I find your ascertation that moderation IS censorship in itself inaccurate.
I am making an assumption here that you are referring to how many Slashdot readers have their user preferences set to only display posts scored above a defined value. In doing so, they have in essence given a certain degree of trust to Slashdot moderators that only the best posts will reach them.
The fact that they do not see posts scored below their defined value does not constitute censorship by Slashdot, but rather a consious choice by individual readers.
If Slashdot wished to censor posts they deem to be of low quality, they would simply delete them. In this case, however, the quality of the post that a user can read is in the hands of the user, not Slashdot.
Stop whining and learn not to troll, post offtopic, or whatever else you are modded down for.
Yes, and then when they start to break, we will dump larger nanoprobes in to clean the smaller ones up. And when those break, we will have to dump in larger MICRO-probes to recover the broken nanoprobes. And then a fish will eat the micro-probes, get sick and die, and a larger fish will eat that dead fish and get sick and die as well. This will continue untill we've filled the ocean with dead fish and broken robots, and we will once again realize that sometimes technology causes more problems than it solves.
I don't see any reason why the Linux and/. community would oppose this sort of program except for the very fact that they hate Microsoft.
While the spread of a free OS is certainly a worthwhile goal to strive for, it is not realistic... yet. What worries me about this issue is that the concerns of the Belgium Linux community is not based on what is best for the people who would be receiving these computers, but what is best for their agenda.
I may be going out on a flamebait limb here, but I suggest that it would be easier for the average layperson to learn Windows as opposed to Linux, whatever the distribution. I also would suggest that better technical support is available for Windows than for Linux.
While that's not a concern of all the 3133t15t h4x0r5 out there who already know the in's and out's of their OS, it is to millions of people who have never used a computer before. Training and tech support will be very valuable... and it is something that the majority of the Linux community cannot provide.
Now all we have to do is stop rewarding people who eat 5 pizzas and 3 gallons of ice cream every day with a nice pension and the opportunity to work at home.
Carpel Tunnel Syndrome, like being overweight (in most cases) is a condition that can easily be prevented, and we shoud stop rewarding people who refuse to take care of themselves.
We can compare this debate to the competition of television delivery formats.
Here we have the majority of service coming from cable, satellite providers. If you watch TV at all, you will notice that they are in quite the battle for market share.
This is essentially the same situation as the one going on with all these media formats. They all have their own characteristics, features, pros, and cons. Like cable and sattelite TV providers, owners of their respective media formats are also vying for supremacy.
However I never see anyone here berating Comcast or Dish Network for their competetive strategies. Why is Microsoft the only company out there that shouldn't be allowed to promote its own proprietary standard?
Re:A little Bionic history:
on
Bionic Eyes
·
· Score: 1
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm going to wait till they start combining other bionic body parts to become the next Six Million Dollar Man.
At these prices, though, I don't think it would have the same effect as Steve Austin. Really, who would be intimidated by a mere Three Hundred-Thousand Dollar Man?
Consider this though. Are we guaranteed privacy when we are on public property?
I am a true believer in the right to privacy when we are on our own property, but when we are on someone else's property, private or public (because public property is technically owned by a government), the rights of the property owner should come before those of the visitor.
This comment is, of course, somewhat offtopic, as the Supreme Court ruling only affects public arcades.
On the topic, however, I usually find myself disagreeing with alot of what I read here, but for once I also see this as a victory. There's no good argument supporting the ban on games that, in terms of movie ratings, are PG at worst for violence.
Some here are worried that children may be influenced by these public displays of violence, but I say that any parent who feels their child is prepared to go out by him/her-self should also feel that their child knows the difference between animated and real violence, and right and wrong.
Any parent who does not feel their child understands these differences, and still allows them to go out on their own, has alot more to worry about than arcade games.
Trust me, educational institutions are already making enough money on their own without selling the fruits of students' labor. But then, they've been doing that for a long time.
What many people apparently don't realize is that alot of research conducted by universities is subsidised by various interest groups. The research that comes out of these programs becomes property of the University and is passed on to whoever funded the research. The only thing the students (who did most of the work) receive in compensation is 3 or 4 credits.
I doubt this is true about CS and related programs at Penn State (where I recently graduated from), and to my knowledge, they do not claim ownership of students' code. But don't get me wrong, they stick it to us in another way.
Students in "non-engineering technology majors" are now assessed a $750 surcharge per semester to (supposedly) cover costs of their respective majors. I don't know exactly how many students this includes, but you can bet Penn State is making a boatload of money from it.
So no, we don't need to take money from the military to dump into an already greedy education system.
"Just like any other cutting edge tech though it's not cheap, weighing in at between $40,000-$50,000 USD."
Considering how expensive these things were less than 30 years ago, $40k isn't bad! Just think, a similar setup cost Steve Austin a good part of $6 Million!
Seriously, though, I'm kind of surprised NY Times didn't include a link to Otto Bock's website for more info.
Well using Vulcan logic, we can all see that Slashdot dogma dictates that the needs of the one (that 15 year old who's right it is to download free music/software) outweigh the needs of the many (artists, programmers, and all employees of the music/software industry working hard to make a living by SELLING a product).
Oh wait, something about that logic looks a little flawed...
Think about this kind of flaw in terms of, say, the automobile industry. If X car company makes a car that (for the sake of an accurate comparison with windows) spontaneously explodes with no warning whatsoever, you could bet the farm that someone would be suing, and probably would win!
Now say an XP user gets his computer trashed by some malicious cracker and loses all of his important personal/business data, should he or she not be able to sue Microsoft for the loss?
I'm guessing a recall by the auto manufacturer would absolve the auto maker, but to do this, the manufacturer must send notification of the recall to EVERYONE who has the defective car. Apparently, Microsoft doesn't feel a similar obligation to notify all of its XP users...
Perhaps I'll go buy XP, leave it unpatched on the 'net, hope someone comes by and fux with it, call Johnny Cochran, and see what happens!
"Students can not only learn to use apps, but can delve as far into the system as their curiosity takes them."
I can picture it already: a clueless teacher who unwittingly gives all of his high school students root access, only to wonder why nothing works after a day of curiosity-exploring.
This will prolly be modded down as a troll, but it seems that the/. community doesn't fault companies, in general, for trying to make money, just Microsoft.
The only thing that would make them happy is if Microsoft decided to give away all of it's products (desktop/server OS, business apps, games, etc.) and support them for free. That seems to be the only acceptable business model.
Comon, people, do we really think that the/. people are oblivious to what will happen when they post an article with the word "gaping" in the title? Of course not, because the/. staff members are the ultimate trolls!
I think they were looking for an excuse to give out a ton of -1 mods, so they post an article that is GUARANTEED to attract numerous goatse.cx references.
Fight back, I say! Why should they be able to mod down OUR trolls, when we can't mod down THEIRS!
"One of the funnier myths perceived to be true is that 'Microsoft's technical support is the best in the industry and is superior to that offered by the Linux community.'"
How is this a myth? Linux technical support is nonexistant. Unless, of course, this is to imply that Microsoft's technical support is worse than none at all.
...a k-rad, neato machine that lets us plug into a TV, play games and DVDs, has a hard drive and a REALLY fast processor, that costs ONLY upwards of $500 (plus the really useful accessories) and makes a software comglomerate filthy rich...
"Unlike PABBIS (the book banning people) they are at least not trying to impose their values on parents who feel that their children can handle violent games or movies without becoming violent themselves."
Don't believe for a second that these advocacy groups are content to limit themselves to a yearly "dirty dozen" list. These groups are constantly lobbying to ban any toy, video game, etc. that they believe encourages violent behavior.
Remember when these kinds of advocacy groups used to altert the public about toys that were actually physically dangerous (one poster mentioned lawn darts)? That's where these wackos' energy should be directed, not at toys they claim (with no scientific backing, mind you) make children violent.
Once these people have successfully lobbied to remove every toy gun or missile from the market, what will be the next consumer product to be axed in the name of "protecting our children"? Will we find ourselves banning action figures of policemen and soldiers because their duties imply the use of force?
I really don't have a problem with these people voicing their concerns. If like-minded parents don't wish to expose their children to the real world (ok, so robots with missiles and laser cannons aren't a reality YET) then that's their choice.
However, I do have a problem with these self-righteous groups making baseless claims about what these toys will do to unsuspecting, imprssionable children and passing it off as fact. I especially have a problem with them trying to get these products off the market (and trust me, that's what they're ultimately trying to do). They have no business trying to force people (by whining to pushover legislators) to buy only the toys that they feel are appropriate.
If these groups want to protect children, they should stick to the physically dangerous toys. Stop blurring the line between feel-good rhetoric and scientific fact, and let parents decide what to expose their children to.
Slashdot Mirror
I am making an assumption here that you are referring to how many Slashdot readers have their user preferences set to only display posts scored above a defined value. In doing so, they have in essence given a certain degree of trust to Slashdot moderators that only the best posts will reach them.
The fact that they do not see posts scored below their defined value does not constitute censorship by Slashdot, but rather a consious choice by individual readers.
If Slashdot wished to censor posts they deem to be of low quality, they would simply delete them. In this case, however, the quality of the post that a user can read is in the hands of the user, not Slashdot.
Stop whining and learn not to troll, post offtopic, or whatever else you are modded down for.
Yes, and then when they start to break, we will dump larger nanoprobes in to clean the smaller ones up. And when those break, we will have to dump in larger MICRO-probes to recover the broken nanoprobes. And then a fish will eat the micro-probes, get sick and die, and a larger fish will eat that dead fish and get sick and die as well. This will continue untill we've filled the ocean with dead fish and broken robots, and we will once again realize that sometimes technology causes more problems than it solves.
While the spread of a free OS is certainly a worthwhile goal to strive for, it is not realistic... yet. What worries me about this issue is that the concerns of the Belgium Linux community is not based on what is best for the people who would be receiving these computers, but what is best for their agenda.
I may be going out on a flamebait limb here, but I suggest that it would be easier for the average layperson to learn Windows as opposed to Linux, whatever the distribution. I also would suggest that better technical support is available for Windows than for Linux.
While that's not a concern of all the 3133t15t h4x0r5 out there who already know the in's and out's of their OS, it is to millions of people who have never used a computer before. Training and tech support will be very valuable... and it is something that the majority of the Linux community cannot provide.
That explains why none of them have really bothered to contact any of us.
Carpel Tunnel Syndrome, like being overweight (in most cases) is a condition that can easily be prevented, and we shoud stop rewarding people who refuse to take care of themselves.
Here we have the majority of service coming from cable, satellite providers. If you watch TV at all, you will notice that they are in quite the battle for market share.
This is essentially the same situation as the one going on with all these media formats. They all have their own characteristics, features, pros, and cons. Like cable and sattelite TV providers, owners of their respective media formats are also vying for supremacy.
However I never see anyone here berating Comcast or Dish Network for their competetive strategies. Why is Microsoft the only company out there that shouldn't be allowed to promote its own proprietary standard?
At these prices, though, I don't think it would have the same effect as Steve Austin. Really, who would be intimidated by a mere Three Hundred-Thousand Dollar Man?
I am a true believer in the right to privacy when we are on our own property, but when we are on someone else's property, private or public (because public property is technically owned by a government), the rights of the property owner should come before those of the visitor.
On the topic, however, I usually find myself disagreeing with alot of what I read here, but for once I also see this as a victory. There's no good argument supporting the ban on games that, in terms of movie ratings, are PG at worst for violence.
Some here are worried that children may be influenced by these public displays of violence, but I say that any parent who feels their child is prepared to go out by him/her-self should also feel that their child knows the difference between animated and real violence, and right and wrong.
Any parent who does not feel their child understands these differences, and still allows them to go out on their own, has alot more to worry about than arcade games.
What many people apparently don't realize is that alot of research conducted by universities is subsidised by various interest groups. The research that comes out of these programs becomes property of the University and is passed on to whoever funded the research. The only thing the students (who did most of the work) receive in compensation is 3 or 4 credits.
I doubt this is true about CS and related programs at Penn State (where I recently graduated from), and to my knowledge, they do not claim ownership of students' code. But don't get me wrong, they stick it to us in another way.
Students in "non-engineering technology majors" are now assessed a $750 surcharge per semester to (supposedly) cover costs of their respective majors. I don't know exactly how many students this includes, but you can bet Penn State is making a boatload of money from it.
So no, we don't need to take money from the military to dump into an already greedy education system.
Considering how expensive these things were less than 30 years ago, $40k isn't bad! Just think, a similar setup cost Steve Austin a good part of $6 Million!
Seriously, though, I'm kind of surprised NY Times didn't include a link to Otto Bock's website for more info.
...similar research suggests that stress in sysadmins seems to be a byproduct of the patches that plug Microsoft security holes.
Oh wait, something about that logic looks a little flawed...
Don't you mean Passport in general?
Now say an XP user gets his computer trashed by some malicious cracker and loses all of his important personal/business data, should he or she not be able to sue Microsoft for the loss?
I'm guessing a recall by the auto manufacturer would absolve the auto maker, but to do this, the manufacturer must send notification of the recall to EVERYONE who has the defective car. Apparently, Microsoft doesn't feel a similar obligation to notify all of its XP users...
Perhaps I'll go buy XP, leave it unpatched on the 'net, hope someone comes by and fux with it, call Johnny Cochran, and see what happens!
I can picture it already: a clueless teacher who unwittingly gives all of his high school students root access, only to wonder why nothing works after a day of curiosity-exploring.
This will prolly be modded down as a troll, but it seems that the /. community doesn't fault companies, in general, for trying to make money, just Microsoft.
The only thing that would make them happy is if Microsoft decided to give away all of it's products (desktop/server OS, business apps, games, etc.) and support them for free. That seems to be the only acceptable business model.
I think they were looking for an excuse to give out a ton of -1 mods, so they post an article that is GUARANTEED to attract numerous goatse.cx references.
Fight back, I say! Why should they be able to mod down OUR trolls, when we can't mod down THEIRS!
Yeah, there really was no point in trying to hide the goatse.cx link with a subject/troll like "Gaping, Wristwear, Screenies"!
How is this a myth? Linux technical support is nonexistant. Unless, of course, this is to imply that Microsoft's technical support is worse than none at all.
*feeds the trolls*
I don't know what you cconsidered "the most modern of machines" in the time FF7 was popular, but my PII-333 w/ Voodoo1 ran just fine!
...Oh wait, we already have that too, don't we.
Don't believe for a second that these advocacy groups are content to limit themselves to a yearly "dirty dozen" list. These groups are constantly lobbying to ban any toy, video game, etc. that they believe encourages violent behavior.
Once these people have successfully lobbied to remove every toy gun or missile from the market, what will be the next consumer product to be axed in the name of "protecting our children"? Will we find ourselves banning action figures of policemen and soldiers because their duties imply the use of force?
I really don't have a problem with these people voicing their concerns. If like-minded parents don't wish to expose their children to the real world (ok, so robots with missiles and laser cannons aren't a reality YET) then that's their choice.
However, I do have a problem with these self-righteous groups making baseless claims about what these toys will do to unsuspecting, imprssionable children and passing it off as fact. I especially have a problem with them trying to get these products off the market (and trust me, that's what they're ultimately trying to do). They have no business trying to force people (by whining to pushover legislators) to buy only the toys that they feel are appropriate.
If these groups want to protect children, they should stick to the physically dangerous toys. Stop blurring the line between feel-good rhetoric and scientific fact, and let parents decide what to expose their children to.