Considering how often the Slashdot editors cut out or outright edit the quoted parts of summaries, I'm not assuming it's his actual quote. It could be, but can hardly be assumed to be.
Yes, Slashdot editors have lost my belief in their credibility...
Any claim that subjective notability can be made objective (what is attempted with the guidelines) is claiming that notability can be objective, which is inconsistent. The guidelines help moderate the bar of subjectivity, certainly, but they are still completely subjective, using subjective terms like "reliable" and "significant". Thanks for linking the guidelines.
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information As explained in the policy introduction, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
There seems to be a mass presumption here that simply because it's an electronic guide everything should go in. That's wrong.
The presumption isn't that everything should go in. It's that everything should be allowed to go in. The distinction is that in one case what goes in must be limited in a subjective way, while in the latter case, it's completely objective (everything allowed).
In other words, while I may disagree with the notability or usefulness of a topic in Wikipedia, in order for it to function as an open encyclopedia everyone contributing must have equal share in what's notable, and therefore equal share in choosing what to post. (The only downside to the idea is storage space, which is small, and there are many important upsides.)
It's very much like the benefits of freedom of speech, or the publishing freedom of the internet itself.
"You assume that the practices are flawed."Assume? Bullshit! I just gave a good *reason* why the practices are flawed. Others in this thread have done the same. You have been blithely ignoring the reasons people are giving. Probably because Wikipedia's current position on triviality is indefensible.
"I largely disagree. I'm interested in debating valid points, which is what I'm doing."
You are not debating valid points. You are trying to appear reasonable on the topic while not actually addressing any of the serious points people have raised (like the one I raised).
I personally know ~8 professionals who have stopped contributing to Wikipedia because of the triviality policies. Ignoring that, as you are doing here, is far more harmful than the harm you see in some extra information on there.
Why was the parent comment modded as troll? Because it is:
"Wow. Cry baby much?" - A trollish start, obviously. Then the comment writer misses the point of the article by going on to list things *he* considers non-notable.
"What's important to someone, a fan, a listener, a developer may not be important to anyone else and you have to work hard to prove notability." - His use of this sentence is a logical contradiction; the sentence shows how subjective 'notable' is.
"Mere existence isn't enough. Has the comic you read won an award? Published an anthology? Those are pretty good indicators of notability. Having a URL? No." - He is putting up a straw man here.
"The whine that some comic was mentioned in a local newspaper was laughable; being notable in your own back yard, how is that good notability?" - Another straw man and wait, I thought he only said a URL wasn't notable? Have to be published in a "popular" paper? SUBJECTIVE.
"Heck, if that counted I think I'll present a note from my mom saying I'm notable and list myself. Why should web comics have different rules to everyone else?" - Two straw men; note from mom is an uninsightful analogy, and the article wasn't about web comics 'having different rules'.
That's why it's a troll. To respond to you rather than this troll - I see that you are defending Wikipedia in this thread, presumably because you've invested some time in it, but please keep in mind that the best way to help something is not necessarily to defend its current practices, if they are flawed.
Yes, but I didn't realize it also kept track of such information.
The whole thing is such a corrupt/incompetent mess that I'm not surprised.
Receiptless Voting
on
eBay The Vote
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I would just like to point out that this kind of thing is why a democracy cannot allow a record of which citizen voted for what to exist (like voting receipts, where a name is tied to voting for a candidate, or a public table of name->vote).
Since (in the US) there's currently no way to verify a voter voted a certain way, Ebaying of votes can't hard democracy because someone can "sell" their vote and still anonymously vote any way they like.
Note this is not the same thing as disallowing a paper trail. You do want a paper trail of votes and voters separately, just not a paper trail of who voted what.
We agree on that. I just don't think it's even her responsibility to secure the computer; she's a teacher, not an IT tech. It's like asking her to make sure the sink drain doesn't suddenly smell like sewage during class. It's just not her job or something she knows anything about. In these days. In 30 years everyone *should* have a basic understanding of these things.
It would, of course, have taken the school/district's IT people 10 minutes to install AVG, Adaware, and and Firefox. And that is their job, while she is busy teaching or making lesson plans... (or surfing for porn, which would be extremely hard to prove, especially if students were on the computer.)
You have a good point about Windows - especially the military viewpoint. If it were seized by ANY government or entity. I'll leave the political buzzwords out of it.
As far as the other services everyone is listing - subscription services are different than something you pay for up front and then depend on remote "continued activation" for use. For example, that's why I didn't buy the game Guild Wars - free to play, but you have to pay up front. Too easy (and even practical when their costs go above their income) for them to cut you off.
I don't have anything I paid a large chunk for up front, which I rely on the goodwill of a company (goodwill = I am not paying them more large chunks regularly) to use.
Sorry my sentences are a bit confusing, I'm tired tonight...
Isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that all of these customers who BOUGHT this item, can now have it disabled remotely? That's what makes this story interesting to me.
Remind me to never buy something that can be taken from me...remotely.
For those who don't know, Slashdot is using a pink girly theme for April Fools day. It has nothing to do with this extension, although version 1.4 lets you choose to use the PONIES theme if you still want pink Slashdot goodness once the theme is removed as the default.
For FF 1.5 with Slashdotter 1.2.2 extension. Adds functionality for:
<3 OMG!!! PONIES!!! <3
Copy it to replace the one used by the Slashdotter extension in your FF profile files (for Windows users, that's in your Documents and Settings folder.)
I've flossed maybe 3x in my entire life, but I brush regularly. No cavities or anything. So I can stop brushing entirely, you say?! Nice! Slashdot has the most amazing medical advice!:-P
The prius already has this feature! It's really cool.
Push Button Start
Prius ignition is the start of a new generation. Instead of a conventional key-start, the Prius gives you a simple, ergonomic push-button start. Your key is just for security. Simply insert it in the keyslot, and press the Start button. In fact, with the i-Tech Option Pack, you don't even need to take the key out of your pocket. As long as it's in your possession, simply press Start and you're driving.
Slashdot Mirror
Lots of people posting Ron Paul and getting modded down for redundancy.
This is just to spite those moderators, since none of those posts were modded UP as a correct answer to your query.
Ron Paul.
Considering how often the Slashdot editors cut out or outright edit the quoted parts of summaries, I'm not assuming it's his actual quote. It could be, but can hardly be assumed to be.
Yes, Slashdot editors have lost my belief in their credibility...
Any claim that subjective notability can be made objective (what is attempted with the guidelines) is claiming that notability can be objective, which is inconsistent. The guidelines help moderate the bar of subjectivity, certainly, but they are still completely subjective, using subjective terms like "reliable" and "significant". Thanks for linking the guidelines.
The presumption isn't that everything should go in. It's that everything should be allowed to go in. The distinction is that in one case what goes in must be limited in a subjective way, while in the latter case, it's completely objective (everything allowed).
In other words, while I may disagree with the notability or usefulness of a topic in Wikipedia, in order for it to function as an open encyclopedia everyone contributing must have equal share in what's notable, and therefore equal share in choosing what to post. (The only downside to the idea is storage space, which is small, and there are many important upsides.)
It's very much like the benefits of freedom of speech, or the publishing freedom of the internet itself.
"You assume that the practices are flawed." Assume? Bullshit! I just gave a good *reason* why the practices are flawed. Others in this thread have done the same. You have been blithely ignoring the reasons people are giving. Probably because Wikipedia's current position on triviality is indefensible.
"I largely disagree. I'm interested in debating valid points, which is what I'm doing." You are not debating valid points. You are trying to appear reasonable on the topic while not actually addressing any of the serious points people have raised (like the one I raised).
I personally know ~8 professionals who have stopped contributing to Wikipedia because of the triviality policies. Ignoring that, as you are doing here, is far more harmful than the harm you see in some extra information on there.
Why was the parent comment modded as troll? Because it is:
"Wow. Cry baby much?" - A trollish start, obviously. Then the comment writer misses the point of the article by going on to list things *he* considers non-notable.
"What's important to someone, a fan, a listener, a developer may not be important to anyone else and you have to work hard to prove notability." - His use of this sentence is a logical contradiction; the sentence shows how subjective 'notable' is.
"Mere existence isn't enough. Has the comic you read won an award? Published an anthology? Those are pretty good indicators of notability. Having a URL? No." - He is putting up a straw man here.
"The whine that some comic was mentioned in a local newspaper was laughable; being notable in your own back yard, how is that good notability?" - Another straw man and wait, I thought he only said a URL wasn't notable? Have to be published in a "popular" paper? SUBJECTIVE.
"Heck, if that counted I think I'll present a note from my mom saying I'm notable and list myself. Why should web comics have different rules to everyone else?" - Two straw men; note from mom is an uninsightful analogy, and the article wasn't about web comics 'having different rules'.
That's why it's a troll. To respond to you rather than this troll - I see that you are defending Wikipedia in this thread, presumably because you've invested some time in it, but please keep in mind that the best way to help something is not necessarily to defend its current practices, if they are flawed.
The whole thing is such a corrupt/incompetent mess that I'm not surprised.
I would just like to point out that this kind of thing is why a democracy cannot allow a record of which citizen voted for what to exist (like voting receipts, where a name is tied to voting for a candidate, or a public table of name->vote).
Since (in the US) there's currently no way to verify a voter voted a certain way, Ebaying of votes can't hard democracy because someone can "sell" their vote and still anonymously vote any way they like.
Note this is not the same thing as disallowing a paper trail. You do want a paper trail of votes and voters separately, just not a paper trail of who voted what.
We agree on that. I just don't think it's even her responsibility to secure the computer; she's a teacher, not an IT tech. It's like asking her to make sure the sink drain doesn't suddenly smell like sewage during class. It's just not her job or something she knows anything about. In these days. In 30 years everyone *should* have a basic understanding of these things.
It would, of course, have taken the school/district's IT people 10 minutes to install AVG, Adaware, and and Firefox. And that is their job, while she is busy teaching or making lesson plans... (or surfing for porn, which would be extremely hard to prove, especially if students were on the computer.)
http://www.sahrs.net/wow/tm.jpeg
Yeah it's by Dalaran in Hillsbrad / Alterac Mountains. I used to pvp in the zone all the time (before world pvp died to Civilians.)
You have a good point about Windows - especially the military viewpoint. If it were seized by ANY government or entity. I'll leave the political buzzwords out of it.
As far as the other services everyone is listing - subscription services are different than something you pay for up front and then depend on remote "continued activation" for use. For example, that's why I didn't buy the game Guild Wars - free to play, but you have to pay up front. Too easy (and even practical when their costs go above their income) for them to cut you off.
I don't have anything I paid a large chunk for up front, which I rely on the goodwill of a company (goodwill = I am not paying them more large chunks regularly) to use.
Sorry my sentences are a bit confusing, I'm tired tonight...
Isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that all of these customers who BOUGHT this item, can now have it disabled remotely? That's what makes this story interesting to me. Remind me to never buy something that can be taken from me...remotely.
Woah, a cite on Slashdot. I never thought I'd see the day!
I agree with you completely, and live by the same philosophy. If people start to care and rise up, I'll be around to cover your back. :)
Oops mis-clicked my mod on you as Redundant when I wanted Insightful...hopefully this post clears the mod and I get modded down for being dumb.
Looks like the Slashdotter extension will have ponies by default in a future version.
From here:
Thanks man! I love the ponies
For FF 1.5 with Slashdotter 1.2.2 extension. Adds functionality for:Copy it to replace the one used by the Slashdotter extension in your FF profile files (for Windows users, that's in your Documents and Settings folder.)
Here, I'll provide the child!
No it's not, quit karma whoring
Yes it is, and that was a well-formatted repost. Site won't load for me...
For every 1 person who walks out of the store screaming to make a scene, there are 5 of us who quietly never return.
Get a big boombox, and CRANK IT UP!
Tada, whole house audio. Your neighbors will love you because you're installing systems for them, too, and for free!
I've flossed maybe 3x in my entire life, but I brush regularly. No cavities or anything. So I can stop brushing entirely, you say?! Nice! Slashdot has the most amazing medical advice! :-P
From
http://prius.toyota.com.au/toyota/vehicle/Content
.au because it came up first in Google...
I third this.
Thank you.
:-P
Here's a new one for the grandparent: If your cow orkers are defeatist jerks, it's time to get out
"Another Beer Please":/ 27/228213&tid=159&tid=137
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07