Here, here. What I can't understand is why the mods didn't defensively mod you -5 overrated.
Actually, I did recently find out why/. is so unfixable. Apparently at least one of the primary coders is a Bushevik moron. Evidently this is his version of truth, beauty, and the American way.
You're exaggerating, you're lying, you're stupid, and you aren't going to convince me that Palin is even in the top hundred Republican politicians in terms of her qualifications for the presidency. But let's not continue this conversation. Please just designate me as your foe so I can more conveniently ignore you in the future.
You're exaggerating, you're lying, you're stupid, and you aren't goingto convince me that Palin is even in the top hundred Republican politicians in terms of her qualifications for the presidency. But let's not continue this conversation. Please just designate me as your foe so I can more conveniently ignore you in the future.
Hey, why wasn't that comment moderated +5 insightful? Lazy incompetent moderators, eh? Sort of joking, but bad (and anonymous) moderation is the greatest problem of/. and it won't be fixed while morons like "pudge" are gaming the system for their propagandistic purposes.
Anyway, I read all of the comments moderated as funny. Didn't find any that actually were, though it's certainly a ripe topic for humor.
Then I read all of the topics that were moderated as +5 insightful. That's a more difficult evaluation, but I didn't see any that I would actually regard as particularly insightful, either directly or by reference.
Oh, so you want some insight now? Shouldn't you take the log out of your eye first?
I'd have regarded it as insightful if some of the posts considered such deep topics as the nature of anonymity and the abuse of anonymity. For example, a few key questions for discussion (or humorous/. polls):
Is there any need for secrecy in the absence of prior secrecy? (This primarily undercuts such cases as the whistleblower rationale where additional secrecy is being used against currently secret crimes. After all, if the secret criminals did not fear exposure, neither would they care who exposed them.)
What will be the consequences of the data explosion, AKA the surveillance society? (I contend that without some positive government action, the technical trend will mean that personal privacy will soon be non-existent except possibly for a few of the very richest people. The rest of us will be at the mercy of the various companies that "own" our personal data.)
Why do so many people persist in the fantasy that email is free? (The spammers thank you.)
Can a perimeter be built around personal privacy and personal information while we still have any? (Should you own your email address and control the right to who may use it?)
Why can't we shoot spammers? (Only because shooting's too good for 'em?)
Now the punchline of the joke. Why did I waste so much time and mental effort on/.? A mental exercise of the most pointless sort?
What is it? It is that I think I have sufficient reason to regard you as a moron. Therefore I am asking you to designate me as your foe so that I can ignore you better. My time is valuable and limited.
Do you need explicit instructions how to use that part of/.? Quite possible that most of those poorly implemented features were the work of one of your fellow morons, the clueless pudge.
Clinton again, eh? Do you have any schedule for Dubya to start taking responsibility for any of his miserable failures? Not much time left you know.
Just funning you. I'm not here to challenge the unarmed opponent to a battle of wits. It's just that having noticed you and your stupidity, I'd like to ask you to designate me as your foe so that you'll be much less visible in my future.
Nothing personal. Oh wait. I guess it is personal. I made a resolution to stop suffering fools, gladly or otherwise.
So you believe every captioned video you see on the Web, eh? And no, that's *NOT* what Michael Moore said, either. However, I didn't stop by to start of a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Having noticed your flagrant stupidity, I just want to ask you to designate me as your foe so that I'll be less likely to see your posts in the future.
I suppose it's possible that you're trying to make a joke, but if so you're a poor enough comic that I ask you to designate me as a foe on those grounds. Interesting humor has to be based on an understanding of reality before you can make the joke about reality.
I was always skeptical of Einstein's claim that human stupidity was unlimited. Since the humans are countable finite, it requires that some humans possess infinite stupidity.
Congratulations! Another prediction proved.
Now about that foe designation, there was a hint in this post about why, though I'm sure such a fine jackass as yourself has never completed the experiment.
Come on, you have to be pulling my leg. You can't possibly be as stupid as you're pretending to be.
Actually, I have two degrees. Supposedly two of the best universities in America--but I think you're supposed to think that you're defending America's reputation and honor. Not actually relevant except that you're reminding me of a student I knew back in those days. Either he was a great story teller or a pathological liar, so now you've made me curious to see if he wound up as a best selling author or convicted felon.
Oh yeah. Back to the point at hand. When are you going to figure out how to designate me as your foe? Come on, you can accomplish that much with your worthless life.
Look you fucking idiot. I'm kind of impressed by your life on/. so you reply so quickly. Me? I have an actual life--and a degree including history. However, it's the later computer science degree that relates to money. I haven't looked at enough of your posts to determine how complete your reality dysfunction is, and I don't care.
Your purpose in life is to accumulate foes. Please make me one of them. Then you can drop dead for all I care.
I know you think your brand of idiocy is a rare and precious thing. It is not. All I want from you, your sole value in my universe, is for you to designate me as a foe.
Anyone who hasn't figured out the neo-GOP scam by now... Really, it would make more sense to discuss religion with a Jehovah's Witness. I'm not interested in rubbing your face in the ugly reality. Reality will do that on it's own.
Your actual purpose in life is to designate me as your "foe" on/. so that I can ignore you better. Should I waste the Shakespeare quote? "I do desire we may be better strangers."
I just installed it a couple of weeks ago. Open Solaris starts in a GNOME shell and feels quite like Ubuntu in that way. Main difference is that the booting is much slower, but that's not unreasonable for a server OS that isn't supposed to get rebooted very often. I haven't really used it that much, but mostly it seemed to be okay. (Reference basis is that I'm a heavy Ubuntu user, though my company distro is a custom version of RHEL5, and I've experimented with about half a dozen of the live CD versions.)
However, overall I still have to rate it as rather betaish. The first major upgrade tends to be fatal when it tries to update GRUB, and I wound up reinstalling pending the fixes. It wasn't just the lack of basic testing that bothered me, but also the unhelpful attitude in the newsgroups: "That's a well known problem." Gee, thanks, so how about a hint of how to fix it? (Yes, I eventually found the description of the fixes, but by then had run out of motivation... I prefer to be virtuously lazy in the Perlish sense and just wait for a more mature product.)
Disclaimer or statement of limitations or something: I'm running it with the VMware Player, and it's only my fourth client OS, and I certainly can't claim to be an expert in that environment.
Look, idiot. You've probably been around/. long enough to notice that Einstein was right. However, I'm only concerned with the countable stupidity. Designate me as a foe, and I won't notice you in the future.
Of course, if/. wasn't such an incompetent design, it wouldn't be an issue, would it? Ten to one you can't figure out any of that--but I still think you might be able to figure out how to designate me as your foe.
No, what I am doing is refusing to suffer a fool gladly. You've already fulfilled your part of proving you're a fool. Now all you have to do is designate me as a foe so I'll know to ignore any future blather.
One day a little guy wandered into the camp looking for a job as a lumberjack. The head lumberjack looked at him doubtfully, but asked him to cut down a small tree. Zip. The tree was down. Kind of surprised, the head lumberjack told him to cut down a large tree. Zip. One swing, and the tree fell.
But how could an omniscient and good god have any freedom? Such a god would know all of the consequences of any action, and would always be required to perform the "good" action. Therefore, this god would lack any freedom. (The question of omnipotence doesn't even matter, since the omniscient god would know his own limitations or lack thereof.)
Freedom only exists under conditions of partial information. You have to know enough about the options to make a meaningful selection between them. Again, if you know too little or if some of the information is false, then the choice is no longer meaningful and the freedom has been removed. (Business as usual for the big dick Cheney, eh?)
The possibilities are infinite, as are the range of possible choices. The past is unified and unique--but we can only know tiny bits of it. And then you die, so have a nice day--but what happens to the unique pattern that was you?
There's no basis for rebuttal. You've convinced me you're an idiot, so there's nothing to discuss here. All I want from idiots like you is that they designate me as a foe on/. Come on, it's your big chance to accomplish something with your miserable life.
Not really, but I do hate spammers much more than that. Yahoo is just the leading home of spam, and they might as well throw the babies out with the bathwater. I gave up on Yahoo a long time ago. I do have a few correspondents who still have secondary Yahoo email accounts--but I have no particular expectation that they will get any email that I route that way.
I'm hoping Gmail will actually do something constructive about the spam problem (= something really destructive to the spammers). No skin off my nose if along the way they crush Yahoo as the spam-loving email system it is.
Still waiting for you to fulfill your purpose in life. And no, I'm not going to argue with a faith-based moron about reality. If you haven't figured it out now, you're a fucking hopeless case.
Not surprised by your lack of curiosity. It's one of the trademarks of your brand of stupidity. Why don't you suggest that I designate you as a foe? I should bet $10 you can't figure it out, even thought the explanation is trivially obvious to the most casual observer.
Slashdot Mirror
Here, here. What I can't understand is why the mods didn't defensively mod you -5 overrated.
Actually, I did recently find out why /. is so unfixable. Apparently at least one of the primary coders is a Bushevik moron. Evidently this is his version of truth, beauty, and the American way.
You're exaggerating, you're lying, you're stupid, and you aren't going to convince me that Palin is even in the top hundred Republican politicians in terms of her qualifications for the presidency. But let's not continue this conversation. Please just designate me as your foe so I can more conveniently ignore you in the future.
You're exaggerating, you're lying, you're stupid, and you aren't goingto convince me that Palin is even in the top hundred Republican politicians in terms of her qualifications for the presidency. But let's not continue this conversation. Please just designate me as your foe so I can more conveniently ignore you in the future.
Hey, why wasn't that comment moderated +5 insightful? Lazy incompetent moderators, eh? Sort of joking, but bad (and anonymous) moderation is the greatest problem of /. and it won't be fixed while morons like "pudge" are gaming the system for their propagandistic purposes.
Anyway, I read all of the comments moderated as funny. Didn't find any that actually were, though it's certainly a ripe topic for humor.
Then I read all of the topics that were moderated as +5 insightful. That's a more difficult evaluation, but I didn't see any that I would actually regard as particularly insightful, either directly or by reference.
Oh, so you want some insight now? Shouldn't you take the log out of your eye first?
I'd have regarded it as insightful if some of the posts considered such deep topics as the nature of anonymity and the abuse of anonymity. For example, a few key questions for discussion (or humorous /. polls):
Is there any need for secrecy in the absence of prior secrecy? (This primarily undercuts such cases as the whistleblower rationale where additional secrecy is being used against currently secret crimes. After all, if the secret criminals did not fear exposure, neither would they care who exposed them.)
What will be the consequences of the data explosion, AKA the surveillance society? (I contend that without some positive government action, the technical trend will mean that personal privacy will soon be non-existent except possibly for a few of the very richest people. The rest of us will be at the mercy of the various companies that "own" our personal data.)
Why do so many people persist in the fantasy that email is free? (The spammers thank you.)
Can a perimeter be built around personal privacy and personal information while we still have any? (Should you own your email address and control the right to who may use it?)
Why can't we shoot spammers? (Only because shooting's too good for 'em?)
Now the punchline of the joke. Why did I waste so much time and mental effort on /.? A mental exercise of the most pointless sort?
What is it? It is that I think I have sufficient reason to regard you as a moron. Therefore I am asking you to designate me as your foe so that I can ignore you better. My time is valuable and limited.
Do you need explicit instructions how to use that part of /.? Quite possible that most of those poorly implemented features were the work of one of your fellow morons, the clueless pudge.
Clinton again, eh? Do you have any schedule for Dubya to start taking responsibility for any of his miserable failures? Not much time left you know.
Just funning you. I'm not here to challenge the unarmed opponent to a battle of wits. It's just that having noticed you and your stupidity, I'd like to ask you to designate me as your foe so that you'll be much less visible in my future.
Nothing personal. Oh wait. I guess it is personal. I made a resolution to stop suffering fools, gladly or otherwise.
So you believe every captioned video you see on the Web, eh? And no, that's *NOT* what Michael Moore said, either. However, I didn't stop by to start of a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Having noticed your flagrant stupidity, I just want to ask you to designate me as your foe so that I'll be less likely to see your posts in the future.
I suppose it's possible that you're trying to make a joke, but if so you're a poor enough comic that I ask you to designate me as a foe on those grounds. Interesting humor has to be based on an understanding of reality before you can make the joke about reality.
I was always skeptical of Einstein's claim that human stupidity was unlimited. Since the humans are countable finite, it requires that some humans possess infinite stupidity.
Congratulations! Another prediction proved.
Now about that foe designation, there was a hint in this post about why, though I'm sure such a fine jackass as yourself has never completed the experiment.
The only relevance in your life is your collection of foes. Please add me to the list.
Come on, you have to be pulling my leg. You can't possibly be as stupid as you're pretending to be.
Actually, I have two degrees. Supposedly two of the best universities in America--but I think you're supposed to think that you're defending America's reputation and honor. Not actually relevant except that you're reminding me of a student I knew back in those days. Either he was a great story teller or a pathological liar, so now you've made me curious to see if he wound up as a best selling author or convicted felon.
Oh yeah. Back to the point at hand. When are you going to figure out how to designate me as your foe? Come on, you can accomplish that much with your worthless life.
Look you fucking idiot. I'm kind of impressed by your life on /. so you reply so quickly. Me? I have an actual life--and a degree including history. However, it's the later computer science degree that relates to money. I haven't looked at enough of your posts to determine how complete your reality dysfunction is, and I don't care.
Your purpose in life is to accumulate foes. Please make me one of them. Then you can drop dead for all I care.
I know you think your brand of idiocy is a rare and precious thing. It is not. All I want from you, your sole value in my universe, is for you to designate me as a foe.
Come on, oh shitfaced one. You can do it.
Anyone who hasn't figured out the neo-GOP scam by now... Really, it would make more sense to discuss religion with a Jehovah's Witness. I'm not interested in rubbing your face in the ugly reality. Reality will do that on it's own.
Your actual purpose in life is to designate me as your "foe" on /. so that I can ignore you better. Should I waste the Shakespeare quote? "I do desire we may be better strangers."
I just installed it a couple of weeks ago. Open Solaris starts in a GNOME shell and feels quite like Ubuntu in that way. Main difference is that the booting is much slower, but that's not unreasonable for a server OS that isn't supposed to get rebooted very often. I haven't really used it that much, but mostly it seemed to be okay. (Reference basis is that I'm a heavy Ubuntu user, though my company distro is a custom version of RHEL5, and I've experimented with about half a dozen of the live CD versions.)
However, overall I still have to rate it as rather betaish. The first major upgrade tends to be fatal when it tries to update GRUB, and I wound up reinstalling pending the fixes. It wasn't just the lack of basic testing that bothered me, but also the unhelpful attitude in the newsgroups: "That's a well known problem." Gee, thanks, so how about a hint of how to fix it? (Yes, I eventually found the description of the fixes, but by then had run out of motivation... I prefer to be virtuously lazy in the Perlish sense and just wait for a more mature product.)
Disclaimer or statement of limitations or something: I'm running it with the VMware Player, and it's only my fourth client OS, and I certainly can't claim to be an expert in that environment.
Look, idiot. You've probably been around /. long enough to notice that Einstein was right. However, I'm only concerned with the countable stupidity. Designate me as a foe, and I won't notice you in the future.
Of course, if /. wasn't such an incompetent design, it wouldn't be an issue, would it? Ten to one you can't figure out any of that--but I still think you might be able to figure out how to designate me as your foe.
No, what I am doing is refusing to suffer a fool gladly. You've already fulfilled your part of proving you're a fool. Now all you have to do is designate me as a foe so I'll know to ignore any future blather.
I'm not trying to convince people. I'm just trying to convince an idiot to designate me as a foe. Can't you figure out how to do it?
Seems to belong here:
One day a little guy wandered into the camp looking for a job as a lumberjack. The head lumberjack looked at him doubtfully, but asked him to cut down a small tree. Zip. The tree was down. Kind of surprised, the head lumberjack told him to cut down a large tree. Zip. One swing, and the tree fell.
"Where did you learn to cut trees like that?"
"In the Sahara Forest."
"What do you mean? The Sahara is a desert!"
"That was afterwards."
But how could an omniscient and good god have any freedom? Such a god would know all of the consequences of any action, and would always be required to perform the "good" action. Therefore, this god would lack any freedom. (The question of omnipotence doesn't even matter, since the omniscient god would know his own limitations or lack thereof.)
Freedom only exists under conditions of partial information. You have to know enough about the options to make a meaningful selection between them. Again, if you know too little or if some of the information is false, then the choice is no longer meaningful and the freedom has been removed. (Business as usual for the big dick Cheney, eh?)
The possibilities are infinite, as are the range of possible choices. The past is unified and unique--but we can only know tiny bits of it. And then you die, so have a nice day--but what happens to the unique pattern that was you?
There's no basis for rebuttal. You've convinced me you're an idiot, so there's nothing to discuss here. All I want from idiots like you is that they designate me as a foe on /. Come on, it's your big chance to accomplish something with your miserable life.
He's right, you are an idiot. When I see an idiot of such a calibre, I have a special request to make. Please designate me as your foe.
I'm complaining because I'm disappointed that I didn't make the cut. I've sent them at least a couple of juicy complaints over the years.
However, the "idle" style sheet does reek like the proverbial big dog's m0e.
We need to change the odds of the spammers' game to make them the losers. My suggestion to make Gmail a very hostile environment for spammers.
Not really, but I do hate spammers much more than that. Yahoo is just the leading home of spam, and they might as well throw the babies out with the bathwater. I gave up on Yahoo a long time ago. I do have a few correspondents who still have secondary Yahoo email accounts--but I have no particular expectation that they will get any email that I route that way.
I'm hoping Gmail will actually do something constructive about the spam problem (= something really destructive to the spammers). No skin off my nose if along the way they crush Yahoo as the spam-loving email system it is.
Search on spam to see various anti-spam suggestions, though I think the best one is in a mostly ignored older thread called "Isn't spam the #1 problem with email?"
Still waiting for you to fulfill your purpose in life. And no, I'm not going to argue with a faith-based moron about reality. If you haven't figured it out now, you're a fucking hopeless case.
Not surprised by your lack of curiosity. It's one of the trademarks of your brand of stupidity. Why don't you suggest that I designate you as a foe? I should bet $10 you can't figure it out, even thought the explanation is trivially obvious to the most casual observer.
What a fucking maroon.