I think for a moderation system like Slashdot's to work well, it needs numbers. When there aren't enough people moderating, it tends to break down -- it's more likely that comments are moderated unfairly etc.
Only an idiot would compare the "art" of trolling to Socrates. Asking serious and uncomfortable questions is not the same as trolling. Socrates intended to provoke discussion to learn and educate. Trolls intend to simply get a reaction, attention, not to educate -- or if they do, they're doing it in a way that is unconstructive.
A real troll is an adolescent mind who wants to feel superior by having emotional control over a group of people, probably because they can't get it in meatspace.
Yeah, those contracts are expensive and not fast, last time I checked. When I mean fast, I mean fixed within the hour. Perhaps they offer better service in major US cities, but not where I live.
Yeah, because the ride in a Cessna and a ride on a jet pack are really the same thing. You might as well compare off-road motorbike racing to driving down the public road in a big sedan.
It doesn't go the crap, scam way most devices go, but more like a car fuel tank. My iPod (4th gen) keeps on playing for quite a bit after it says the battery is empty. Compare that to every digital camera I own, where when it get to the last 1/4 or so it goes red and soon shuts off.
Actually, I plan to get a copy of Snow Leopard server and some basic BSD or Linux, and play around with them both on a Mac mini (via external drives -- gotta love EFI). I agree for that for serious web hosting, OS X server requires a lot of mucking about, like any Linux install would, but I also want to use OS X Server so that I can use the more Mac friendly features of it for other uses (such as a small all-Mac office etc), rather than just as a traditional web and mail server.
I was hoping that OS X server was actually good enough to use for web hosting and e-mail for many of my clients, rather than telling them to use some web host or do reselling (I'm a web designer/developer), but after a bit of research, it doesn't look like you can just use the GUI while you learn the technical side along the way (my original plan), but need to learn it all before, at which point, I might as well muck about with something cheaper and leaner. I might also give SuSE Linux Enterprise Server a go, too.
The other factor was that going the non-Apple route for a server means I don't have to pay for an Xserve -- servers are already expensive enough. And while I don't mind having to take my iMac in to get it fixed (even though I can do it myself), a commercial web server is another story.
I'm a bit disappointed with Apple recently -- with all the iPhone stuff going on, it has clearly affected the quality of the desktop and the server version of OS X. If they continue down this road, it won't be good. However, unlike Microsoft, I actually have faith that they will get back on track -- they can't afford not to if they want to continue doing as well as they are at the moment.
The thing about lock-in is that there is even lock-in with open source stuff, as it still takes a lot of time and effort to switch platforms and applications. It may not be the legal type of lock-in that people here usually mean, but that is not the only problem people face when they're talking about being locked-in to a specific platform, anyway. As long as I can always get my data back out, I'm prepared to accept some amount of lock-in when it comes to the hardware, OS, and applications.
Really? I could have sworn the last keynote that Jobs said Apple was a software company. I've always thought of them as being a computer company -- neither hardware or software, but both. Why do they have to be either one or the other?
Actively hostile toward its customers? Most of Apple's customers buy their machines and have no interest in clones. And these clone makers are also not Apple customers, either, but competition. It's hardly a case of Apple being so hostile to its customers. We can talk about if EULAs are BS all day long, but please, don't make idiotic arguments, it only weakens any point you may have.
Groups search for diazepam Not one legit result on the whole page, and none of them from traditional Usenet. Doing an advanced search and restricting to alt.drugs or some specific group does work better, but you need to know what groups are useful in the first place for that to work.
I imagine that certain sites, such as sites the size of Slashdot (in terms of dynamically generated pages), make a difference. After all, the index talks in pages, not domains. I bet there's also a lot of junk and redundancy in there, but still, it's quite an achievement to be able to deal with that much data.
Yeah, that's a problem. I'm sure they'll work it out. I don't find it to be a problem most of the time though, just on certain searches in certain places. They have a real spam problem if you search for info on pharmaceuticals in their groups search last time I checked (about a month ago). The problem wasn't the Usenet groups, but their own special groups, and the worse thing is you can't filter out their groups and just search Usenet ones.
I tried to contact them about it and discovered that they could also really do with making their site more accessible to general enquirers and feedback -- Apple make it easy to give feedback. Yeah, they probably ignore most of the stuff sent through there, but at least you can feel as if there is some possibility of them knowing about a certain issues, unlike when you can't find a way to seed feedback and just get end up with sales and PR contacts (who probably delete anything not related to their department) after 10 mins of browsing -- not good for customer relations.
As someone who is partially engineering/analytically minded (but not a great programmer) it amazes me how Google has manged to index so much data, yet at the same time, serve up results in a fraction of a second to so many people.
Sounds similar, perhaps. But it's very different. For starters, DLP is a front projection technology, where this is still more similar to traditional LCD screen technology. It uses mirrors to boost the efficiency of the backlight, where as DLP used mirrors to actually create the end image. And from what I've read about DLP mirrors, the technologies even differ a lot in this area.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh?
Does trolling trolls count as trolling?
Still stupid, you lose.
Or perhaps I read it first on some other tech site a while ago?
I think for a moderation system like Slashdot's to work well, it needs numbers. When there aren't enough people moderating, it tends to break down -- it's more likely that comments are moderated unfairly etc.
Only an idiot would compare the "art" of trolling to Socrates. Asking serious and uncomfortable questions is not the same as trolling. Socrates intended to provoke discussion to learn and educate. Trolls intend to simply get a reaction, attention, not to educate -- or if they do, they're doing it in a way that is unconstructive.
A real troll is a work of art
A real troll is an adolescent mind who wants to feel superior by having emotional control over a group of people, probably because they can't get it in meatspace.
There, fixed that for you.
Yeah, those contracts are expensive and not fast, last time I checked. When I mean fast, I mean fixed within the hour. Perhaps they offer better service in major US cities, but not where I live.
Yeah, because the ride in a Cessna and a ride on a jet pack are really the same thing. You might as well compare off-road motorbike racing to driving down the public road in a big sedan.
It doesn't go the crap, scam way most devices go, but more like a car fuel tank. My iPod (4th gen) keeps on playing for quite a bit after it says the battery is empty. Compare that to every digital camera I own, where when it get to the last 1/4 or so it goes red and soon shuts off.
Actually, I plan to get a copy of Snow Leopard server and some basic BSD or Linux, and play around with them both on a Mac mini (via external drives -- gotta love EFI). I agree for that for serious web hosting, OS X server requires a lot of mucking about, like any Linux install would, but I also want to use OS X Server so that I can use the more Mac friendly features of it for other uses (such as a small all-Mac office etc), rather than just as a traditional web and mail server.
I was hoping that OS X server was actually good enough to use for web hosting and e-mail for many of my clients, rather than telling them to use some web host or do reselling (I'm a web designer/developer), but after a bit of research, it doesn't look like you can just use the GUI while you learn the technical side along the way (my original plan), but need to learn it all before, at which point, I might as well muck about with something cheaper and leaner. I might also give SuSE Linux Enterprise Server a go, too.
The other factor was that going the non-Apple route for a server means I don't have to pay for an Xserve -- servers are already expensive enough. And while I don't mind having to take my iMac in to get it fixed (even though I can do it myself), a commercial web server is another story.
I'm a bit disappointed with Apple recently -- with all the iPhone stuff going on, it has clearly affected the quality of the desktop and the server version of OS X. If they continue down this road, it won't be good. However, unlike Microsoft, I actually have faith that they will get back on track -- they can't afford not to if they want to continue doing as well as they are at the moment.
Yeah, they should get someone like Sculley back. People seemed to like him. Jobs has been dragging the company down ever since he got back.
I rather have a Mac OS X Server than Linux for many things. I have better things to do that learn how to setup a server.
Perhaps the scoop is not the same temperature as the soil.
The thing about lock-in is that there is even lock-in with open source stuff, as it still takes a lot of time and effort to switch platforms and applications. It may not be the legal type of lock-in that people here usually mean, but that is not the only problem people face when they're talking about being locked-in to a specific platform, anyway. As long as I can always get my data back out, I'm prepared to accept some amount of lock-in when it comes to the hardware, OS, and applications.
Really? I could have sworn the last keynote that Jobs said Apple was a software company. I've always thought of them as being a computer company -- neither hardware or software, but both. Why do they have to be either one or the other?
Actively hostile toward its customers? Most of Apple's customers buy their machines and have no interest in clones. And these clone makers are also not Apple customers, either, but competition. It's hardly a case of Apple being so hostile to its customers. We can talk about if EULAs are BS all day long, but please, don't make idiotic arguments, it only weakens any point you may have.
Groups search for diazepam Not one legit result on the whole page, and none of them from traditional Usenet. Doing an advanced search and restricting to alt.drugs or some specific group does work better, but you need to know what groups are useful in the first place for that to work.
I imagine that certain sites, such as sites the size of Slashdot (in terms of dynamically generated pages), make a difference. After all, the index talks in pages, not domains. I bet there's also a lot of junk and redundancy in there, but still, it's quite an achievement to be able to deal with that much data.
Yeah, that's a problem. I'm sure they'll work it out. I don't find it to be a problem most of the time though, just on certain searches in certain places. They have a real spam problem if you search for info on pharmaceuticals in their groups search last time I checked (about a month ago). The problem wasn't the Usenet groups, but their own special groups, and the worse thing is you can't filter out their groups and just search Usenet ones.
I tried to contact them about it and discovered that they could also really do with making their site more accessible to general enquirers and feedback -- Apple make it easy to give feedback. Yeah, they probably ignore most of the stuff sent through there, but at least you can feel as if there is some possibility of them knowing about a certain issues, unlike when you can't find a way to seed feedback and just get end up with sales and PR contacts (who probably delete anything not related to their department) after 10 mins of browsing -- not good for customer relations.
As someone who is partially engineering/analytically minded (but not a great programmer) it amazes me how Google has manged to index so much data, yet at the same time, serve up results in a fraction of a second to so many people.
They're listed as separate encoders in the GUI, but that's hardly definitive.
Sounds similar, perhaps. But it's very different. For starters, DLP is a front projection technology, where this is still more similar to traditional LCD screen technology. It uses mirrors to boost the efficiency of the backlight, where as DLP used mirrors to actually create the end image. And from what I've read about DLP mirrors, the technologies even differ a lot in this area.
Why on earth would you assume that?
You did read the article, right? It's a prototype and they expect to get much better than 20:1.