As usual, slashdot editors fail to see the larger picture.
I don't think this is fair.
It's really only a few, most notably these days Michael. Usually quite uninformed, but not afraid to speak loudly about it. I wish Slashdot would fire him. (Related note: anyone else notice Timothy seems to be getting better. Maybe it is worth while giving honest, non-flaming criticism?)
Furthermore, Zimbabwe is willing to accept the corn if the US will agree to mill it before shipping. The additional cost of milling is minimal, but is not covered by the aid package.
As the article states, the milling is actually a significant added cost at an additional ~25% increase. (The corn is estimated to be worth $95/metric ton. To mill it would be an additional $25/metric ton.)
I think the article is a little skewed. The United States is the one making a very large donation to a poor company for almost no (if any) self-benifit, yet it is painted as the bad guy for not agreeing to mill the corn as well! Note that is the EXACT SAME CORN you get in the grocery store. I.e. we're not subjecting Zimbabwe to a lower standard than we place on our own people.
If Europe wants to continue to claim to be concerned about the world as well, yet also wants to push back on genetically modified foodstuff, would it be so hard for multiple countries to kick in 25% of the United States donation and pay for it be milled (and thus eliminate the chance that they will be sold genetically modified corn)?
I'm been in a similar situation (with NT, not XP though).
What I did was create a 3rd parition in FAT32 or VFAT32 that both OSes could read/write to. NT got to use NTFS and was happy, Linux got to use ext2 and was happy, and I got to share my data in both and was happy.:)
First, either kids or criminals. Then whichever of the first two wasn't gotten. Then, those who'll accept extra benefits for it (generally implemented by removing said pre-existing benefits and then only giving what you had before back if you submit.)
Finally, it's mandatory.
Sounds like a pretty clear requirement of the technology being mandated. In fact, seems like the entire point.
I am not celebrating sys admin day. Frankly, I find it ridiculous. Enough with the self-martyring. For a profession paid an average of $60,5000 (well above national average), I think your take home pay should be sufficent enough.
Yes, there can be the occasional developer that makes your life hell. Guess what? There's the occasional BOFH who does the same for developers. By large both groups are good people, but every profession has their share of assholes.
Yes, you work overtime. YOU KNEW THAT BEFORE YOU GOT INTO IT. And damn it, so does everyone else in IT: Developers, CTO's, QA. And speaking of QA, talk about people who get no respect for what they have to put into it. It's the nature of the beast.
You do your job. You do your best. You take pride in it. That should be enough.
My two cents, -Bill
And no, I don't want a developer's thank you day either.
I wasn't generalizing. And you can block all stories I post if you'd like:)
I'm hesitant to respond, but since I hear the beating of the "you-can-block-editors-you-dislike" drum, more and more these days, I feel somewhat obligated. It seems a lot of editors feel this is a solution.
I would like to explain why I feel it is not. Or rather, it's not a solution that works in all cases.
Slashdot has given us two great tools for tweaking what we want to see: blocking an editor & making someone a friend/enemy.
In the case of a moronic user, it works well. I can just make them a foe/enemy and adjust my preferences to score it beneath my threshold. In the case of an editor like Katz, who posts almost exclusively his own commentary, it also works well. As you state, I can block all his stories.
But what about when an editor posts stories that aren't his? That is, what about all the stories coming from the submission bin? Often, they're independent of the editor and really dependent upon who ever's on shift to watch the bin.
In these cases, sometimes the editors just post the story, and if it's a topic they're especially interested in, participate in the discussion. Perfect! That's helping keep slashdot a healthy, active community.
In other cases, some editors, notably yourself & Michael, aggressively integrate your own opinions and commentary into other slashdot worthy stories, instead of simply posting the story and adding your comments as a regular user. Some, like Jamie, will even go out of their way to update an existing story they didn't post to add their commentary!
To be clear: I have no problems with you -- or the others -- having an opinion. You're certainly entitled to it.
But, I, and a large part of the slashdot community would rather just ignore you. Something you make it very difficult for everyone to do. As someone who often pulls from the bin, you make it so we can't ignore you without ignoring half the daily submissions to slashdot!
I don't understand why you guys do it. You build use these great tools, only to circumvent them! In this case you, I can't block you without blocking half the user base.
The solution is pretty simple, and it's been pleaded for by myself and other user's. Post the story, and inject your commentary just as all the other user's do: in the comments area.
Sure, you aren't going to get every invalid version, but who wants that anyway? For clean rips, you should be able to narrow the range down a lot. No, it won't be one-to-one like a CD, but that's okay too.
For someone who's done it already, check out MoodLogic. Hooks in with winamp too.
...both 1984 and Animal Farm should be viewed as a declaration against tyrants, not an endorsement of conservative values.
Books should be viewed as each reader perceives them. There is no right or wrong. You can quibble over an author's intention's, but that's a wholely different question as to how they should be perceived.
One of the great things about books is the expression of thought, and the freedom of each reader to interpret each idea as they see fit. Look how many people can read the same book (e.g., the Bible) and come away with so many varying viewpoints on it.
-Bill
Still the Best: Herman Miller Aeron
on
Painless Chairs?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
If you want pure comfort and support, you still can't beat Herman Miller's Aeron's.
Some complain about the cost, but for me, not having pain in my back and shoulders are well worth it. (I'm 6'6" so finding comfortable furniture is often a challenge for me too.) They last forever, allow you to customize just about every aspect you care about (height/tilt/recline/arm height/optional lumbar), and fade transparently into the background, like a good working enviroment should. The only time you'll even notice the chair is if it's missing, or someone tried to replace it with something lesser (i.e. just about any other chair).
If it's coming out of your pocket look around for a good price. With the dot com bust, I was able to pick up a used one for home use for about $200.
Forgive me if I'm being dense, but how does replacing the word "mocha" prevent cross-site scripting problems? Is mocha() a function in some language with semantics "format the hard drive"?
No, nothing like that.
"mocha" is what javascript was called before the big java hype. You'd want to replace "mocha" for the same reason you want to replace "javascript", as many browsers will still treat the two the same for backwards-compatiblity reasons.
Recall that only Labor has real value; and the Labor it took to make you (nyuck) is commonly available, therefore of low value.
This sounds like an odd perversion of Locke's Two Treatises of Government. The only thing we control is our own actions, but that's different from value. What defines value in of itself is going to vary (most would say it's what anyone is willing to pay, while others, like Nietzsche disagreed somewhat).
Second, grouping all action together as "Labor" is simply too broad of a generatlization. It fails to distingish between skilled and unskilled labor, and that the demand for a particular type of labor will vary over time and location.
You get points for asserting a question claim as a statement of fact, as well as lumping FOUR questionable claims (only labor has real value, labor is commonly available, labor is of low value, implying all labor is the same). Common debate trick, but you executed it well, and it usually gets you mod'ed up on Slashdot.;)
However, YOU only control a natural resource - your life.
Well, this is where you went crazy. The nazi-like let's-make-furinture-out-of-people's-skins slant makes me hope to God you're not serious.
I have to admit that I'm somewhat cringing at that solution.
I think it will work in a lot of enviroments, but if you're heavily concerned with security (e.g. you're passing around credit card numbers), and it sounds like the poster is, relaying information, at any point, unencrypted is a bad idea. If you can't get around (e.g. sometimes front end webservers must talk to DBs) just to limit that network channel to just those devices to reduce the odds of penetration.
Having said that, your problem shouldn't be too bad -- just make sure each physical server has the correct certificates for www.mydomain.com. Did you run into problems with that?
Slashdot Mirror
When did Cliff start to get paid by the question?
Three questions today? And all three lame? Geezzz... Ease up on the posting trigger there, hoss!
-Bill
As usual, slashdot editors fail to see the larger picture.
I don't think this is fair.
It's really only a few, most notably these days Michael. Usually quite uninformed, but not afraid to speak loudly about it. I wish Slashdot would fire him. (Related note: anyone else notice Timothy seems to be getting better. Maybe it is worth while giving honest, non-flaming criticism?)
Furthermore, Zimbabwe is willing to accept the corn if the US will agree to mill it before shipping. The additional cost of milling is minimal, but is not covered by the aid package.
As the article states, the milling is actually a significant added cost at an additional ~25% increase. (The corn is estimated to be worth $95/metric ton. To mill it would be an additional $25/metric ton.)
I think the article is a little skewed. The United States is the one making a very large donation to a poor company for almost no (if any) self-benifit, yet it is painted as the bad guy for not agreeing to mill the corn as well! Note that is the EXACT SAME CORN you get in the grocery store. I.e. we're not subjecting Zimbabwe to a lower standard than we place on our own people.
If Europe wants to continue to claim to be concerned about the world as well, yet also wants to push back on genetically modified foodstuff, would it be so hard for multiple countries to kick in 25% of the United States donation and pay for it be milled (and thus eliminate the chance that they will be sold genetically modified corn)?
-Bill
I'm been in a similar situation (with NT, not XP though).
:)
What I did was create a 3rd parition in FAT32 or VFAT32 that both OSes could read/write to. NT got to use NTFS and was happy, Linux got to use ext2 and was happy, and I got to share my data in both and was happy.
-Bill
What use is a rescue disk without a floppy drive to put it in?
The CD drive? My rescue compact disk doesn't fit in the floppy drive anyway.
-Bill
Alas, neither funny nor original.
-Bill
I fully agree.
;-)
XP is not *that* bad.
-Bill
From the parent node:
First, either kids or criminals. Then whichever of the first two wasn't gotten. Then, those who'll accept extra benefits for it (generally implemented by removing said pre-existing benefits and then only giving what you had before back if you submit.)
Finally, it's mandatory.
Sounds like a pretty clear requirement of the technology being mandated. In fact, seems like the entire point.
-Bill
Exactly, which is why you missed the point ENTIRELY.
-Bill
You were supplying us an example of a technology the government ended up mandating?
-Bill
So you're saying Onstar is a manadate government-run tracking technology?
Talk about paraniod! *sheesh*
-Bill
Ahh, is that where it came from? I was wondering. It is unfortunate, Klingon inheritance aside.
Guess Marketing does have some value after all!
-Bill
I am not celebrating sys admin day. Frankly, I find it ridiculous. Enough with the self-martyring. For a profession paid an average of $60,5000 (well above national average), I think your take home pay should be sufficent enough.
Yes, there can be the occasional developer that makes your life hell. Guess what? There's the occasional BOFH who does the same for developers. By large both groups are good people, but every profession has their share of assholes.
Yes, you work overtime. YOU KNEW THAT BEFORE YOU GOT INTO IT. And damn it, so does everyone else in IT: Developers, CTO's, QA. And speaking of QA, talk about people who get no respect for what they have to put into it. It's the nature of the beast.
You do your job. You do your best. You take pride in it. That should be enough.
My two cents,
-Bill
And no, I don't want a developer's thank you day either.
I wasn't generalizing. And you can block all stories I post if you'd like :)
I'm hesitant to respond, but since I hear the beating of the "you-can-block-editors-you-dislike" drum, more and more these days, I feel somewhat obligated. It seems a lot of editors feel this is a solution.
I would like to explain why I feel it is not. Or rather, it's not a solution that works in all cases.
Slashdot has given us two great tools for tweaking what we want to see: blocking an editor & making someone a friend/enemy.
In the case of a moronic user, it works well. I can just make them a foe/enemy and adjust my preferences to score it beneath my threshold. In the case of an editor like Katz, who posts almost exclusively his own commentary, it also works well. As you state, I can block all his stories.
But what about when an editor posts stories that aren't his? That is, what about all the stories coming from the submission bin? Often, they're independent of the editor and really dependent upon who ever's on shift to watch the bin.
In these cases, sometimes the editors just post the story, and if it's a topic they're especially interested in, participate in the discussion. Perfect! That's helping keep slashdot a healthy, active community.
In other cases, some editors, notably yourself & Michael, aggressively integrate your own opinions and commentary into other slashdot worthy stories, instead of simply posting the story and adding your comments as a regular user. Some, like Jamie, will even go out of their way to update an existing story they didn't post to add their commentary!
To be clear: I have no problems with you -- or the others -- having an opinion. You're certainly entitled to it.
But, I, and a large part of the slashdot community would rather just ignore you. Something you make it very difficult for everyone to do. As someone who often pulls from the bin, you make it so we can't ignore you without ignoring half the daily submissions to slashdot!
I don't understand why you guys do it. You build use these great tools, only to circumvent them! In this case you, I can't block you without blocking half the user base.
The solution is pretty simple, and it's been pleaded for by myself and other user's. Post the story, and inject your commentary just as all the other user's do: in the comments area.
Anyway, two cents.
-Bill
It's still really useful. I'm usually able to find what I'm looking for via Google's interface.
-Bill
Sure, you aren't going to get every invalid version, but who wants that anyway? For clean rips, you should be able to narrow the range down a lot. No, it won't be one-to-one like a CD, but that's okay too.
For someone who's done it already, check out MoodLogic. Hooks in with winamp too.
-Bill
Aren't porting and java supposed to be oxymoronic? ;-)
-Bill
Do you have over 1000 [slashdot.org] comments? Why Not?
Quality over quantity?
-Bill
perceptions are worth nothing and useless if they dont at least swarm around a truth.
Okay, so how do you know what is truth?
-Bill
...both 1984 and Animal Farm should be viewed as a declaration against tyrants, not an endorsement of conservative values.
Books should be viewed as each reader perceives them. There is no right or wrong. You can quibble over an author's intention's, but that's a wholely different question as to how they should be perceived.
One of the great things about books is the expression of thought, and the freedom of each reader to interpret each idea as they see fit. Look how many people can read the same book (e.g., the Bible) and come away with so many varying viewpoints on it.
-Bill
If you want pure comfort and support, you still can't beat Herman Miller's Aeron's.
Some complain about the cost, but for me, not having pain in my back and shoulders are well worth it. (I'm 6'6" so finding comfortable furniture is often a challenge for me too.) They last forever, allow you to customize just about every aspect you care about (height/tilt/recline/arm height/optional lumbar), and fade transparently into the background, like a good working enviroment should. The only time you'll even notice the chair is if it's missing, or someone tried to replace it with something lesser (i.e. just about any other chair).
If it's coming out of your pocket look around for a good price. With the dot com bust, I was able to pick up a used one for home use for about $200.
-Bill
Forgive me if I'm being dense, but how does replacing the word "mocha" prevent cross-site scripting problems? Is mocha() a function in some language with semantics "format the hard drive"?
No, nothing like that.
"mocha" is what javascript was called before the big java hype. You'd want to replace "mocha" for the same reason you want to replace "javascript", as many browsers will still treat the two the same for backwards-compatiblity reasons.
-Bill
emacs -f tetris
:)
'nuff said.
-Bill
Or, said another way:
Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
-Bill
Recall that only Labor has real value; and the Labor it took to make you (nyuck) is commonly available, therefore of low value.
;)
This sounds like an odd perversion of Locke's Two Treatises of Government . The only thing we control is our own actions, but that's different from value. What defines value in of itself is going to vary (most would say it's what anyone is willing to pay, while others, like Nietzsche disagreed somewhat).
Second, grouping all action together as "Labor" is simply too broad of a generatlization. It fails to distingish between skilled and unskilled labor, and that the demand for a particular type of labor will vary over time and location.
You get points for asserting a question claim as a statement of fact, as well as lumping FOUR questionable claims (only labor has real value, labor is commonly available, labor is of low value, implying all labor is the same). Common debate trick, but you executed it well, and it usually gets you mod'ed up on Slashdot.
However, YOU only control a natural resource - your life.
Well, this is where you went crazy. The nazi-like let's-make-furinture-out-of-people's-skins slant makes me hope to God you're not serious.
-Bill
I have to admit that I'm somewhat cringing at that solution.
I think it will work in a lot of enviroments, but if you're heavily concerned with security (e.g. you're passing around credit card numbers), and it sounds like the poster is, relaying information, at any point, unencrypted is a bad idea. If you can't get around (e.g. sometimes front end webservers must talk to DBs) just to limit that network channel to just those devices to reduce the odds of penetration.
Having said that, your problem shouldn't be too bad -- just make sure each physical server has the correct certificates for www.mydomain.com. Did you run into problems with that?
-Bill