This broadcast was clearly not purposed to educate, but to unnecessarily fill the average viewer with fear, uncertainty, and doubt.
And this, sir, is why it was a TV Movie (as you said yourself) and not a documentary.
Why is this any different from, say, Hackers or The Net? Because they were in the theatre and not on TV? Sure, geeks everywhere complained about how unrealistic they were, but nobody moved to ban anything over them.
Or was it because this one was about Y2K, which is in just over a month? People were reminded at every commercial break that this was a movie and not a documentary, weren't they?
by flagrant intimidation attempts like yours
what appears to be, a deliberate attempt to intimidate the public.
tat right does not extend to falsely yelling "fire" when there is none
catalytic broadcast of fear, uncertainty, and doubt
That's funny... it seemed to me to be a "flagrant attempt" at a movie. You know, entertainment. As in, not to be taken seriously. Perhaps you could say "a deliberate attempt to entertain the public."
I can tell you exactly nothing about a proper Slashdotting, but I can tell you this:
I posted the URL to my website (not even as a link, just typed the URL) in a comment on a story that was, at that point, a day or two old at least. Over the next three days, I determined from the server logs that I recieved at least 200 hits from Slashdot readers. Based on this, hits from a Slashdotting must be in the millions.
Hmm... let's try it again. http://silverlight.org/cray/
;)
Napster? (Semi-off-topic)
on
Copyright!
·
· Score: 2
Okay, so I went to download Napster to see what it's all about.
Looks like a members-only IRC server that's seriously underpowered. Takes me a long time to connect, and that's only after several tries. Searches take as long as five minutes. And while I admit I only downloaded two things, neither went above 2.3kbps.
I think, if you're gonna leech mp3s, mIRC will do a much better job for you.
P.S. Is there anybody here who's been using Napster for a while, and can tell me if they've always been like this, or if it's due to media attention? I'd appreciate it.
I remember playing a version of this for DOS quite some time ago...
Yeah, I remember that =) One of the few games I had for my old IBM XT. Great little computer... I think it had DOS version 2.something... I even had a version of Microsoft Works for it. I think it was the best version of MS works I've ever used, too;)
I would argue that adding applications is, minimally, one of the points. If all the OS was capable of doing was allowing _access_ to the disks, KB, framebuffer, et al., without actually being able to write to the disk and making that binary (or script) executable, what would be the point?
Maybe I should clarify: If you delete gcc, yes, you'll have trouble adding some applications. Why? Well, they're distributed in source form, for the most part. If you get binaries, you'll have no problem at all adding new apps without having gcc available. Therefore, gcc is not part of the OS.
If the system requires a compiler to be useable, then a compiler can logically be assumed to be part of the system.
But it doesn't require the compiler, does it? Just get everything in binary form and you're all set.
It would make a useless development box though
That, of course, isn't the point, though. Sure, it might be no good for development, but what if I want a simple little box to play MP3s for me in the car? (And maybe do a little RC5 cracking with it's spare cycles.) I don't need gcc... or vi, or emacs, or telnet, or most if any of the daemons... but it's still unarguably a linux box, isn't it?
I don't think that anybody will ever reach an agreement on this topic. The definition of "operating system" is really a pretty fuzzy one. There are some things that, no matter where you stand, you can see are not part of the OS, though, and I think gcc is one of those.
There's a possibility it could be a badly deformed human, sure. I doubt it, though. I'm more inclined to believe that it's either an alien or a hoax, though.
Take a look at the pictures of the skull (and the forensic rending) on their site. The shape of this skull is amazingly like that of the "Gray" aliens everyone seems to be abducted by. There's two trains of thought you could follow here:
One: The skull is a hoax. After all, if you're going to make up something like this, why not use the most popular form?
Two: (and this is the one I'm more inclined to believe, based on the information I've seen) The skull is alien, or at least not human. After all, it's hard to fake something like a skull. You'd need to have a cheap way of forming convincing bone tissue, find a way to age it, and break it in a way that looks natural...
If it's proven that this skull is little more than a malformed human, I won't be terribly surprised. The conincidental shape would be amazing, but I suppose anything is possible. I'm far more inclined to believe, however, that the skull is non-human in nature.
Block all access to other peoples SMTP ports. Force your customers to go through YOUR mailer.
I, for one, have a major problem with this. Let's say AOL (yeah, I use them, get over it) stopped letting me use SMTP servers. Not only would my AOL account have to be my primary mail account, forcing me to wade through spam to find the good email, but what is currently my primary email address (at silverlight.org) would become inaccessable.
There are a lot of other people who do the same thing as me. Whether it's their primary account or not, they have a POP/SMTP account at a site where their web page is hosted. Small businesses with websites probably even do this.
I think your #5 suggestion is a lot better -- your ISP should secure their SMTP ports, and only let users access it. The same can be done for these web-based accounts, I'd imagine.
I would like to add, re: the GUI, it is ABSOLUTELY NOT part of the os, as it can be replaced, in 95, 98 AND NT. See LiteStep. I have not seen Litestep mentioned in any of these threads, and it is a really nice GUI replacement.
Hmmm... I think that's about half right. Litestep replaces the shell, but the windows and menus are still drawn the same way, etc. Maybe it's just that Litestep doesn't replace those parts. But you're right, the Windows GUI is largely replacable. I have a friend who's been using Litestep for quite some time now, and he absolutely loves it.
As far as palms and the like, they are very proprietary systems, built for proprietary hardware, though, I don't doubt if you had the means, you could create an alternative GUI for it.
I admit I know nothing about the PalmOS, but I'm not so sure about that. If the operating system is designed from the ground up to be graphical, I'd call the GUI part of the OS. I have an ancient PDA (the Tandy Zoomer if anyone's interested) that has a decent GUI (GEOS), but it appears to run on top of DOS. In this case, the GUI definitely is not part of the OS.
Palms may be different, though, and if someone who knows about these things reads this comment, I'd be interested to know what the reality is. I'd think, however, that the PalmOS has nothing underneath the GUI, in which case the GUI is most definitely part of the OS.
Just remember that "Operating system" doesn't always mean "command line based." They can be graphical. And if you really wanted to, I'm sure you could create an OS based on voice recognition and speech synthesis.
I think that "operating system," as clear-cut as it may once have been, is now a really, really fuzzy term. Let's look at two examples you'll know:
First off, Windows (booo, hisssss). With all of it's features, graphics showoff-ness, 40 million lines of code, and everything else... is it an operating system or an application?
I say it's both. The sad truth is, they're far too closely integrated. The actual operating system part is, basically, the MS-DOS leftovers. Those are the parts integral to the operation of the computer. It's easier to define what's *not* the operating system, though.
The OS is not the GUI. They may be tied to each other in some sort of unholy union, but it's not necessary. Anyone who's booted to DOS mode will know that. The GUI is not having menus fade in when you click them (yes, Win2K does that). The GUI is not Internet Explorer, no matter how deep in the bed they are with each other. The operating system is not "Scandisk is now checking your drive for errors. To avoid seeing this message in the future, please choose Shut Down from the Start menu" -- even when that's what I did. And in the case of Micros~1, the OS is *not* where I want to go today.
Now for Linux. Some people have said that things like vi and the gcc compiler are part of linux. On the same note, some people have claimed programs like edlin are part of DOS.
Let me ask you this -- go to your linux box, delete vi and gcc, and reboot. Does it still work? Of course it does. Might you have trouble configuring things or adding new applications? Yes, but that's not the point. Minimal linux configurations can be (I believe) stored on a single floppy disk. In other words, the OS is the kernel and the shell. I say the shell because if the OS stops working, the shell is kinda necessary to make it work again. Likewise in DOS (and not the DOS-behind-Windows), the OS is comprised of msdos.sys, io.sys, and command.com. Nothing more, and certainly nothing less.
Of couse, there are exceptions. The MacOS and PalmOS were designed from the ground up with the GUI as an integral part of it. Unlike Windows, where the GUI is really more of an afterthought than anything else, these operating systems rely on the GUI -- there's no command line (yes, there technically is on Macs... but it's nothing like DOS or bash), no other pieces that the GUI sits on top of.
So that's my take on operating systems, take it or leave it. And I admit I don't know everything, so if I've made a glaring error here, please don't flame me. A nice, friendly correction would be appreciated, though.
You can barely even buy resistors there anymore. Remember those electronics kits they used to have? Boy, those were the days.
Not always true...
The RadioShack closet to me has a decent assortment of resistors, transistors, capacitors, wiring, solder, project boxes... some of the other ones I've been to have an even wider selection than this one, meaning you can basically make whatever little circuits you can come up with. I've even seen circuit board etching kits, right next to the little books full of various little useless but fun schematics...
Yeah, RadioShack is more of a consumer electronics store than a store for hobbyists now... but if you find the right location, you can still see the old RadioShack in them.
What's really sad is that a lot of the policies are downright illegal. Many take away the kids rights (yes, kids have rights too) without informing the parent, informing the kid, or informing the state.
I don't know about other schools, but where I go, this isn't quite the case.
We have our student handbooks, of course, which outline all these asinine policies. Having (and having read) the handbook, of course, creates no legally binding agreement to abiding by it.
So we get this sheet of paper with it saying that we've read and agree with the thing, with space on it for our signature, and one of our parents'. If they don't get it back, signed, within a few days? In-school suspension until you return it.
In other words, the public school system here is forcing us to sign away our rights. Yes, you can file a formal objection to anything in the handbook -- after you've returned the form -- but that's never taken seriously.
So when I wake up with a headache in the morning, I had better take some aspirin before I leave and hope it doesn't come back while I'm in school, eh? Especially since, due to these same kind of rules, the school nurse isn't allowed to dispense headache medication. I'm surprised she's even allowed to give out cough drops (and yes, I've seen her do it.)
Often, you patent something to prevent others from patenting it and then charging you and the rest of the world money.
True. I believe Volkswagen (I know someone did this, may not have been VW) patented the seat belt, but let everyone else use it free of charge. If this the the route Yahoo wants to take with this patent, then by all means let them, and hail them as the protectors of this technology.
They'd have to be really stupid to try and patent something like this with the intention of mass lawsuits, IMHO... but who said big businesses were intelligent?
Some of it's valid. There are, indeed, programs out there which have a problem with the date.
My school has finally reached the last straw with their Y2K compliance paranoia. My AP Computer Science course (which, despite the title, seems to focus on programming) which is scheduled for next term may be cancelled, because the version of the Borland C compiler they have is so old, Borland won't even test it for Y2K compliance.
Now, from what I understand, there shouldn't even be an issue here. Except maybe for date functions within the language, a compiler shouldn't have any Y2K issues. They just don't care about the date! And if a program you compile with it has Y2K issues, that's *your* problem, not the compiler's.
They think they can get away with cancelling it because there's only 9 kids in the course. If they do, well... they'll have to deal with 9 very irate kids.
I saw the screenshots, and immediately had to download this program. Now I can play with legos without ever leaving my computer *grin*
It's a little awkward getting used to moving the pieces around... trying to move things in three dimensions with a 2-d input device. The keyboard definitely comes in handy.
Hmm... I think I'll dig out some of my old lego instruction booklets, if I can find them... and download POV-Ray again... =)
Man, when I was a kid, I cringed at the Tesla coil thingy they have at Boston's museum of science.
You mean their gigantic Van DeGraff generator? That thing's awesome =) I remember trips to the museum when I was about 8 years old, younger even, and getting freaked out by that thing. A couple years older, and it was a great adrenaline rush. Even today (I'm 17, btw) it's great entertainment. There's nothing like the raw power of electricity to get your juices flowing. *grin*
By the way, that link above has some great pics along the same lines as the ones in this article, plus goes into a lot of the mechanics behind it all... check it out.
But after realizing that a whole lot of others also had it, it wasn't so impressive. In fact, I probably won't bother to use it.
For me, it's not so much the fact that so many other people are moderators, it's the fact that I only got one point. Not to sound greedy or anything, but one just doesn't cut it. I like being able to look through the comments and think to myself, Okay, this comment, this one, and this one deserve to be moderated up... that's a troll... and hey, that one's really cool. One point just doesn't do anything for me. It's like saying to a little kid, I'll bring you to the arcade, but only get one quarter.
I would put forth that you've allowled your feeling to WANT to be entertained to overwelm you. I've got a news flash, you won't go nuts of you don't have Q3 arena, You won't go crazy is you don't have the absolute latest and greatest thing.
I would put forth that any psychologist worth their weight would disagree with you.
Food, shelter, and clothing are physical necessities, though depending on the climate and such clothing may not rank as highly. However, you have emotional needs which go above and beyond that. Everybody, for example, needs to feel loved. Do you die if you don't feel loved? Of course not. But you don't develop healthily (or, if you prefer, normally) if that's the case. The same with entertainment. I'm sure you've heard the phrase "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy." You're right, you *don't* need Q3Arena. You can just as easily get by with a deck of cards, or socializing with friends. But if you never take some time to yourself, to do things that you enjoy doing... then, well, something's wrong.
This is mostly left over from when I had a horribly slow system, and wanted to cater to people with similar setups while designing my web page, but I had maybe two graphics on the whole site. A title logo and an email button. That's it. Everything else I prettied up with colors and tables and whatnot. Made for a site that looked nice, loaded quickly, was easy to use, and anybody could look at it no matter what their setup.
In response to the article a while ago about AltaVista's new look (or rather, to a comment on that article), I started designing my own, personal "portal." Guess what? Not a single graphic on the page. It looks nice, layout is rather efficient, and the whole thing only takes up 7kb (inlcuding a 1.6kb ASP script so I can search multiple search engines from the same form). http://silverlight.org/cray/ if anybody's interested.
Nobody needs entertainment. I'm sorry if this comes as a shock, but you don't.
That has to be the least truthful thing I've heard in quite some time.
We all need entertainment. We may not need it in the form of multi-million dollar movies or overpriced CDs, but everybody needs some things in their life to distract them from the daily grind. Plays, poetry, concerts, operas, board games, Bingo night, or playing Quake with Rob Zombie's latest blasting out your eardrums... whatever you choose, you need something in your life to entertain you, or you'll go crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
And this, sir, is why it was a TV Movie (as you said yourself) and not a documentary.
Why is this any different from, say, Hackers or The Net? Because they were in the theatre and not on TV? Sure, geeks everywhere complained about how unrealistic they were, but nobody moved to ban anything over them.
Or was it because this one was about Y2K, which is in just over a month? People were reminded at every commercial break that this was a movie and not a documentary, weren't they?
That's funny... it seemed to me to be a "flagrant attempt" at a movie. You know, entertainment. As in, not to be taken seriously. Perhaps you could say "a deliberate attempt to entertain the public."
I can tell you exactly nothing about a proper Slashdotting, but I can tell you this:
I posted the URL to my website (not even as a link, just typed the URL) in a comment on a story that was, at that point, a day or two old at least. Over the next three days, I determined from the server logs that I recieved at least 200 hits from Slashdot readers. Based on this, hits from a Slashdotting must be in the millions.
Hmm... let's try it again. http://silverlight.org/cray/
;)
Okay, so I went to download Napster to see what it's all about.
Looks like a members-only IRC server that's seriously underpowered. Takes me a long time to connect, and that's only after several tries. Searches take as long as five minutes. And while I admit I only downloaded two things, neither went above 2.3kbps.
I think, if you're gonna leech mp3s, mIRC will do a much better job for you.
P.S. Is there anybody here who's been using Napster for a while, and can tell me if they've always been like this, or if it's due to media attention? I'd appreciate it.
Alright, let's put it this way:
AOL does not support the use of their SMTP servers for members' outgoing mail. They have a proprietary email system for users.
Yeah, I remember that =) One of the few games I had for my old IBM XT. Great little computer... I think it had DOS version 2.something... I even had a version of Microsoft Works for it. I think it was the best version of MS works I've ever used, too ;)
Maybe I should clarify: If you delete gcc, yes, you'll have trouble adding some applications. Why? Well, they're distributed in source form, for the most part. If you get binaries, you'll have no problem at all adding new apps without having gcc available. Therefore, gcc is not part of the OS.
But it doesn't require the compiler, does it? Just get everything in binary form and you're all set.
That, of course, isn't the point, though. Sure, it might be no good for development, but what if I want a simple little box to play MP3s for me in the car? (And maybe do a little RC5 cracking with it's spare cycles.) I don't need gcc... or vi, or emacs, or telnet, or most if any of the daemons... but it's still unarguably a linux box, isn't it?
I don't think that anybody will ever reach an agreement on this topic. The definition of "operating system" is really a pretty fuzzy one. There are some things that, no matter where you stand, you can see are not part of the OS, though, and I think gcc is one of those.
I did say that I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be little more than a deformity, didn't I? I thought so.
There's a possibility it could be a badly deformed human, sure. I doubt it, though. I'm more inclined to believe that it's either an alien or a hoax, though.
Take a look at the pictures of the skull (and the forensic rending) on their site. The shape of this skull is amazingly like that of the "Gray" aliens everyone seems to be abducted by. There's two trains of thought you could follow here:
One: The skull is a hoax. After all, if you're going to make up something like this, why not use the most popular form?
Two: (and this is the one I'm more inclined to believe, based on the information I've seen) The skull is alien, or at least not human. After all, it's hard to fake something like a skull. You'd need to have a cheap way of forming convincing bone tissue, find a way to age it, and break it in a way that looks natural...
If it's proven that this skull is little more than a malformed human, I won't be terribly surprised. The conincidental shape would be amazing, but I suppose anything is possible. I'm far more inclined to believe, however, that the skull is non-human in nature.
That may work nice for you, but AOL doesn't have an SMTP server.
I realize there can't be a perfect solution to any problem, really, but I still say your #5 soultion is way better than this one.
I, for one, have a major problem with this. Let's say AOL (yeah, I use them, get over it) stopped letting me use SMTP servers. Not only would my AOL account have to be my primary mail account, forcing me to wade through spam to find the good email, but what is currently my primary email address (at silverlight.org) would become inaccessable.
There are a lot of other people who do the same thing as me. Whether it's their primary account or not, they have a POP/SMTP account at a site where their web page is hosted. Small businesses with websites probably even do this.
I think your #5 suggestion is a lot better -- your ISP should secure their SMTP ports, and only let users access it. The same can be done for these web-based accounts, I'd imagine.
Hmmm... I think that's about half right. Litestep replaces the shell, but the windows and menus are still drawn the same way, etc. Maybe it's just that Litestep doesn't replace those parts. But you're right, the Windows GUI is largely replacable. I have a friend who's been using Litestep for quite some time now, and he absolutely loves it.
I admit I know nothing about the PalmOS, but I'm not so sure about that. If the operating system is designed from the ground up to be graphical, I'd call the GUI part of the OS. I have an ancient PDA (the Tandy Zoomer if anyone's interested) that has a decent GUI (GEOS), but it appears to run on top of DOS. In this case, the GUI definitely is not part of the OS.
Palms may be different, though, and if someone who knows about these things reads this comment, I'd be interested to know what the reality is. I'd think, however, that the PalmOS has nothing underneath the GUI, in which case the GUI is most definitely part of the OS.
Just remember that "Operating system" doesn't always mean "command line based." They can be graphical. And if you really wanted to, I'm sure you could create an OS based on voice recognition and speech synthesis.
I think that "operating system," as clear-cut as it may once have been, is now a really, really fuzzy term. Let's look at two examples you'll know:
First off, Windows (booo, hisssss). With all of it's features, graphics showoff-ness, 40 million lines of code, and everything else... is it an operating system or an application?
I say it's both. The sad truth is, they're far too closely integrated. The actual operating system part is, basically, the MS-DOS leftovers. Those are the parts integral to the operation of the computer. It's easier to define what's *not* the operating system, though.
The OS is not the GUI. They may be tied to each other in some sort of unholy union, but it's not necessary. Anyone who's booted to DOS mode will know that. The GUI is not having menus fade in when you click them (yes, Win2K does that). The GUI is not Internet Explorer, no matter how deep in the bed they are with each other. The operating system is not "Scandisk is now checking your drive for errors. To avoid seeing this message in the future, please choose Shut Down from the Start menu" -- even when that's what I did. And in the case of Micros~1, the OS is *not* where I want to go today.
Now for Linux. Some people have said that things like vi and the gcc compiler are part of linux. On the same note, some people have claimed programs like edlin are part of DOS.
Let me ask you this -- go to your linux box, delete vi and gcc, and reboot. Does it still work? Of course it does. Might you have trouble configuring things or adding new applications? Yes, but that's not the point. Minimal linux configurations can be (I believe) stored on a single floppy disk. In other words, the OS is the kernel and the shell. I say the shell because if the OS stops working, the shell is kinda necessary to make it work again. Likewise in DOS (and not the DOS-behind-Windows), the OS is comprised of msdos.sys, io.sys, and command.com. Nothing more, and certainly nothing less.
Of couse, there are exceptions. The MacOS and PalmOS were designed from the ground up with the GUI as an integral part of it. Unlike Windows, where the GUI is really more of an afterthought than anything else, these operating systems rely on the GUI -- there's no command line (yes, there technically is on Macs... but it's nothing like DOS or bash), no other pieces that the GUI sits on top of.
So that's my take on operating systems, take it or leave it. And I admit I don't know everything, so if I've made a glaring error here, please don't flame me. A nice, friendly correction would be appreciated, though.
Not always true...
The RadioShack closet to me has a decent assortment of resistors, transistors, capacitors, wiring, solder, project boxes... some of the other ones I've been to have an even wider selection than this one, meaning you can basically make whatever little circuits you can come up with. I've even seen circuit board etching kits, right next to the little books full of various little useless but fun schematics...
Yeah, RadioShack is more of a consumer electronics store than a store for hobbyists now... but if you find the right location, you can still see the old RadioShack in them.
Oh, come on. You could at least be a little more creative than that...
10 FOR I = 1 TO 40
20 PRINT TAB(I); "I am broken!"
30 NEXT I
40 FOR I = 40 TO 1 STEP -1
50 PRINT TAB(I); "I am broken!"
60 NEXT I
70 GOTO 10
I never actually used BASIC on a TRS-80, but my first programmin experience was on an IBM XT running DOS 2.something and GW-BASIC. =)
Ah, yes. Volvo. I knew it started with a V ;)
Gimme a break, it was in a driver's ed film, and I was half asleep =)
I don't know about other schools, but where I go, this isn't quite the case.
We have our student handbooks, of course, which outline all these asinine policies. Having (and having read) the handbook, of course, creates no legally binding agreement to abiding by it.
So we get this sheet of paper with it saying that we've read and agree with the thing, with space on it for our signature, and one of our parents'. If they don't get it back, signed, within a few days? In-school suspension until you return it.
In other words, the public school system here is forcing us to sign away our rights. Yes, you can file a formal objection to anything in the handbook -- after you've returned the form -- but that's never taken seriously.
So when I wake up with a headache in the morning, I had better take some aspirin before I leave and hope it doesn't come back while I'm in school, eh? Especially since, due to these same kind of rules, the school nurse isn't allowed to dispense headache medication. I'm surprised she's even allowed to give out cough drops (and yes, I've seen her do it.)
True. I believe Volkswagen (I know someone did this, may not have been VW) patented the seat belt, but let everyone else use it free of charge. If this the the route Yahoo wants to take with this patent, then by all means let them, and hail them as the protectors of this technology.
They'd have to be really stupid to try and patent something like this with the intention of mass lawsuits, IMHO... but who said big businesses were intelligent?
Some of it's valid. There are, indeed, programs out there which have a problem with the date.
My school has finally reached the last straw with their Y2K compliance paranoia. My AP Computer Science course (which, despite the title, seems to focus on programming) which is scheduled for next term may be cancelled, because the version of the Borland C compiler they have is so old, Borland won't even test it for Y2K compliance.
Now, from what I understand, there shouldn't even be an issue here. Except maybe for date functions within the language, a compiler shouldn't have any Y2K issues. They just don't care about the date! And if a program you compile with it has Y2K issues, that's *your* problem, not the compiler's.
They think they can get away with cancelling it because there's only 9 kids in the course. If they do, well... they'll have to deal with 9 very irate kids.
I saw the screenshots, and immediately had to download this program. Now I can play with legos without ever leaving my computer *grin*
It's a little awkward getting used to moving the pieces around... trying to move things in three dimensions with a 2-d input device. The keyboard definitely comes in handy.
Hmm... I think I'll dig out some of my old lego instruction booklets, if I can find them... and download POV-Ray again... =)
You mean their gigantic Van DeGraff generator? That thing's awesome =) I remember trips to the museum when I was about 8 years old, younger even, and getting freaked out by that thing. A couple years older, and it was a great adrenaline rush. Even today (I'm 17, btw) it's great entertainment. There's nothing like the raw power of electricity to get your juices flowing. *grin*
By the way, that link above has some great pics along the same lines as the ones in this article, plus goes into a lot of the mechanics behind it all... check it out.
For me, it's not so much the fact that so many other people are moderators, it's the fact that I only got one point. Not to sound greedy or anything, but one just doesn't cut it. I like being able to look through the comments and think to myself, Okay, this comment, this one, and this one deserve to be moderated up... that's a troll... and hey, that one's really cool. One point just doesn't do anything for me. It's like saying to a little kid, I'll bring you to the arcade, but only get one quarter.
I would put forth that any psychologist worth their weight would disagree with you.
Food, shelter, and clothing are physical necessities, though depending on the climate and such clothing may not rank as highly. However, you have emotional needs which go above and beyond that. Everybody, for example, needs to feel loved. Do you die if you don't feel loved? Of course not. But you don't develop healthily (or, if you prefer, normally) if that's the case. The same with entertainment. I'm sure you've heard the phrase "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy." You're right, you *don't* need Q3Arena. You can just as easily get by with a deck of cards, or socializing with friends. But if you never take some time to yourself, to do things that you enjoy doing... then, well, something's wrong.
This is mostly left over from when I had a horribly slow system, and wanted to cater to people with similar setups while designing my web page, but I had maybe two graphics on the whole site. A title logo and an email button. That's it. Everything else I prettied up with colors and tables and whatnot. Made for a site that looked nice, loaded quickly, was easy to use, and anybody could look at it no matter what their setup.
In response to the article a while ago about AltaVista's new look (or rather, to a comment on that article), I started designing my own, personal "portal." Guess what? Not a single graphic on the page. It looks nice, layout is rather efficient, and the whole thing only takes up 7kb (inlcuding a 1.6kb ASP script so I can search multiple search engines from the same form). http://silverlight.org/cray/ if anybody's interested.
That has to be the least truthful thing I've heard in quite some time.
We all need entertainment. We may not need it in the form of multi-million dollar movies or overpriced CDs, but everybody needs some things in their life to distract them from the daily grind. Plays, poetry, concerts, operas, board games, Bingo night, or playing Quake with Rob Zombie's latest blasting out your eardrums... whatever you choose, you need something in your life to entertain you, or you'll go crazy.
Did I somehow miss a change to the moderation rules?
I found myself as a moderator a few minutes ago, found a comment to moderate up... and then discovered I had only one point. What gives?