I'm saying that culture and improvements are irrelevant.
That is simply not true. We acquired culture because it helps us survive. It's just as relevant (or irrelevant if you insist) as the trunk of an elephant or the echo location systems of bats.
The question whether culture makes us better than chickens, however, is highly irrelevant. But if you change that question just a little, you have a highly relevant one: does culture make us better adapted than chickens? Of course, in that case it's very easy to answer: since chickens are alive and kicking and are not fighting with us over the same resources, no, chickens and humans are both doing just fine.
If a 24-year-old without any degree can write perfectly good articles on Wikipedia, where will this leave all the guys and girls with the degrees?
Stop worrying about Wikipedia. All those "What will happen to Wikipedia if" and "Where will it leave Wikipedia when" articles haven't stopped me from looking up stuff on Wikipedia first. And the number of degress somebody has or has not surely isn't a good indicator of trustworthy information.
I'd like to see the Slashdot thread the day that Dell announces to ship machines with a preinstalled Suse. All the Red Hat, the Debian, the [your favorite distro here] fans will be really pissed off.
However there are still a lot of people out there that think that every piece of marketing material whether its legitimate or not should be treated as spam and the person sending it should be hung out on a noose. ...
Capitalism needs marketing
Marketing is something that should persuade potential customers to buy your products or services. I don't think that the definition of marketing includes the term "annoying". If you don't want your customers to be pissed off, don't piss them off.
We wonder if Microsoft would bundle Windows Media Player 11 with Vista [...] It most certainly will end up looking a lot better (graphically) than most music players out there
This is soooo cool. Never mind stability, usability, or the damned security of the new OS. As long as the media player looks groovy, we really don't care.
If the program is really based on Bodanis' book, even nerds that presumably "know" the equation will have a chance to learn something new.
In the book, Bodanis takes each part of the formula and provides background for its origin. While you maybe one heck of a clever nerd, you might not necessarily know about the origins of the equals sign, for instance.
If stories about Einstein's equation make you weep, what about stories about Star Trek/Wars?
If I have an (otherwise proprietary) web application that makes a call to a GPL3'd grep command then I'd have to distribute grep to people if they asked.
...
We're looking at an approach where programs used (on a public server) will have to include a command for the user to download the source for the version that is running," Stallman said. [...] seems vastly more sane.
You think it's more sane to build a 'command' into grep that makes its source code available on the server it is running on? To me, this sounds incredibly unsane.
Whenever Firefox is mentioned here on Slashdot and elsewhere, it won't take long until somebody says something about security issues and gaping holes in IE.
While this is true, I doubt that it will ever make people switch.
Tell those people that using Firefox is more fun. That IE treats its users like shit and that alternative browsers (including Opera) are much more fun to work and play with.
Just shutup about the security issues. If people, given their level of expertise, took those seriously, they would have to disconnect. Now.
The question isn't really whether browsers support standard this or standard that. The question is whether browsers support what designers are trying to do.
Some desginers seem to be looking at the standards when they decide what they want to do. I agree that it's about time browsers started fully supporting css 2.1. But css 3? Isn't that a little early?
Try to see it that way: Either standards are ahead of browsers or standards get created after the fact. That latter mode of operation gave us lots of browser-specific features. Remember <blink> and <marquee>?
What we really need are versions of the standards documents that tell us what browsers support which features. People shouldn't be forced to find out the hard way which browser support what.
Somebody working in tech support once told me a very... well... interesting story.
He had a user that received a worm via email. The AV software caught it and denied access to that mail. So she went home and downloaded that message to her laptop. Again, the message was blocked by AV, but she was somehow able to save it to disk.
The next day, she brought the disk to the IT guys, requesting that they open the message so she could finally find out what was in that attachment.
I guess what you say isn't completely wrong. But that story demonstrates that there is more to it than just credulity.
Anybody still stupid enough to open attachements in emails like this DESERVE to get infected and have their harddrives ERASED.
Yeah. But the problem is that these people aren't having their harddrives erased, they have their machines turned into zombies so we don't run out of spam, bounces, and worms.
... that the best software in the world couldn't protect you from the stupidity of the guy in front of the monitor. Makes you wonder who is worse: Microsoft or their users?
With all the FUD the entertainment industry is spreading and with the real danger of having to cough up thousands of Euros for sharing some files, this move is brilliant in terms of marketing.
OTOH, and before you start thinking that Germany is the real land of the free, there are laws under way that will require ISPs to keep connection data for at least 6 months. Some even want them to keep them for 2 years.
Apparently Lycos was thinking that they should make some revenue before they have to shell out millions for tracking equipment.
Slashdot Mirror
How about a simple sudo su?
What?
It doesn't leverage my human resources investments?
Guess I'll be going for that other paradigm shift then.
if you're going to use Facebook's servers, you have to abide by Facebook's rules
OK. That makes sense.
But when did Slashdot become the Facebook TOS enforcer?
I really don't know what this story is doing here.
That is simply not true. We acquired culture because it helps us survive. It's just as relevant (or irrelevant if you insist) as the trunk of an elephant or the echo location systems of bats.
The question whether culture makes us better than chickens, however, is highly irrelevant. But if you change that question just a little, you have a highly relevant one: does culture make us better adapted than chickens? Of course, in that case it's very easy to answer: since chickens are alive and kicking and are not fighting with us over the same resources, no, chickens and humans are both doing just fine.
If a 24-year-old without any degree can write perfectly good articles on Wikipedia, where will this leave all the guys and girls with the degrees?
Stop worrying about Wikipedia. All those "What will happen to Wikipedia if" and "Where will it leave Wikipedia when" articles haven't stopped me from looking up stuff on Wikipedia first. And the number of degress somebody has or has not surely isn't a good indicator of trustworthy information.
What happens when somone using Gnome wants something like k3b is that he installs k3b and happy.
I'm amazed that that comment was rated funny because that's exactly what Dell is saying/thinking: http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS3822185143.html
I'd like to see the Slashdot thread the day that Dell announces to ship machines with a preinstalled Suse. All the Red Hat, the Debian, the [your favorite distro here] fans will be really pissed off.
However there are still a lot of people out there that think that every piece of marketing material whether its legitimate or not should be treated as spam and the person sending it should be hung out on a noose.
...
Capitalism needs marketing
Marketing is something that should persuade potential customers to buy your products or services. I don't think that the definition of marketing includes the term "annoying". If you don't want your customers to be pissed off, don't piss them off.
So children with 'superior' IQ have a slow start. Fine.
But that doesn't friggin mean that everyone with a slow start has a superior IQ!
I, for one, welcome our new flamebaiting overlords.
With no Microsoft-centric frame of reference, Microsoft cannot look good.
That MS is not looking so good?
MS would look better if the New York Times used PCs?
Everything looks better if you don't use it.
This is soooo cool. Never mind stability, usability, or the damned security of the new OS. As long as the media player looks groovy, we really don't care.
Just don't tell the marketing folks in Redmond.
If the program is really based on Bodanis' book, even nerds that presumably "know" the equation will have a chance to learn something new.
In the book, Bodanis takes each part of the formula and provides background for its origin. While you maybe one heck of a clever nerd, you might not necessarily know about the origins of the equals sign, for instance.
If stories about Einstein's equation make you weep, what about stories about Star Trek/Wars?
You think it's more sane to build a 'command' into grep that makes its source code available on the server it is running on? To me, this sounds incredibly unsane.
I guess I still don't get the point here.
Are your apps GPL'd? If they aren't, you don't need to have that link.
Let's forget about that blue-e camp for a moment.
Whenever Firefox is mentioned here on Slashdot and elsewhere, it won't take long until somebody says something about security issues and gaping holes in IE.
While this is true, I doubt that it will ever make people switch.
Tell those people that using Firefox is more fun. That IE treats its users like shit and that alternative browsers (including Opera) are much more fun to work and play with.
Just shutup about the security issues. If people, given their level of expertise, took those seriously, they would have to disconnect. Now.
Finland, Finland, Finland,
The country where I want to be,
Pony trekking or camping,
Or just watching TV.
Finland, Finland, Finland.
It's the country for me.
You're so near to Russia,
So far from Japan,
Quite a long way from Cairo,
Lots of miles from Vietnam.
Finland, Finland, Finland,
The country where I want to be,
Eating breakfast or dinner,
Or snack lunch in the hall.
Finland, Finland, Finland.
Finland has it all.
You're so sadly neglected
And often ignored,
A poor second to Belgium,
When going abroad.
Finland, Finland, Finland,
The country where I quite want to be,
Your mountains so lofty,
Your treetops so tall.
Finland, Finland, Finland.
Finland has it all.
Finland, Finland, Finland,
The country where I quite want to be,
Your mountains so lofty,
Your treetops so tall.
Finland, Finland, Finland.
Finland has it all.
Finland has it all.
I don't really understand that line of reasoning.
The question isn't really whether browsers support standard this or standard that. The question is whether browsers support what designers are trying to do.
Some desginers seem to be looking at the standards when they decide what they want to do. I agree that it's about time browsers started fully supporting css 2.1. But css 3? Isn't that a little early?
Try to see it that way: Either standards are ahead of browsers or standards get created after the fact. That latter mode of operation gave us lots of browser-specific features. Remember <blink> and <marquee>?
What we really need are versions of the standards documents that tell us what browsers support which features. People shouldn't be forced to find out the hard way which browser support what.
Since the fix has been released, attackers are on notice that there is are vulnerable systems out there...
Wouldn't you think that the attackers are on notice because somebody posted the exploit/vulnerability to some security mailing list?
Are attackers really that lazy? Do they wait until there's a story on slashdot about a new Mozilla release?
Somebody working in tech support once told me a very... well... interesting story.
He had a user that received a worm via email. The AV software caught it and denied access to that mail. So she went home and downloaded that message to her laptop. Again, the message was blocked by AV, but she was somehow able to save it to disk.
The next day, she brought the disk to the IT guys, requesting that they open the message so she could finally find out what was in that attachment.
I guess what you say isn't completely wrong. But that story demonstrates that there is more to it than just credulity.
Anybody still stupid enough to open attachements in emails like this DESERVE to get infected and have their harddrives ERASED.
Yeah. But the problem is that these people aren't having their harddrives erased, they have their machines turned into zombies so we don't run out of spam, bounces, and worms.
... that the best software in the world couldn't protect you from the stupidity of the guy in front of the monitor. Makes you wonder who is worse: Microsoft or their users?
A little more detail about how that stuff works wouldn't have hurt in that story.
Ocean Power Delivery Limited has a website! And they have a nice little Flash animation that explains those sausages.
You're right, France should be excluded here. But I fail to see the role of nuclear weapons here.
With all the FUD the entertainment industry is spreading and with the real danger of having to cough up thousands of Euros for sharing some files, this move is brilliant in terms of marketing.
OTOH, and before you start thinking that Germany is the real land of the free, there are laws under way that will require ISPs to keep connection data for at least 6 months. Some even want them to keep them for 2 years.
Apparently Lycos was thinking that they should make some revenue before they have to shell out millions for tracking equipment.