I know this comment will probably never be read because it's in a dad thread, but...
Isn't it interesting that the above reply was rated higher than my original comment? If my comment was worth a weight of 1, then how could a rebuttal be worth a weight of 3?
Anyway, to reply... (even though it won't be read)
Demographics are one, perfectly valid explaination for the advertisements we see on adfu. However, what _if_ M$ tried to put 300 ads on Slashdot? (Making 50% of the ads theirs.) Would Rob sell them the space? If the answer is "yes" then Slashdot hasn't sold it's soul. If "no" then it has.
Don't get me wrong. Slashdot should be biased towards what advertisers it takes. After all, somebody has to decide what the "stuff that matters" is. It has an ideology to present just like (most) everybody else. Let's just not deny it.
> Monolithic media conglomerates such as the > NYTimes and The Mercury News don't see it as > such, but this is the same reason why they just > don't ring true in my ears, they've sold their > journalistic souls to the sponsors, big-wigs, > and advertisers.
To be fair, I think Slashdot has sold it's soul to advertisers as well, just to the advertisers Rob believes in. Just check out the redirects from adfu.blockstackers.com. (hit adfu.blockstackers.com/redir.pl?XXX where XXX is an integer between 1 and 300 or so) You'll see a whole lot of linux websites, distributers of open source software, etc. So, Slashdot's soul is sold. We just like the buyers...
The Linux "disadvantage" I liked best was "Provides source code to allow developers to deviate from standard distribution." I also liked "OS services provided as an un-integrated collection of technologies developed by independent developers." So does this mean that there's no 3rd party software for NT? And, on the completely unsubstantiated FUD side, "More prone to security bugs." Lovely!
> Anyone have their familiy not get it or actually turn on you for telling them the truth?
Yep. I had to break up with my last gf because of my geekliness. She said I was "trying too hard to be different." I am just different because... I just am. She couldn't understand how I could not mind standing out in a crowd in any way: physically, intellectually, spiritually. Strangely enough, those very qualities that she says make me "undesirably noticable" are exactly what made her notice me in the first place. Strange, that...
Book is one of the better O'Reilly books I've bought, and I've bought a good few. It has both variety and depth. The only thing that confused me was the cover. Aren't teapots supposed to be reserved for books on 3D graphics?:-)
OK. I hate to admit it, but I used to support M$ Access for the evil empire itself. I can tell you that we DID give custom fixes for people's problems, although sometimes it had to be done without the management's knowledge or consent. (Not all of the time, though...) And I also know for a fact that the SQL guys often did custom fixes, sometimes going to the customer site. This was three years ago, though...
I think you've got a good point. Technology's rise to "hipness" has definately contributed to tech culture hubris. Previously geeks had little or no reinforement for any feelings of superiority gained from technical accomplishment. Now that's been completely turned around.
I know this is an overgeneralization, but arrogance seems to be a major undercurrant in tech culture. It shows itself on a cultural level (we're the "knowledge bearers" of the modern world) and an individual level. (the "everybody else's code is crap" reflex)
If we really want to wrangle this behavior it would behoove us to find it's causes, both psychological and cultural. What promotes it? Is it created by tech culture, or are arrogant people attracted to the tech culture?
I don't thin our aim should be to eliminate our arrogance, though. It can be extremely useful, even essential, especially in the business world. But, when midirected, it can be very self destructive.
It matters in what context comments are allowed. I could always comment on another section of slashdot on this article, so even if this article gets closed to comments there is no "last comment." For a last comment in that sense, slashdot itself would have to end. But then I could continue commenting on another website, etc., etc... If you define a comment as a sentient reaction that can be causally linked to the existence of the article, then all you need for comments is the continuation of time and sentience.
So, hah!
"last comment!" inherently impossible...
on
GNOME 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
...unless you believe that the universe, and thus the passage of time, will end. Otherwise, there will never be a "last comment."
So, hah!
Gnome message has been on top for a day now
on
GNOME 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Naw, I just think Malda hasn't woken up yet.:-) Too much partying at Linux World, maybe? Of course, he is on the west cost at the moment, so that may be it...
...but so far I guess I'm in the minority. Maybe what was meant by "more like Windows" was to make it more user friendly. Even if they made the UI identical to Windows, much as that would make the majority of ya'll yack (and me as well), I think it would be great.
As long as there was a simple, put the CD in and go install with great tech support. Fancy, new lookin', new fangled stuff could be put in later. Otherwise there's too much chance of frazzling John Q Normal. We need John (and Jane) Q Normal. Otherwise Linux will die in the dust with Bill in his black hat chuckling holding two six shooters...
1. Destined to be a Microsoft killer 2. Small chink in Microsoft's armor 3. Plaything for techies 4. Better OS/2 than OS/2 5. Not sure
Note the large difference between 1 and 2. So we have to decide if it's a "killer" or a "small chink"? This is a common pollster's tactic. Moderate thinkers (like myself) might not think that Linux will be a "killer," but might coexist with Microsoft. Thus, moderates might be pushed towards the "small chink" response, which is worded favorably for Microsoft.
Beware statistics FUD! It's the worst of them all...
Slashdot Mirror
I know this comment will probably never be read because it's in a dad thread, but...
Isn't it interesting that the above reply was rated higher than my original comment? If my comment was worth a weight of 1, then how could a rebuttal be worth a weight of 3?
Anyway, to reply... (even though it won't be read)
Demographics are one, perfectly valid explaination for the advertisements we see on adfu. However, what _if_ M$ tried to put 300 ads on Slashdot? (Making 50% of the ads theirs.) Would Rob sell them the space? If the answer is "yes" then Slashdot hasn't sold it's soul. If "no" then it has.
Don't get me wrong. Slashdot should be biased towards what advertisers it takes. After all, somebody has to decide what the "stuff that matters" is. It has an ideology to present just like (most) everybody else. Let's just not deny it.
> Monolithic media conglomerates such as the
> NYTimes and The Mercury News don't see it as
> such, but this is the same reason why they just
> don't ring true in my ears, they've sold their
> journalistic souls to the sponsors, big-wigs,
> and advertisers.
To be fair, I think Slashdot has sold it's soul to advertisers as well, just to the advertisers Rob believes in. Just check out the redirects from adfu.blockstackers.com. (hit adfu.blockstackers.com/redir.pl?XXX where XXX is an integer between 1 and 300 or so) You'll see a whole lot of linux websites, distributers of open source software, etc. So, Slashdot's soul is sold. We just like the buyers...
The Linux "disadvantage" I liked best was "Provides source code to allow developers to deviate from standard distribution." I also liked "OS services provided as an un-integrated collection of technologies developed by independent developers." So does this mean that there's no 3rd party software for NT? And, on the completely unsubstantiated FUD side, "More prone to security bugs." Lovely!
> Anyone have their familiy not get it or actually turn on you for telling them the truth?
Yep. I had to break up with my last gf because of my geekliness. She said I was "trying too hard to be different." I am just different because... I just am. She couldn't understand how I could not mind standing out in a crowd in any way: physically, intellectually, spiritually. Strangely enough, those very qualities that she says make me "undesirably noticable" are exactly what made her notice me in the first place. Strange, that...
Book is one of the better O'Reilly books I've bought, and I've bought a good few. It has both variety and depth. The only thing that confused me was the cover. Aren't teapots supposed to be reserved for books on 3D graphics? :-)
OK. I hate to admit it, but I used to support M$ Access for the evil empire itself. I can tell you that we DID give custom fixes for people's problems, although sometimes it had to be done without the management's knowledge or consent. (Not all of the time, though...) And I also know for a fact that the SQL guys often did custom fixes, sometimes going to the customer site. This was three years ago, though...
I think you've got a good point. Technology's rise to "hipness" has definately contributed to tech culture hubris. Previously geeks had little or no reinforement for any feelings of superiority gained from technical accomplishment. Now that's been completely turned around.
I know this is an overgeneralization, but arrogance seems to be a major undercurrant in tech culture. It shows itself on a cultural level (we're the "knowledge bearers" of the modern world) and an individual level. (the "everybody else's code is crap" reflex)
If we really want to wrangle this behavior it would behoove us to find it's causes, both psychological and cultural. What promotes it? Is it created by tech culture, or are arrogant people attracted to the tech culture?
I don't thin our aim should be to eliminate our arrogance, though. It can be extremely useful, even essential, especially in the business world. But, when midirected, it can be very self destructive.
I hear that the trailer will be shown before the movie "Wing Commander" opening this Friday...
AMD and Cyrix chips are not SMP capable.
Hah!
Is this whining? I thought it was a perfectly reasonable, completely idiotic philisophical argument...
Alright, let's get philosophical...
It matters in what context comments are allowed. I could always comment on another section of slashdot on this article, so even if this article gets closed to comments there is no "last comment." For a last comment in that sense, slashdot itself would have to end. But then I could continue commenting on another website, etc., etc... If you define a comment as a sentient reaction that can be causally linked to the existence of the article, then all you need for comments is the continuation of time and sentience.
So, hah!
...unless you believe that the universe, and thus the passage of time, will end. Otherwise, there will never be a "last comment."
So, hah!
Naw, I just think Malda hasn't woken up yet. :-) Too much partying at Linux World, maybe? Of course, he is on the west cost at the moment, so that may be it...
...but so far I guess I'm in the minority. Maybe what was meant by "more like Windows" was to make it more user friendly. Even if they made the UI identical to Windows, much as that would make the majority of ya'll yack (and me as well), I think it would be great.
As long as there was a simple, put the CD in and go install with great tech support. Fancy, new lookin', new fangled stuff could be put in later. Otherwise there's too much chance of frazzling John Q Normal. We need John (and Jane) Q Normal. Otherwise Linux will die in the dust with Bill in his black hat chuckling holding two six shooters...
Notice the selections on their reader poll:
1. Destined to be a Microsoft killer
2. Small chink in Microsoft's armor
3. Plaything for techies
4. Better OS/2 than OS/2
5. Not sure
Note the large difference between 1 and 2. So we have to decide if it's a "killer" or a "small chink"? This is a common pollster's tactic. Moderate thinkers (like myself) might not think that Linux will be a "killer," but might coexist with Microsoft. Thus, moderates might be pushed towards the "small chink" response, which is worded favorably for Microsoft.
Beware statistics FUD! It's the worst of them all...
So you're testing the /. effect on restaurants now? :-)