You'll have a notification on every page's sidebar that you have points, and a drop-down under ever comment (in threads you haven't posted in) if you have points. There is no mystery. If you are uncertain then you don't.
Thank you for the explanation...I must not have mod points since I see nothing like that in my sidebar or anywhere else.
(I looked through all the slashdot FAQs and stuff earlier but saw no real explanation of what I would see if I had 'em.)
Thanks, maeka! (Obligatory "If I had mod points, they'd be yours", heh)
"You can actually see who asked the developer to write that code," said Nikhil Kaul, a product manager at test/dev software maker SmartBear Software. "Then if you go upstream you can see who that person's boss was...and see if testing happened...and, if testing didn't happen. So you can go from the bottom up to nail everyone."
I sense a feeding frenzy in law firms all over the country, with lawyers asking themselves, "How can we get a piece of this pie?"
The audit trail might not include everybody, but it'll include enough people so that the ones not included will likely be given up by the ones that are. I doubt that anyone who was involved is going to escape unscathed. And the audit trail at this point appears to include a devastatingly detailed trail of managers and executives who knowingly signed off on this. Some will deny that they knew what this was all about, but some simply won't be able to claim that.
There's no way to make this into an "oopsie" moment or claim it was a simple mistake. This was planned and approved at the highest levels.
Heads will roll, and I expect a river of blood and money will be flowing from Volkswagen for years over this...and that is as it should be. They did this in the name of profits, and now it's time to make those fuckers pay.
Moron. The CEO has explained that they're using the extra revenue to fund R&D for new drug development, marketing to expand the market for this drug, and general corporate purposes.
Oh yeah, totally believable. That guy would never lie to anyone, especially in light of the immense outpouring of outrage and hate against him.
The solution is SAP, or course. If they'd just hired SAP for this project they could have wasted all that money up front without the need for a middleman.
or potentially even in database dumps (e.g. eliminating needlessly duplicated rows,
I don't see how an algorithm could ever really determine with any certainty which/what rows were "needlessly duplicated", as the reason(s) for duplication could vary so widely as to make it a guessing game. Maybe a row was there to test "needless" duplication.
Unless it was able to read the designer's mind or somehow positively determine for itself what the definition of "needless" was, this would be a disaster waiting to happen. Maybe a duplicated row was there for a good reason, just not one that's apparent. A database compression scheme should never decide for itself if a given row "deserves" to be there or not. There are just an endless number of ways for that to go wrong.
There are some applications where lossy compression is never, ever the correct choice.
Oh yes, by all means, lets discuss the ethics of lying, cheating, and stealing, not to mention willfully polluting the shit out of the atmosphere we all breathe.
Anyone that could possibly defend what VW here did is an idiot or a VW executive. This was corporate wrong-doing on a massive scale, and the fact that this made it into production means that it wasn't the work of some rogue engineer or even a rogue group.
This had to have been approved at the highest levels within the company- there is simply no other way this could have occurred.
It makes me long for the old days when all we could criticize Volkswagen for was building vehicles for the Nazis.
Except that they don't - because then you have to add in drownings, jellyfish attacks, lightning strikes, etc...
Exactly. Or being hit by boats, getting swept out to sea, moray eels, undertows, etc etc.
One might as well say that more people are "killed by ladders" than sharks. It's not the ladder that kills you, it's some activity that involves a ladder.
A shark attack is a direct mechanism of death — a thing that produces actual, physical harm. A selfie, on the other hand, is what health statisticians might classify as an “underlying mechanism” or an “intermediate mechanism,” depending on the exact circumstances: a thing that’s involved in, and maybe precipitates, an accident, but doesn’t actually cause any physical harm. (Unless your phone electrocutes you or something, but that’s a different situation.)
That may seem like a small distinction, but it’s actually pretty huge. Let’s turn to the World Health Organization to see how it breaks down the issue. WHO gives the example of a woman tripping over something on the floor and hitting her head on the counter; you’d never say that the thing on the floor killed her — that’s just the underlying mechanism. (Also, stupid.) The direct mechanism was hitting her head, just as in most “selfie deaths,” the direct mechanism is being struck by a car, falling down, what have you.
We could, for the sake of argument, compare the number of deaths from falling down the stairs to the number of deaths from shark attacks. Or we could compare the number of deaths while taking selfies to the number of deaths while swimming in the ocean.
But if we did that, we’d come to the boring conclusion that selfie-related deaths are total anomalies: a microscopic sliver of the big ole Death pie chart, scarcely even worth mentioning.
did anyone read the article? those guys have perfected their C*O speak.
You just don't understand the verbification of customer-facing, vertically-oriented, dynamic whiteboard portals. So in effect, these collaborative cross-platform methodologies employ seamless paradigms to repurpose transparent, misidentified strategic communities.
I'll take my "CEO Achievement" badge and golden parachute now, thankyouverymuch.
But even a massive advertising agency couldn't do it for, say, Bing.
I don't know...I had spicy tacos last night and took a giant Bing this morning. Then my Binging car wouldn't start so I had to walk to work, and wouldn't ya know it, I stepped in a big ol' pile of Bing.
"BING! BING! BING!" I screamed, as I tried to scrape the Bing off my shoes. My boss, who is a total Binghole yelled at me for being late, so I told him to Bing off. I got fired and now I feel like Bing.
As opposed to what, a lossy compression formula for data?
Well hell, if you don't need the original data back I've got a compressor algorithm that'll reduce a 50GB file to 1 byte every time. Sometimes even less than a byte, like maybe 0.25 bytes. In fact it reduces the file to such a small size that just finding it again turns out to be a real challenge...
I surely can't be in the minority in getting 15 mod points at a time. I have a rather unremarkable account history.
It may just be that I'm an idiot, lol. If I had mod points to give out, where would I see them or how would I know I had them?
I see no indication on the posts or names or anything that would indicate I had mod points. Hell, for all I know I have some and don't know it. Like I said, it may just be that I'm an idiot (that's the usual explanation, according to my wife).
Slashdot moderation isn't Youtube moderation. Slashdot grants users who have earned amount of Karma, and who visit the site regularly, 5 moderation points.
I understand that. Although I visit the site regularly and post stories (some of which are accepted and published) I've never seen or gotten karma. To me it feels as though an elite group is blessed with being able to "rule" on what's liked or not, which isn't necessarily representative of the community's actual take on any given story or comment.
So yes, I understand how it works, I just don't think it's a very good way to go about it. I also think that not being able to edit a post during a grace period to fix typos and errors is straight out of 1995. Seriously, would it be so awful to be able to have a 5-minute "grace" window to edit a post so we could fix typos or add relevant information?
It's an interesting comparison. While the slashdot system obviously allows us a more fine-grained expression of opinion, it's widely abused, e.g. people modding down posts as redundant or overrated because they disagree with the content of the post. And the maximum +5 score means you can't tell if just a handfull of people found a post interesting, or thousands of people.
^^^ THIS, times about a billion.
Was it a few people that disagreed with you, or 10,000? With slashdot's moderation system you'll never know.
Slashdot could show the full tally (i.e. "437 up votes and 192 down votes") but for some reason they want to use a lobotomized post rating system.
Once again, Facebook users provide a never-ending source of gullible suckers who will click on ANYTHING given the slightest encouragement.
Reason #32,461,273 why Facebook is a bad idea for the unwary, the unwise, and people with a propensity to click on everything they see.
Maybe someday I'll get a Facebook account so I can be exploited by advertisers and malware authors. I almost feel like I'm cheating them by not having an account.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Crystal author,
Fuck you.
Sincerely,
-JustAnotherOldGuy
You'll have a notification on every page's sidebar that you have points, and a drop-down under ever comment (in threads you haven't posted in) if you have points. There is no mystery. If you are uncertain then you don't.
Thank you for the explanation...I must not have mod points since I see nothing like that in my sidebar or anywhere else.
(I looked through all the slashdot FAQs and stuff earlier but saw no real explanation of what I would see if I had 'em.)
Thanks, maeka! (Obligatory "If I had mod points, they'd be yours", heh)
"You can actually see who asked the developer to write that code," said Nikhil Kaul, a product manager at test/dev software maker SmartBear Software. "Then if you go upstream you can see who that person's boss was...and see if testing happened...and, if testing didn't happen. So you can go from the bottom up to nail everyone."
I sense a feeding frenzy in law firms all over the country, with lawyers asking themselves, "How can we get a piece of this pie?"
The audit trail might not include everybody, but it'll include enough people so that the ones not included will likely be given up by the ones that are. I doubt that anyone who was involved is going to escape unscathed. And the audit trail at this point appears to include a devastatingly detailed trail of managers and executives who knowingly signed off on this. Some will deny that they knew what this was all about, but some simply won't be able to claim that.
There's no way to make this into an "oopsie" moment or claim it was a simple mistake. This was planned and approved at the highest levels.
Heads will roll, and I expect a river of blood and money will be flowing from Volkswagen for years over this...and that is as it should be. They did this in the name of profits, and now it's time to make those fuckers pay.
Moron. The CEO has explained that they're using the extra revenue to fund R&D for new drug development, marketing to expand the market for this drug, and general corporate purposes.
Oh yeah, totally believable. That guy would never lie to anyone, especially in light of the immense outpouring of outrage and hate against him.
The solution is SAP, or course. If they'd just hired SAP for this project they could have wasted all that money up front without the need for a middleman.
or potentially even in database dumps (e.g. eliminating needlessly duplicated rows,
I don't see how an algorithm could ever really determine with any certainty which/what rows were "needlessly duplicated", as the reason(s) for duplication could vary so widely as to make it a guessing game. Maybe a row was there to test "needless" duplication.
Unless it was able to read the designer's mind or somehow positively determine for itself what the definition of "needless" was, this would be a disaster waiting to happen. Maybe a duplicated row was there for a good reason, just not one that's apparent. A database compression scheme should never decide for itself if a given row "deserves" to be there or not. There are just an endless number of ways for that to go wrong.
There are some applications where lossy compression is never, ever the correct choice.
It's easy to joke about, but in many cases lossy encoding/compression algorithms can be incredibly useful.
Yes yes, I know. But for something like a compressed database dump....no. Or medical imaging....no. Or forensic work.....no.
Pictures of cats....yes.
Oh yes, by all means, lets discuss the ethics of lying, cheating, and stealing, not to mention willfully polluting the shit out of the atmosphere we all breathe.
Anyone that could possibly defend what VW here did is an idiot or a VW executive. This was corporate wrong-doing on a massive scale, and the fact that this made it into production means that it wasn't the work of some rogue engineer or even a rogue group.
This had to have been approved at the highest levels within the company- there is simply no other way this could have occurred.
It makes me long for the old days when all we could criticize Volkswagen for was building vehicles for the Nazis.
Except that they don't - because then you have to add in drownings, jellyfish attacks, lightning strikes, etc...
Exactly. Or being hit by boats, getting swept out to sea, moray eels, undertows, etc etc.
One might as well say that more people are "killed by ladders" than sharks. It's not the ladder that kills you, it's some activity that involves a ladder.
Re:You're being pedantic...
I prefer to think of it as being "accurate".
My guess is they'll still be litigating this ridiculous nonsense in 100 years, or by the time we have flying cars, whichever takes longer.
And it only took how many decades to sort this shit out?
A shark attack is a direct mechanism of death — a thing that produces actual, physical harm. A selfie, on the other hand, is what health statisticians might classify as an “underlying mechanism” or an “intermediate mechanism,” depending on the exact circumstances: a thing that’s involved in, and maybe precipitates, an accident, but doesn’t actually cause any physical harm. (Unless your phone electrocutes you or something, but that’s a different situation.)
That may seem like a small distinction, but it’s actually pretty huge. Let’s turn to the World Health Organization to see how it breaks down the issue. WHO gives the example of a woman tripping over something on the floor and hitting her head on the counter; you’d never say that the thing on the floor killed her — that’s just the underlying mechanism. (Also, stupid.) The direct mechanism was hitting her head, just as in most “selfie deaths,” the direct mechanism is being struck by a car, falling down, what have you.
We could, for the sake of argument, compare the number of deaths from falling down the stairs to the number of deaths from shark attacks. Or we could compare the number of deaths while taking selfies to the number of deaths while swimming in the ocean.
But if we did that, we’d come to the boring conclusion that selfie-related deaths are total anomalies: a microscopic sliver of the big ole Death pie chart, scarcely even worth mentioning.
did anyone read the article? those guys have perfected their C*O speak.
You just don't understand the verbification of customer-facing, vertically-oriented, dynamic whiteboard portals. So in effect, these collaborative cross-platform methodologies employ seamless paradigms to repurpose transparent, misidentified strategic communities.
I'll take my "CEO Achievement" badge and golden parachute now, thankyouverymuch.
But even a massive advertising agency couldn't do it for, say, Bing.
I don't know...I had spicy tacos last night and took a giant Bing this morning. Then my Binging car wouldn't start so I had to walk to work, and wouldn't ya know it, I stepped in a big ol' pile of Bing.
"BING! BING! BING!" I screamed, as I tried to scrape the Bing off my shoes. My boss, who is a total Binghole yelled at me for being late, so I told him to Bing off. I got fired and now I feel like Bing.
What about just using homeopathic treatments instead?
Yeah, but if you forgot to take your homeopathic meds, you'd overdose.
People and companies that do this sort of predatory business are truly Scum of the Earth.
I don't care how legal it is, this is just pure scumbaggery at its absolute worst.
"I don't care if you die, I need to make a profit!"
It is a "lossless compressed data format..."
As opposed to what, a lossy compression formula for data?
Well hell, if you don't need the original data back I've got a compressor algorithm that'll reduce a 50GB file to 1 byte every time. Sometimes even less than a byte, like maybe 0.25 bytes. In fact it reduces the file to such a small size that just finding it again turns out to be a real challenge...
Save the whales [+11564847]
Save the whales...collect the entire set!
you should meta-moderate if you've never been given mod points.
Okay, help me out here..."meta-moderate"...? How?
What should I see (and where) in the interface if I do have those magical mod points to give out?
I surely can't be in the minority in getting 15 mod points at a time. I have a rather unremarkable account history.
It may just be that I'm an idiot, lol. If I had mod points to give out, where would I see them or how would I know I had them?
I see no indication on the posts or names or anything that would indicate I had mod points. Hell, for all I know I have some and don't know it. Like I said, it may just be that I'm an idiot (that's the usual explanation, according to my wife).
Slashdot moderation isn't Youtube moderation. Slashdot grants users who have earned amount of Karma, and who visit the site regularly, 5 moderation points.
I understand that. Although I visit the site regularly and post stories (some of which are accepted and published) I've never seen or gotten karma. To me it feels as though an elite group is blessed with being able to "rule" on what's liked or not, which isn't necessarily representative of the community's actual take on any given story or comment.
So yes, I understand how it works, I just don't think it's a very good way to go about it. I also think that not being able to edit a post during a grace period to fix typos and errors is straight out of 1995. Seriously, would it be so awful to be able to have a 5-minute "grace" window to edit a post so we could fix typos or add relevant information?
It's an interesting comparison. While the slashdot system obviously allows us a more fine-grained expression of opinion, it's widely abused, e.g. people modding down posts as redundant or overrated because they disagree with the content of the post. And the maximum +5 score means you can't tell if just a handfull of people found a post interesting, or thousands of people.
^^^ THIS, times about a billion.
Was it a few people that disagreed with you, or 10,000? With slashdot's moderation system you'll never know.
Slashdot could show the full tally (i.e. "437 up votes and 192 down votes") but for some reason they want to use a lobotomized post rating system.
Once again, Facebook users provide a never-ending source of gullible suckers who will click on ANYTHING given the slightest encouragement.
Reason #32,461,273 why Facebook is a bad idea for the unwary, the unwise, and people with a propensity to click on everything they see.
Maybe someday I'll get a Facebook account so I can be exploited by advertisers and malware authors. I almost feel like I'm cheating them by not having an account.
Just another $20 billion and it'll be done, we swear!