Yeah, I am trying to cram as many lies into one post. Good one, clever pants.
A lot of talking about what editors do and do not do. When talking about E2 you would certainly have more a clue than, say, a tribal hunter from africa (well, the average tribal hunter from africa) but not much more. Editors have littered my posts with swear words so saying they "do not" doesn't hold any weight (ask Jessica Pierce about my home node, or any of my last nodes if she read them, for example). You may be an excellent editor (I recognise the name) but just as you have only edited "blatant mistakes" doesn't mean that other editors haven't meddled with puns, changed wording to what they think is best and corrected nothing, or worse - maliciously gone about making wording goofy and adding swear words (not that I didn't also provide my own! (as I said)). That's just rude and I'd like to hear you justify that. There's no excuse for what editors were doing. And, up until I left, they were still [doing what I consider was] abusing their powers.
I'm glad you/msg the author when editing a post but as it's optional many editors don't bother. Hence the paragraph about maintaining nodes. One node of mine had puns corrected three times! E2 just isn't worth the effort.
E2 does have many factual nodes, I agree, but still "in-jokes are what they value - those posts gain the highest rating or are placed on the front of the site". This was how I saw it before leaving. This is no bad thing - but it's more a community site than a reference site. Other posters in this story seem to agree.
You've been there for years and obviously love it - I'm honestly glad you enjoy it. I don't... at all, and since then I've found greener pastures. Have fun with E2, Mr Wesc.
Good god yes. I (and my girlfriend) had nodes moved about and heavily edited... they even started correcting puns! If you got on the bad-side of editors and they would start littering your old posts with swear words -- or, in my case, swear words and goofy wording (not that I didn't provide my own).
If one wrote a node, months ago, one would have to maintain that node by regularly checking that some braindead editor (who often didn't know the topic) hadn't gone and rewritten parts of it. They rarely/msged the original authors (this certainly wasn't a requirement - but a bonus and a sign of a good editor - if they notified you!) and you never knew which editor was responsible. The post that you never wrote would have have your name on it, though.
E2 kinda postures to be an encyclopedia of knowledge, but it's mostly in-jokes (at least, in-jokes are what they value - those posts gain the highest rating or are placed on the front of the site), which is fine.
If I give you an apple, and it cost me money, but you pay nothing. Yes, we're ignoring time and effort it took for you to come get the apple - as those are the general costs of living and most definitions of "free" ignore that. That the giver pays is not the issue. It's free to the taker - which is the general definition of "free".
What isn't free is "get the third one free", or "free swatch watch when you subscribe to blah blah blah" - but what is free is when you pay only the living costs and when that money/time/etc doesn't go to the people providing the service, whatever it is.
For example, I can listen to radio stations for free. I must buy a radio - but that's an living cost and has nothing to do with the radio station. Radio stations are free.
By living costs I mean whatever costs involved in enabling me to get things when the money doesn't go to the people providing the service. If it's just living costs then the thing is free. When I buy a phone and pay for a monthly phone connection I can probably get a free local weather report, etc. This is a free.
I propose that the general costs of living online are a computer and an internet connection. This money for these doesn't go to the websites I frequent.
These websites provide a free service. I would even say that for most people the ad banner model is so fucked and ignored that you don't even pay with your eyeballs anymore. If you use an Ad blocking proxy you're certainly not paying with your eyeballs by looking at ads.
They send the content to you (at their cost) for free. It costs you no more than that living costs involved for being online.
Of course you agreed with it. He doesn't write anything disagreeable and anything that's not plainly obvious. All he does is put a slant on it. In this case it's his patented "geek vs jock" ("brain vs brawn"... "technology vs action") with movies. He has provided no evidence that it wasn't the same in the past - he shows no trends that a quick look at the latest releases won't disprove - and he writes in the same posturing style he always does.
Re:In the end, it's all about the games....
on
Mario's Revenge?
·
· Score: 1
CD32... I mean Dangerous Streets? What the fuck were Commodore thinking?
Copyright and IP doesn't mean restricting what you made from the people. It means doing what you want with it - be that giving it away or hiding your shame in a black box far away from prying eyes oh how you still hear the screams that wake you at night.
When I was a kid any type of censorship software would have just been a challenge. I haven't seen software for windows stand up the l337 haxor skillz of starting windows in safe mode.
So I usually recommend an old 486 (as an auto-dialup gateway) with unix and some logging software. It's secure enough for most adults.
I have decided of two things I want done with my body (and i'm sure any trolls responding to this post will have a few ideas themselves).
Have decomposed organs removed and have my body sterilized then launched into space, wearing a spacesuit, with a surfboard nailed to my feet and a solar powered broadcast system playing that cheesy (and uncopyrighted) surf song unto eternity.
Put my dead body in an air balloon with some automated height system so I cannot crash. I float over populated areas leaning (and learing) out at school children over the years as my decomposing body becomes somewhat of an icon. The government eventually shoot me down.
How many people are you catering to? If there's only a few people using biometrics might be OK - you can control that. But I wouldn't use biometrics for anything larger than 100 people (unless there was very tight security at login terminals). The reason is that if passwords are stolen you can change them - with biometrics you can't reissue a retina. If someone gets an face scan of an employee they've got a login forever.
...Though I guess you could move around body parts when one was compromised. Har! har!
...8.3 bashing while Unix uses/usr/etc/var/bin/proc/boot/home/root/sbin/dev/lib/tmp. The longer ones would be more descriptive but there are good reasons for shorter names.
X is pretty dumb in the way of describes graphical primitives (much unnecessary network traffic). If one were going to do a rewrite they should learn from Berlin's trim structure (although CORBA certainly bloats).
Slashdot Mirror
What's so shallow about ranking appearance?
Yeah, I am trying to cram as many lies into one post. Good one, clever pants.
A lot of talking about what editors do and do not do. When talking about E2 you would certainly have more a clue than, say, a tribal hunter from africa (well, the average tribal hunter from africa) but not much more. Editors have littered my posts with swear words so saying they "do not" doesn't hold any weight (ask Jessica Pierce about my home node, or any of my last nodes if she read them, for example). You may be an excellent editor (I recognise the name) but just as you have only edited "blatant mistakes" doesn't mean that other editors haven't meddled with puns, changed wording to what they think is best and corrected nothing, or worse - maliciously gone about making wording goofy and adding swear words (not that I didn't also provide my own! (as I said)). That's just rude and I'd like to hear you justify that. There's no excuse for what editors were doing. And, up until I left, they were still [doing what I consider was] abusing their powers.
I'm glad you /msg the author when editing a post but as it's optional many editors don't bother. Hence the paragraph about maintaining nodes. One node of mine had puns corrected three times! E2 just isn't worth the effort.
E2 does have many factual nodes, I agree, but still "in-jokes are what they value - those posts gain the highest rating or are placed on the front of the site". This was how I saw it before leaving. This is no bad thing - but it's more a community site than a reference site. Other posters in this story seem to agree.
You've been there for years and obviously love it - I'm honestly glad you enjoy it. I don't... at all, and since then I've found greener pastures. Have fun with E2, Mr Wesc.
Oh you pathetic little girls.
If one wrote a node, months ago, one would have to maintain that node by regularly checking that some braindead editor (who often didn't know the topic) hadn't gone and rewritten parts of it. They rarely /msged the original authors (this certainly wasn't a requirement - but a bonus and a sign of a good editor - if they notified you!) and you never knew which editor was responsible. The post that you never wrote would have have your name on it, though.
E2 kinda postures to be an encyclopedia of knowledge, but it's mostly in-jokes (at least, in-jokes are what they value - those posts gain the highest rating or are placed on the front of the site), which is fine.
Just wanted to say that AOLiza was brilliant. If you ever want a kid named after you, just say the word.
If I give you an apple, and it cost me money, but you pay nothing. Yes, we're ignoring time and effort it took for you to come get the apple - as those are the general costs of living and most definitions of "free" ignore that. That the giver pays is not the issue. It's free to the taker - which is the general definition of "free".
What isn't free is "get the third one free", or "free swatch watch when you subscribe to blah blah blah" - but what is free is when you pay only the living costs and when that money/time/etc doesn't go to the people providing the service, whatever it is.
For example, I can listen to radio stations for free. I must buy a radio - but that's an living cost and has nothing to do with the radio station. Radio stations are free.
By living costs I mean whatever costs involved in enabling me to get things when the money doesn't go to the people providing the service. If it's just living costs then the thing is free. When I buy a phone and pay for a monthly phone connection I can probably get a free local weather report, etc. This is a free.
I propose that the general costs of living online are a computer and an internet connection. This money for these doesn't go to the websites I frequent.
These websites provide a free service. I would even say that for most people the ad banner model is so fucked and ignored that you don't even pay with your eyeballs anymore. If you use an Ad blocking proxy you're certainly not paying with your eyeballs by looking at ads.
They send the content to you (at their cost) for free. It costs you no more than that living costs involved for being online.
Good god, I have lost my faith in moderators.
Read the Salon article. There, much better.
SP? No, you spelt it correctly.
Are you the same AC as... oh, never mind. Yes, Holloway is holloway is holloway.
Of course you agreed with it. He doesn't write anything disagreeable and anything that's not plainly obvious. All he does is put a slant on it. In this case it's his patented "geek vs jock" ("brain vs brawn"... "technology vs action") with movies. He has provided no evidence that it wasn't the same in the past - he shows no trends that a quick look at the latest releases won't disprove - and he writes in the same posturing style he always does.
CD32... I mean Dangerous Streets? What the fuck were Commodore thinking?
Copyright and IP doesn't mean restricting what you made from the people. It means doing what you want with it - be that giving it away or hiding your shame in a black box far away from prying eyes oh how you still hear the screams that wake you at night.
So I usually recommend an old 486 (as an auto-dialup gateway) with unix and some logging software. It's secure enough for most adults.
After becoming accustomed to Windows one would not feel as home in Mac. So for you the interface failed.
Whether a pure and untouched user would pick up Mac faster than Windows or Berlin faster than Gnome is the point though.
Hmmm, a reply... yes. At least the UK have some slightly sane journalists (read the link, it's quite good really).
Sounds like the arstechnica article.
Simcity was a paint program.
NinjaBurger?
Pearl is a language.
...Though I guess you could move around body parts when one was compromised. Har! har!
Ooooh... and LOGO for those not familiar with it's awesome power.
...8.3 bashing while Unix uses /usr /etc /var /bin /proc /boot /home /root /sbin /dev /lib /tmp. The longer ones would be more descriptive but there are good reasons for shorter names.
X is pretty dumb in the way of describes graphical primitives (much unnecessary network traffic). If one were going to do a rewrite they should learn from Berlin's trim structure (although CORBA certainly bloats).