment decisions, but it is a complaint targeted at FASB, not Microsoft.
So it's legal and ethical to report that you earned 2.5 billion when the actually value of the company decreased by the same amount in 3 months?
That's why it matters how much money they are doing it with. Lying about having $100 is a lot different than lying about $10 billion, especially when people are relying on that $10 billion to feed and house them after they retire.
Funny, you seem to believe that information (such as source code, for example) has no value.
The source code has value to Microsoft only because they can control its distrubution. They use legal, not logical or natural means to do so.
This is a shaky proposition. It turns out their "profits" are built upon the same shaky ground.
Do only physical things have real value to you?
Personal attacks in logical discussions are flames, and are ignored.
Er.. No. Microsoft has followed and is following legal, acceptable and very widespread accounting practices. You may question whether these accounting practices are helpful to make reasonable investment decisions, but it is a complaint targeted at FASB, not Microsoft.
So it's legal and ethical to report that you earned 2.5 billion when the actually value of the company decreased by the same amount in 3 months?
That's why it matters how much money they are doing it with. Lying about having $100 is a lot different than lying about $10 billion, especially when people are relying on that $10 billion to feed and house them after they retire.
Funny, you seem to believe that information (such as source code, for example) has no value.
The source code has value to Microsoft only because they can control its distrubution. They use legal, not logical or natural means to do so.
This is a shaky proposition. It turns out their "profits" are built upon the same shaky ground.
Do only physical things have real value to you?
Personal attacks in logical discussions are flames, and are ignored.
The author of the above article is scared. It takes some serious balls to call the richest man in the world a thief and a liar. If you read the whole story (and I suggest you do, if this gets large-scale media attention it could be big) he gets more personal at the end. Mainly the guy has tried for some time to get this story out. No one seems to be refuting it, all of the attacks on the story seem to be directed at the man, not his facts. Perhaps that is why he is so scared.
So now he is putting his own name on, he's got a big whistle and he's blowing it. It mentions in the article that M$'s accountant did the same thing in '96 and got fired for it. He's sending it to everybody. Action has already been taken from PRNewswire (against him). He sounds committed and it often takes serious resolve to change entrenched assumptions. More power too him, I'm gonna send this article to my friends and ask that they do the same. Each may do his part to slay the evil behemoth, if they feel it should die.
It's a slow news day, lets see if we can get this story on CNN tonight. Turn the public's interest and awareness of Microsoft against them. Anybody know (or is) a reporter?
Funny that you should notice one tactic of argument and ignore another...
Because it was blatant and well addressed in the actual article. Kaa's statments basically call the guy a liar to his face since he (parish) repeatedly said in the article that he was not biased for or against M$ in any way and even lauded thier office products while belittling the POS that is Win98.
Gawd, I wish there was a way to tell which posters read the article. This one was particularly long, the Linux comments don't come till near the end, for those of you that just scanned the first 5 pages.
..outlines and says how they have been doing each thing.
Maybe the guy has a point in that the gullible public should be made more aware of the problem (and I freely concede that this *is* a problem: only not limited to Microsoft, not having such huge importance, and not likely to lead to the financial meltdown of the free world). But financial professionals know the situation quite well. And the measures that he proposes against Microsoft are quite ridiculous.
I disagree, mainly for the large amounts of cash involved. M$ had basically lied, saying they are making 30-50% profit margins when they are not. This keeps raising their stock price (and get's them into indexes and 401k) to a level where they recieve a constant demand. The problem is the value behind the company. Everybody here knows that the only value that M$ has in on paper. Paper that says you can't copy their software, paper that says you must buy a license for every 5 users, etc. They have "nothing" of real value. Take this paper away (or reveal how transparent it is) and you realize that the highest valued company in the world HAS NOTHING OF VALUE. Then you factor in the large number of people whose retirement is tied to that value, and you see the scope of the problem.
Their accounting practices also make themselves look better than other companies and then when John Q. looks at who to invest in, he picks M$. Thus IBM, HP and others, whose accounting is honest, look like crap and they must use the same dishonest technique to create a competitively profitable image. M$ is the image making machine, they have created a huge image of a profitable company that is made out of paper and burning away from the inside.
...and it didn't seem irrelevant. He has his facts in order and the fundamental problem was well put. M$ has been lying extensively for years. I had wondered how a major company could put off MAJOR (NT5) product release indefinitely and still have 40-50% profit margins, now I know.
until somebody fires off a crapload of EMP rockets at the US and fries every circuit.
Didn't l0pht say there are a few "magic" packets that could be used to shut down the 'Net? Anybody know the process? There have to be weakpoints. If a few conscruction workers can cut the thing in half, what can a few well placed bombs do?
Granted, the results are worth it, but how many times have you had a hack go the wrong way, and have nothing to show for it but a pile of chips?
Exactly. How many times has everyone here fscked up a system so bad the only choice is to reinstall? How many times by doing horrendously stupid stuff? Trial and error is a good way to learn, but a bad way to learn to teach. Either way it's more a sign of resourcefulness and stubbornness than intelligence
my only reply to this is that things are changing not changed.
Linux drivers will start coming in hardware boxers, for the simple reason that that last time I went to Best Buy I was *specifically* looking for a box that had the word Linux on it. And so was the guy standing behind me. A Demand is growing, a Supply will follow.
Oh and it's not all about hav[ing] their minds expanded with limitless amounts of wisdom , it's about never having to remember what guy was in what movie or how to spell what word, and a hundred other details.
This thing is just getting rolling. The Internet was the big first step, the spark if you will. I think Linux might be a big log on the fire (free widely distributed quality software). I think it might end at nanotech and quantum mechanics.
We really are moving on to a new and exciting age. Information is power and the Net basically gives every single person (connected to it, an important technicality) a Whole Lotta Power.
Media, as an example, is seeing a huge shift as it becomes easier and easier to become a media gatekeeper or content creator. Truly interactive media (where you create the content) is already here, you're reading it.
One the whole, How People Communicate, is changing and that has wide reaching unforseen consequences (hopefully benificial) on society.
The only profound effect that the net has had on society in general is that Joe User can now look up scores on espn.com instead of watching the little ticker at the bottom of CNN on tv, and buy stuff with one click from amazon as opposed to actually having to go to a store.
;^)
That's for people who see the 'Net like a newspaper, not a "Brain Extender(tm)" . Even these things you say are trivial are amazing. Ordering products with the click of a mouse, from ANY store ANYwhere. That's tremendous, especially considering the amount of informational organization that needs to occur to get you your new Antonio Banderas Blow-up Doll overnight.
Or Linux, which wouldn't have existed without the Net. Or the way MP3 are changing the music industry. Entire industries are being obsoleted and created on a monthly basis, and you say the effect isn't profound? I can type up a paper, put it on the server in my apartment and you can read it from ANYwhere in the World, that's profound, even more so because of the content
I could go on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, about this, but I won't. The Internet is cool.
That's a good comic. Go check it out for a bit if you haven't. The site needs some serious usability work but the comedy is dead on. Esp. the M$ bashing Linux slant.
i've even set my users page as home on a couple of systems (quick poll: how many computers do you have with /. as the start page? (4)). Then if you click on a story you have login again.
I e-mailed Rob about this a while back, maybe I should send it to pater@slashdot.org??
(and getting that (no +1 button) back would be nice)
That's the real problem with /.'s moderation system: it incites people to act POLITICALLY CORRECTLY.
Actually, Political Correctness was introduced with Meta-Moderation. If you moderated a "darkly funny" joke up, then get meta-moderated by a tight ass you lose karma. This leads to conservative moderation and ultimately PC behaviour. It's because Rob added a conscience to the system (something above the action that determines if it is good or bad).