If that is your sig, please use the signature field properly.
The reason I don't use the sig field is a nasty experience. On 9/11 2001 I removed a witty joke sig that I had back then, and participated in a huge thread about the tragedies of that day. A couple of days later I put the sig back and took part in other discussions. Then for some reason I checked one of my 9/11 comments, and was horrified to see my witty joke sig under my comments there. In that context the sig was horribly out of place and disrespectful.
If slashdot should offer optionally "sticky" sigs (sigs that stay with each comment), like Scoop sites do, I'd use that immediately.
I'm not going to comment on it or the rest of your post, because the way this stuff gets modded +5 insightful around here, *anything* I might say to the contrary would be viewed as flamebait (even what I am posting now), no matter how true
If you don't express your opinions people won't listen to your opinions. They can't.
But don't worry, the story is more than twelve hours old, so it's very unlikely that a moderator will pass by. You can express your opinion freely now. You have nothing to fear. Or almost nothing. The risk is very small.
Of course a discussion would probably be rather fruitless since by now we're all alone in this thread. That is probably a good reason to save it for some other opportunity with more people participating.
If anybody would care to prove me wrong, mod this insightful (not that I think my comment really deserves it).
If you want to be modded Insightful or Interesting you have to express insightful or interesting opinions. Declaring that you won't say what you think usually isn't enough.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
There is no protection from terrorism. If somebody really wants to get you, they will. If you spend your life worrying over it, stress'll get you before the bomb.
I wish the United States would understand that, and would tone down their hysteria about terrorism. That hysteria has made such incredible damage! Turning Iraq into an incredibly fertile breeding ground for terrorism is just one example among many.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
Any inventor/writer/musician should be free to file a claim with the restitution bureau.
So in your opinion the power that now rests with consumers and shareholders should instead rest with bureaucrats, assigned by the State to decide the fate of inventors based on "value to society"?
In Communist East Germany, if you wanted a car, the only choice was the ridiculously inefficient and simple Trabant, because decisionmakers felt that the people did not need better cars. Initiating things like our home computers and the Internet is quite impossible in such systems, because you can't convince a state bureaucrat of the value of such an invention by describing it. To be a good bureaucrat you need to be cautious and exact, not bold and imaginative. If a state bureaucrat takes bold leaps with the taxpayer's money, he's not doing his job right.
I respect the bureaucrats, they do important work. But it's not their job to be visionaries. Your arrangement sounds quite horrible to me.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
Please don't mention iris - or anything to do with eyes - in the same sentence as "explode". Some of us are squeamish.
Squeamish? But the writeup was extremely careful and considerate! They didn't even mention the feeler that checks if the eyeball is dead or alive by measuring blood pressure in the space between eyeball and cranium.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
I've always felt that the United States seems full of contradictions, but this is absolutely amazing! Fingerprint "evidence" is rarely ever used in practice these days.
The FBI has more requests for fingerprint checks than they can handle,
the FBI rarely accepts a request to run a fingerprint scan
Moore's law has proved accurate for three decades, so we can reliably predict that if Windows gets infected in twelve minutes today, in December next year it'll be six minutes, in June 2008 three minutes, and so on. By 2017 Windows will get infected in just 50 milliseconds.
The speed with which PC's can become infected has now shortened.
Of course it's faster now than before! What did you expect? Considering how much Microsoft has invested in improvements, of course it's become more efficient!
Yeah, and the guy you linked to tries to teach correct English usage while making errors like "Trying to pretend [...] that a blurb from a random jackass which claims to be an authority [...] is nothing but a way to delude one's self [...]"
Never-Review writes "The speed with which/. editors can become infected has now shortened. If your/. editors are not properly protected, it will take 12 minutes before a story becomes duped, according to world-based geek crowd Slashdotters. They have detected 7,944 new dupes in the first half of this year, a 59% increase over the same time span last year."
(Okay, so we're not quite there yet. But with Moore's law...)
Dense? No, it's a very large amount of information to sift through.
but could you tell me which section title this is under?
Under the title How did the moderation system develop?, scroll down to the smaller title Who, and below that, in the indented list, you'll find the following (all emphasis by italics is mine):
Regular Slashdot Readers The scripts track average accesses from each logged-in user. It then selects eligible users who read an average number of times. The homepage doesn't count either. It then picks users from the middle of the pack- no obsessive compulsive reloaders, and nobody who just happened to read an article this week.
This paragraph only mentions that the system checks how often you read, but I'm pretty sure several other factors are checked too. My guess is that a majority of users metamoderate only seldom, so if the scripts look for averages in that, three times a day is probably far from the average that they are looking for.
In a way this arrangement is unfair, because you have contributed a lot to Slashdot by metamoderating so much. But the moderation system isn't about fairness, it's only about keeping the site readable in spite of the massive crapflooding and trolling. (In fact from that point of view I find The World Forum and Kuro5hinmuch nicer and friendlier than Slashdot. (And both of them are well worth visiting for other reasons too!))
I think the periods when I get mod points most frequently on Slashdot are periods when I visit Slashdot maybe two to four times a week or so, reading only two or three articles-and-discussions on each visit, and metamoderate only once a fortnight or so. -- But that's only a very uncertain impression. I haven't kept track.
If you change your habits you'll probably need to allow several weeks to let the system get used to your new habits. Good luck.
My guess is you're too active. To get to moderate, you have to be somewhere midway between the very active users and the very inactive users. This is explained in the FAQ, in the part about moderating.
Slashdot Mirror
If that is your sig, please use the signature field properly.
The reason I don't use the sig field is a nasty experience. On 9/11 2001 I removed a witty joke sig that I had back then, and participated in a huge thread about the tragedies of that day. A couple of days later I put the sig back and took part in other discussions. Then for some reason I checked one of my 9/11 comments, and was horrified to see my witty joke sig under my comments there. In that context the sig was horribly out of place and disrespectful.
If slashdot should offer optionally "sticky" sigs (sigs that stay with each comment), like Scoop sites do, I'd use that immediately.
I'm not going to comment on it or the rest of your post, because the way this stuff gets modded +5 insightful around here, *anything* I might say to the contrary would be viewed as flamebait (even what I am posting now), no matter how true
If you don't express your opinions people won't listen to your opinions. They can't.
But don't worry, the story is more than twelve hours old, so it's very unlikely that a moderator will pass by. You can express your opinion freely now. You have nothing to fear. Or almost nothing. The risk is very small.
Of course a discussion would probably be rather fruitless since by now we're all alone in this thread. That is probably a good reason to save it for some other opportunity with more people participating.
If anybody would care to prove me wrong, mod this insightful (not that I think my comment really deserves it).
If you want to be modded Insightful or Interesting you have to express insightful or interesting opinions. Declaring that you won't say what you think usually isn't enough.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
Argh. I have had it with people and organisations cashing in on terrorism.
The United States has shown the way: How to take advantage of terrorism for profit, entertainment and re-election.
The writeup mentions the military-industrial complex. Maybe we need to start discussing the terror-media-politics complex.
I do hope my sig isn't too optimistic.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
There is no protection from terrorism. If somebody really wants to get you, they will.
If you spend your life worrying over it, stress'll get you before the bomb.
I wish the United States would understand that, and would tone down their hysteria about terrorism. That hysteria has made such incredible damage! Turning Iraq into an incredibly fertile breeding ground for terrorism is just one example among many.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
Any inventor/writer/musician should be free to file a claim with the restitution bureau.
So in your opinion the power that now rests with consumers and shareholders should instead rest with bureaucrats, assigned by the State to decide the fate of inventors based on "value to society"?
In Communist East Germany, if you wanted a car, the only choice was the ridiculously inefficient and simple Trabant, because decisionmakers felt that the people did not need better cars. Initiating things like our home computers and the Internet is quite impossible in such systems, because you can't convince a state bureaucrat of the value of such an invention by describing it. To be a good bureaucrat you need to be cautious and exact, not bold and imaginative. If a state bureaucrat takes bold leaps with the taxpayer's money, he's not doing his job right.
I respect the bureaucrats, they do important work. But it's not their job to be visionaries. Your arrangement sounds quite horrible to me.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
Please don't mention iris - or anything to do with eyes - in the same sentence as "explode". Some of us are squeamish.
Squeamish? But the writeup was extremely careful and considerate! They didn't even mention the feeler that checks if the eyeball is dead or alive by measuring blood pressure in the space between eyeball and cranium.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
what are the odds of that?
I wouldn't worry too much, because it seems such a bomb would cost around a quadrillion dollars. (I'm assuming Moore's Law doesn't apply here.)
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
It's checking if you're connecting through a proxy. There really should be a FAQ entry about slashdot's evil-looking port scanning!
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
Maybe you should become an editor here.
Or maybe you'd enjoy SciScoop more than Slashdot.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
if you used things like it's self-evident and obvious before a leap of logic, anything could be justified.
Which means that to get a valid argument you have to put the word after the leap of logic, obviously.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
it'd sort of be embaressing to spend eternity with a bunch of people you don't know.
Embarrassing? Can't you just throw a party or something and get to know each other?
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
The article did talk a lot about the relationships between the Amish and the English.
-- Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
I'm pretty sure you mean taikonaut (unless the Chinese are really sending Americans into space...)
By that logic a French spacefarer would be called éspaceonaut, a Swedish rymdonaut and a German Weltraumonaut.
Why use this multilingual arrangement specifically for spacefarers? Why not use it also for airline pilots, bakers, mushrooms and shoes?
Terrorism may have turned the United States into a nation of fear and aggression, but it won't succeed in Europe.
The latest stable version is often actually stale
Henceforth we'll label them "sta(b)le".
The only problem with that is the odd cookie that you do want to keep, but they're pretty rare in my experience.
You can whitelist the ones you want to keep.
Are you sure you want your laptop back all icky?
I've always felt that the United States seems full of contradictions, but this is absolutely amazing!
Fingerprint "evidence" is rarely ever used in practice these days.
The FBI has more requests for fingerprint checks than they can handle,
the FBI rarely accepts a request to run a fingerprint scan
--
Damn! Now they'll patent anniversary discounts presented on websites.
Moore's law has proved accurate for three decades, so we can reliably predict that if Windows gets infected in twelve minutes today, in December next year it'll be six minutes, in June 2008 three minutes, and so on. By 2017 Windows will get infected in just 50 milliseconds.
The speed with which PC's can become infected has now shortened.
Of course it's faster now than before! What did you expect? Considering how much Microsoft has invested in improvements, of course it's become more efficient!
--
Yeah, and the guy you linked to tries to teach correct English usage while making errors like "Trying to pretend [...] that a blurb from a random jackass which claims to be an authority [...] is nothing but a way to delude one's self [...]"
How ironic.
--
--
Never-Review writes "The speed with which /. editors can become infected has now shortened. If your /. editors are not properly protected, it will take 12 minutes before a story becomes duped, according to world-based geek crowd Slashdotters. They have detected 7,944 new dupes in the first half of this year, a 59% increase over the same time span last year."
(Okay, so we're not quite there yet. But with Moore's law...)
--
--
Dense? No, it's a very large amount of information to sift through.
but could you tell me which section title this is under?
Under the title How did the moderation system develop? , scroll down to the smaller title Who, and below that, in the indented list, you'll find the following (all emphasis by italics is mine):
This paragraph only mentions that the system checks how often you read, but I'm pretty sure several other factors are checked too. My guess is that a majority of users metamoderate only seldom, so if the scripts look for averages in that, three times a day is probably far from the average that they are looking for.
In a way this arrangement is unfair, because you have contributed a lot to Slashdot by metamoderating so much. But the moderation system isn't about fairness, it's only about keeping the site readable in spite of the massive crapflooding and trolling. (In fact from that point of view I find The World Forum and Kuro5hin much nicer and friendlier than Slashdot. (And both of them are well worth visiting for other reasons too!))
I think the periods when I get mod points most frequently on Slashdot are periods when I visit Slashdot maybe two to four times a week or so, reading only two or three articles-and-discussions on each visit, and metamoderate only once a fortnight or so. -- But that's only a very uncertain impression. I haven't kept track.
If you change your habits you'll probably need to allow several weeks to let the system get used to your new habits. Good luck.
It disturbs me greatly that the parent is currently modded "insightful."
You must be new here.
See my reply to the grandparent post.
My guess is you're too active. To get to moderate, you have to be somewhere midway between the very active users and the very inactive users. This is explained in the FAQ, in the part about moderating.
Good luck.
--
--