These stories are posted because a lot of people have an interest in them, as is evident by the large number of comments each SCO story gets. As such, you represent a minority.
Complaining here will not help. These stories will continue to be posted. The fact that you are even posting in a SCO story yourself shows that you are actually interested in them, and as such, you seem to be complaining over nothing.
If you don't like what Slashdot has to offer, there is a simple solution: Stop reading Slashdot. No one has asked you for your opinion on the stories, and the editors sure as hell don't care.
If you really want to continue reading Slashdot but hate the SCO stories, simply filter them out.
But whining like a little crybaby isn't going to help. You have chosen to read Slashdot. You also have the choice to not read it. No one is forcing you.
And yeah, when people say "if you don't like what's on TV, change the channel", it is a perfectly valid response to pointless complaining. So you think Slashdot has become a tabloid magazine? I guess it sucks to be you then. Stop reading Slashdot. Complaining about Slashdot is useless, since Slashdot doesn't owe you anything. The editors decide what happens. I don't see a problem with valid complaints, but when you whine and bitch about something which is easily solved by simply filtering out SCO stories, that is just too much.
You also compare SCO stories on Slashdot with spam, which, again, is utterly ridiculous. For one, Slashdot is not the only geek news site. Also, again, you can easily filter out stories. No one is forcing your to read Slashdot or SCO stories.
So stop complaining already. Your silly excuses for being a big crybaby are simply not relevant, since Slashdot doesn't force itself on you, it is not the only site on the web, and you can even filter out stories on Slashdot itself.
It might be healthy to complain at times, but you are just whining pointlessly. It says more about your characteristics than about people who use their brains and don't complain about things they can easily fix themselves.
Read this carefully, word by word, and then let it sink in:
AdWords
Does
Not
Affect
Normal
Search
Results
AdWords does not affect normal search results! This is about the sponsored links, and they are very obvious, and also separated from the actual search results.
Can we please quit it with the FUD and misinformation now? What is this, Google Watch?
But how is this relevant to the story? And what makes you think Google is going down the drain?
The paranoia is incredible at times. From Google Watch to "Google is dying!" posts on Slashdot... Why all the doom and gloom? Let's try to be a bit level headed here and stop the nonsensical posts about how Google is evil and doing everything wrong, oh no, wait, they are doing things right, but surely everything and anything is a sign that it's going to get worse!
Oh my GOD! He runs a site with eighteen to nineteen year old women, women with slim bodies, and women dressed up as cheerleaders! He must be locked away immediately!
I mean, what kind of SICKO would get turned on by good looking women around 20! It is simply unheard of!
Isn't "Stoned Beaver" just the name for this specific test kernel? If so, what is the problem? The kernel is still Linux, it is not changing its name. Just because someone wants to have a bit of fun with the name of a mere test version doesn't mean that it's unprofessional.
I don't really see how this has got anything to do with Linux or professionalism, since, as I said, the kernel is still "Linux", and this is a test kernel.
Except, as someone else posted out in this discussion, you have no choice but to accept the terms if you want to attend the university, since you can't opt out of purchasing access. You need it. You have no choice.
You could always use a browser with SSR (Small Screen Rendering), such as Opera or Mozilla. Or you can use any browser which supports alternate style sheets and make your own SSR implementation.
PS. Just ignore the rants on various Mozilla sites about how Opera's SSR is "nothing but CSS", as it is insignificant or useless. Sure, it might be a simple idea, but why didn't someone else come up with it first then? Also, just because an idea is simple doesn't mean that it's bad or useless. It is, in fact, a good idea, one which might finally kill off WAP (about time). Just had to get that off my chest...
They have completely different uses. Pie menus are better as replacement for normal context menus. Mouse gestures, on the other hand, are best used for the most common tasks (such as going back, reloading, closing page, etc.). Mouse gestures are much faster than pie menus, but as I said, they have different uses, and pie menus are supposed to be slower, because you select your action, rather than perform it quickly.
That's fine by me. Playing PC games or creating my own web page is not a lucurative business either, so I have to work with something else. If a musician can't make money by working with music, then that's too bad. Get another job.
"I don't understand why everyone falls back on touring as something that artists should be required to do if they want to make any money. What if they don't want to? We don't require authors to constantly travel the country and do readings to make money because nobody is willing to pay for their books."
Yes, exactly. What if I don't want to work? Then I'll go broke and end up on the street. So I have to work. I wish I had laws to make me rich simply by doing what I like to do.
I am exaggerating a bit on purpose, but I think that the argument "the artist won't be able to get rich and stop working" is a bad argument.
"To rephase your post, "relying on stealing music for a while is a nice idea, but if it doesn't work, then the consumer should stop complaining and start paying.""
No. Downloading music is not stealing. I am not depriving the artist of any revenue by downloading a song, am I? I am not taking the song from his possession am I? He is still free to go on tour with his song to make money.
I am not so much arguing for downloading other people's must for free, as I am making a statement against what I feel is a silly argument: That the artist somehow has the right to get rich and stop working. TEveryone else has to work, so I really have no sympathy for artists who have to work for their income either.
"A good album release keeps paying the artist without him doing any work so long as the album is bought or music is used commercially (among other things)."
If what you are saying is correct, then I have no sympathy for the artist. I have to work every day of the week to make money, and there is no reason why the artist shouldn't either. Relying on working for a while, then relaxing and letting the money flow in is a nice idea, but if it doesn't work, then the artist should stop complaining and start touring. It's a job. So the artist should do his job.
"Coming to the RIAA's defense by saying "she's guilty, she's a thief, what they're doing is right!" isn't insightful, it isn't informative, and it sure as hell isn't interesting."
How difficult was it to read that part of the text and just not post, instead of taking a quote out of context and asking a question that's been answered in the very same post?
".... that infects your machine and emails everyone in your address book could cost you a few dollars? YIKES!"
Hmm, that sounds like a great idea!:D
Seriously, some people simply don't care about this. I inform them about viruses and they say they don't care because they don't even notice it so it's "not my problem". They don't care if it messes up other people's systems as well. Though this is another problem than spam, it would be great if people who didn't take the time to secure their system had to pay for it or at least face the consequences.
This would be extremely handy to have as an online resource where anyone can just open a web page to get a generated apparently-valid CC number. But one would have to figure out if it is legal. If it is, then we could really cause problems for spammers that have order sites.
For this to work well, it will probably have to be planned, and various things have to be considered. Such as, maybe someone should pick out spam and post them somewhere site so anyone can go in and make life difficult for those specific spammers? Or do we just want people to pick randomly from their inboxes?
But to address your comment about valid return addresses, the primary goal as I see it is not to swamp the spammer or the spammer's client with e-mail, but with responses - of any kind. If it only takes you to a web site, then follow that link (maybe remove any id string or change it first, though) and sign up with a fake name, address, phone number etc.
You wouldn't have to read all your spam either. Just pick out a couple of random spam e-mails every day, or if you are feeling extra grumpy because of spam or have a lot of time on your hands, do several of them.
This would all have to be looked into and organized in some way, but that is what the guy sending in the story was talking about wasn't it? Perhaps NANAE would be a good place to discuss these things?
In any case, if done by enough people, we would be taking the fight to the spammers' home turf, rather than having to defend ourselves all the time.
I fail to see the problem. For one, they didn't get 5,000 developers to do the job. 5,000 contestants doesn't mean that they all contributed with a good solution. And why would they have to hire a team of developers? It seems to me that one is enough, if he can figure out the problem.
So I fail to see the problem. The guy who won is very happy now, and got plenty of money. Google solved a problem. Everyone wins!
The problem is that when a company grows, it usually grows because it is successful and has a lot of customers. Unfortunately, more customers means more clueless fools who clog up your phone and e-mail with questions they could have found an answer to if they bothered searching, angry people ranting and raving, etc.
This means that if it is very easy to get in touch with the company, the people who will get in touch are often the ones who shouldn't have contacted the company in the first place. At least not before cooling down, because they often call in a rage and spend ages ranting and raving on the phone, and in the end, nothing is really solved... Anyway, this means that the company has to filter out the worst cases to make sure they aren't overrun. This usually doesn't help, as the people who actually need help and take the time to try to help themselves or at least calm down before calling, are the ones who end up having to wait.
I've personally witnessed this several times.
There's always possibility for improvement, and unfortunately, this means having to hide the human face as much as possible without making it impossible to contact you. It is a delicate balance, but it is necessary because of the flood of people trying to get in touch with someone.
Slashdot Mirror
Complaining here will not help. These stories will continue to be posted. The fact that you are even posting in a SCO story yourself shows that you are actually interested in them, and as such, you seem to be complaining over nothing.
If you don't like what Slashdot has to offer, there is a simple solution: Stop reading Slashdot. No one has asked you for your opinion on the stories, and the editors sure as hell don't care.
If you really want to continue reading Slashdot but hate the SCO stories, simply filter them out.
But whining like a little crybaby isn't going to help. You have chosen to read Slashdot. You also have the choice to not read it. No one is forcing you.
And yeah, when people say "if you don't like what's on TV, change the channel", it is a perfectly valid response to pointless complaining. So you think Slashdot has become a tabloid magazine? I guess it sucks to be you then. Stop reading Slashdot. Complaining about Slashdot is useless, since Slashdot doesn't owe you anything. The editors decide what happens. I don't see a problem with valid complaints, but when you whine and bitch about something which is easily solved by simply filtering out SCO stories, that is just too much.
You also compare SCO stories on Slashdot with spam, which, again, is utterly ridiculous. For one, Slashdot is not the only geek news site. Also, again, you can easily filter out stories. No one is forcing your to read Slashdot or SCO stories.
So stop complaining already. Your silly excuses for being a big crybaby are simply not relevant, since Slashdot doesn't force itself on you, it is not the only site on the web, and you can even filter out stories on Slashdot itself.
It might be healthy to complain at times, but you are just whining pointlessly. It says more about your characteristics than about people who use their brains and don't complain about things they can easily fix themselves.
I'm just curious because it sounds a bit strange. For one, I've never heard about that.
This is about sponsored links/ads, not about the search results. What is your point?
AdWords does not affect normal search results! This is about the sponsored links, and they are very obvious, and also separated from the actual search results.
Can we please quit it with the FUD and misinformation now? What is this, Google Watch?
The paranoia is incredible at times. From Google Watch to "Google is dying!" posts on Slashdot... Why all the doom and gloom? Let's try to be a bit level headed here and stop the nonsensical posts about how Google is evil and doing everything wrong, oh no, wait, they are doing things right, but surely everything and anything is a sign that it's going to get worse!
Sigh.
I mean, what kind of SICKO would get turned on by good looking women around 20! It is simply unheard of!
I don't really see how this has got anything to do with Linux or professionalism, since, as I said, the kernel is still "Linux", and this is a test kernel.
But whatever. IHBT.
Except, as someone else posted out in this discussion, you have no choice but to accept the terms if you want to attend the university, since you can't opt out of purchasing access. You need it. You have no choice.
By the way, here's the contact form for the spammer... Remember not to threaten them too much.
Uh, dude... Slashdot adds the site domain as a title automatically. Maybe it's time to cut down on the caffeine? It appears to make you grumpy :^)
PS. Just ignore the rants on various Mozilla sites about how Opera's SSR is "nothing but CSS", as it is insignificant or useless. Sure, it might be a simple idea, but why didn't someone else come up with it first then? Also, just because an idea is simple doesn't mean that it's bad or useless. It is, in fact, a good idea, one which might finally kill off WAP (about time). Just had to get that off my chest...
They have completely different uses. Pie menus are better as replacement for normal context menus. Mouse gestures, on the other hand, are best used for the most common tasks (such as going back, reloading, closing page, etc.). Mouse gestures are much faster than pie menus, but as I said, they have different uses, and pie menus are supposed to be slower, because you select your action, rather than perform it quickly.
That's fine by me. Playing PC games or creating my own web page is not a lucurative business either, so I have to work with something else. If a musician can't make money by working with music, then that's too bad. Get another job.
I am exaggerating a bit on purpose, but I think that the argument "the artist won't be able to get rich and stop working" is a bad argument.
No. Downloading music is not stealing. I am not depriving the artist of any revenue by downloading a song, am I? I am not taking the song from his possession am I? He is still free to go on tour with his song to make money.I am not so much arguing for downloading other people's must for free, as I am making a statement against what I feel is a silly argument: That the artist somehow has the right to get rich and stop working. TEveryone else has to work, so I really have no sympathy for artists who have to work for their income either.
"Coming to the RIAA's defense by saying "she's guilty, she's a thief, what they're doing is right!" isn't insightful, it isn't informative, and it sure as hell isn't interesting."
How difficult was it to read that part of the text and just not post, instead of taking a quote out of context and asking a question that's been answered in the very same post?
Seriously, some people simply don't care about this. I inform them about viruses and they say they don't care because they don't even notice it so it's "not my problem". They don't care if it messes up other people's systems as well. Though this is another problem than spam, it would be great if people who didn't take the time to secure their system had to pay for it or at least face the consequences.
http://www3.telus.net/samuel/ccgen
No idea if it works...
This would be extremely handy to have as an online resource where anyone can just open a web page to get a generated apparently-valid CC number. But one would have to figure out if it is legal. If it is, then we could really cause problems for spammers that have order sites.
But to address your comment about valid return addresses, the primary goal as I see it is not to swamp the spammer or the spammer's client with e-mail, but with responses - of any kind. If it only takes you to a web site, then follow that link (maybe remove any id string or change it first, though) and sign up with a fake name, address, phone number etc.
You wouldn't have to read all your spam either. Just pick out a couple of random spam e-mails every day, or if you are feeling extra grumpy because of spam or have a lot of time on your hands, do several of them.
This would all have to be looked into and organized in some way, but that is what the guy sending in the story was talking about wasn't it? Perhaps NANAE would be a good place to discuss these things?
In any case, if done by enough people, we would be taking the fight to the spammers' home turf, rather than having to defend ourselves all the time.
That would be a welcome change.
I still don't see the problem. Everyone gets a shot at winning, five people win lots of cash, while Google solves a problem. Everyone wins. Who loses?
...and the problem, again, is? Everyone wins. How is this a problem?
So I fail to see the problem. The guy who won is very happy now, and got plenty of money. Google solved a problem. Everyone wins!
This means that if it is very easy to get in touch with the company, the people who will get in touch are often the ones who shouldn't have contacted the company in the first place. At least not before cooling down, because they often call in a rage and spend ages ranting and raving on the phone, and in the end, nothing is really solved... Anyway, this means that the company has to filter out the worst cases to make sure they aren't overrun. This usually doesn't help, as the people who actually need help and take the time to try to help themselves or at least calm down before calling, are the ones who end up having to wait.
I've personally witnessed this several times.
There's always possibility for improvement, and unfortunately, this means having to hide the human face as much as possible without making it impossible to contact you. It is a delicate balance, but it is necessary because of the flood of people trying to get in touch with someone.