Face it, corporations are in the business of making money, if they can reduce their costs by taking jobs elsewhere, they will do it. Not that this is a bad thing, inefficiencies are weeded out, and companies can continue to make money.
Plus, the outsourced country benefits more than the whiny liberals care to admit. These jobs pay more than the local average, treat their workers a hell of a lot better, and boosts their economy.
So as a whole, this is not really a bad thing, except for the people losing their jobs. This is the free market at work.
what the hell is going to be accomplished if this becomes law? Do you really think more works will become public domain because the owner won't pay 1 fuckin dollar? get real here.
i've seen some pretty dumb petitions, I can't believe this one made slashdot. Of course, when you have michael posting the story, you can't rule anything out.
This obsession with "Diversity" in everything in American Life by some of the liberal elites is strange.
There are already a wide range of views and opinions on all media forms, but for some, they hate that a few have such disproportionate share of the audience.
I say, what the hell is so wrong with this?
You can't force people to watch or read something they don't want, but these diversity types would have you think that somehow your choices are being limited by some strange powerful force.
In this age of the Internet, anybody can be publisher, broadcaster, or viewer, so these rule changes reflect this new reality we live in.
let's see, everybody here at least concedes my original point, that there is no one man/group behind the curtain of the "media", but then procede to change the subject to "well this small group controls most of it". This may be true in the sense that most people get their information from only a few sources, but I think you people have it completely backwards thinking they control us.
Did Fox News somehow hypnotized people to watch them? No, people liked what they saw and switched from CNN, MSNBC, or whatever. Look at your local magazine rack..who's fault is it that the Nation or the Socialist News aren't the bestsellers?
I love how the same people decrying internet filters and censorship would suggest that I apply it to myself simply because I don't agree with their viewpoints.
Secondly, I believe it's very important to keep track of any and all movments of the biggest, richest, most powerful company in the world.
Seriously..get over yourself. It sounds like you're the same psycho nerd who stalked and hated the hot girl in school simply because you couldn't get her.
Despite your obvious trolling,...
On slashdot, anybody who doesn't toe the party line MUST a troll.
Recently it seems not a day goes by on slashdot without a few Microsoft stories. This supposedly linux, open-source focused site seems awfully preoccupied with Microsoft for some reason, and it's not good.
The trolling editors seem desperate to generate pageviews and posting a Microsoft piece almost guarantees to inflame and troll enough users to accomplish this.
Look at this story...what's really that new or interesting here? This looks like just another opportunity for slashbots and "M$" haters to get their kicks.
The more reasonable readers don't get off on that kind of stuff. Please editors, this is getting old and boring.
it's good that there are some sane people here. I love how this ontopic comment gets modded to -1 in no time, meaning this comment must be as worthless as an ASCII goatse.cx or a BSD is dying post.
FK's main point is absolutely valid and correct, IMO. Michael is truely a cancer on this site. Just think, if a reader writes what he did as a comment, he would be modded to -1 in no time. But time and time again, he is allowed to get away with trolling, baiting, distorting, lying to push his little platform of his.
I also find it amusing the editors sooo hate Microsoft, but have no problem taking ad money to fund them. Got hypocrisy?
Allowing $8,000 in tax dollars to be spent on drapes to conceal two semi-nude statues that often appeared behind the attorney general during press conferences in the Great Hall of the Department of Justice. Ironically, the two statues represent "The Spirit of Justice" and "The Majesty of Law."
Can someone explain how this example constitutes censorship? From what I read, this incident was completely blown out of proportion. It wasn't because he wanted to cover up the statues, it was to provide a better backdrop for the cameras.
Using this as an example of "censorship" or to say that free expression has been muzzled is a little dubious. It puts the whole list into question of the motives and partisanship behind making it.
But of course it makes slashdot because it fits with their worldview.
please, for chrissakes, give it up Taco. This running gag you've been doing for the last few years wasn't particularly funny then, and it sure as hell hasn't gotten any better. Here's a hint for trying to be funny: sublety.
Nobody thinks bashing-over-the-head stuff is funny (except for maybe the French).
I see..so where were the christian militant crusade was happening on 9-11? or when the USS Cole was bombed? or when the WTC was bombed the first time? What crusade were we on then, and how exactly do you repel this crusade by murdering civilians?
If nothing else was learned before 9-11, it's that we don't need to be provoked or engaged to be targetted by a bunch of islamo-facsists.
The focus was that large-scale software piracy supports organized crime, which is absolutely true. Particularly in Asia and Europe, where millions can be made, and the penalties are not severe, it's as good as selling drugs.
Michael conveniently left this part out of his headline, which served to make this bigger flamebait than it really is.
It's kind of puzzling that you want users to be more supportive of slashdot by improving the quality of their writings, yet you resist any request that the editors do the same on their part. You argue that typos, and dupes are a fundamental part of what slashdot is, yet the same can be said of trolling and karma whoring, and you work feverishly in stamping that out. It's not just the users who can make this a more readable place, Taco. Why you can't realize this, I don't know.
Here's some news for you. When people can get something for free, quality is not usually the biggest priority, but when you ask people to pay for the same thing, then it becomes one. That's why people aren't going to pay, for reasons other than goodwill and support.
Taco, that is just an incredibly lazy excuse for not doing even the rudimentary work on your parts. Nobody here says you have to CNN or the NY Times and nobody expects it to be.
If you look up the word professionl in the dictionary, people here are referring to your utter inabilities to "conform to the standards of a profession", not your "great skill". All the spelling errors, bad links, and unclosed tags shows you guys can't even bother to use a spell checker or goto the linked site. That isn't high school newspaper quality, let alone CNN quality.
If you guys can't show some effort into making the stories halfway readable, then most people, including the parent poster, see a site just not worth paying money to people who won't put the effort into working for it.
My take on these new "plums": big whoop. These things do not really change the way I feel about slashdot, that it's an amateurishly written site, and run by a group of dictatorial editors. I like to come and see what other people write, but it's almost never because of the "news" content, or the uninsightful commentary from the editors.
Here's some easier ways of actually getting more subscribers without writing a single line of code. Spell check. Correct grammar. News that is actually timely and relevant. Lose the inane commentary from paranoid jerks like michael, who add nothing new to the discussion and only serve to trollbait the users. Listen to the readers, instead of waiving all the criticisms as trolls. Lose the moderation system. It doesn't work, and never has.
That's a good start to people paying. Run it professionally.
The only reason I would ever consider subscribing is if salon was worth paying for. Right now, it simply isn't. Once in a while, they have a good story, but for the most part, they recycle the same tripe and offer very little new insight I couldn't get anywhere else.
But I was turned off by how the Editor-In-chief wrapped thesmelves as some crusaders for free speech, as if their death would be one less voice of reason. That's really not a valid reason for why anybody should be supporting them. They shouldn't kid themselves or their readers that they are a business, and out to make money like anybody else. Putting up the right wing conspiracy as a bogeymen to solicit donations is pretty disgusting for event them.
I certainly echo that sentiment. But I think the concept of privacy in this context is completely overblown by some people. Having any kind of privacy on air travel has been blown away since metal detectors were installed, and for good reason.
It's not like people have a fundamental right to privacy when traveling on a plane. If you people haven't learned from 9/11 by now, airplanes have been a target for terrorists for years, and will likely continue to be. It's the easiest way to cause terror and destruction.
And "profiling" is a much better way of stopping terrorists instead of stripping down some 80 year old grandma from Kansas City all in the name of political correctness. Using this information might give the Feds another tool to identify and apprehend these evildoers without causing a massive inconvenience and slowdown to others.
So you slashbots should come down from your high horse.
I must speak out for the "silent majority" that does not find Dave Barry funny whatsover. I laugh exactly 0 times from this interview, for a grand total of 0 for all the Dave Barry stuff I've read tried to read.
What is it about him I don't like? He's like the Robin Williams of print. All he does is talk and talk and talk, but if you actually listen to what he's saying, he's not saying anything funny.
To each their own I guess, but others who hate Dave Barry, please rally here.
I love seeing these Linux based XXX stories always get posted, and then the slashbots orgasm with glee how great this is, and how they can't wait to get one.
Yea, right, like anybody will actually buy it mainly because it's Linux. Based on other Linux type items sold (games, computers), I hope these guys won't bank on the linux hippies for business. They will succeed or fail based on the product's merits, whether it does the job and whether it does it better for the price than its competitors.
So hold off on all the flag waving until you people actually try it.
What the fuck does this have to do with my rights online?? My "rights" in the workplace are limited all the time at work.
My company has blocked access to p2p applications, all sorts of website, and limit my access to my PC. Should I be crying about my rights being violated?
Where is it part of my rights that I can illegaly download music at my desk, thereby wasting bandwidth and company time?
As it turns out, open code and "thoroughly examined hardware" do not a secure system make. The problem is that the code has to get compiled, and it has to run on an operating system, and that has to run on a computer. Even if the code and hardware (if one can examine the microcode) appears to be entirely pristine, Ken Thompson explained in his classic 1984 essay "Reflections on Trusting Trust" (available online, do a Google search) that the compiler that compiled all of that code can be rigged such that malicious code can be concealed. For example: Since the dates of US National Elections are fixed to infinity (they are always the 1st Tuesday in November) and since many voting systems (as well as computer systems) rely on real-time clocks, it is certainly plausible to create a hardware trap that only goes off on election day. And that trap doesn't have to be in the voting system either, there's tallying devices, reporting software, and so on. It's a nightmare. The only sane solution is to rely on a voter-verified physical audit trail that can be READ BY HUMANS in case of the necessity for a recount. There's a lot of ways this can be performed (including one by David Chaum that allows the voter to verify that their ballot actually was entered into the final tallies), and true improvements in voting systems will only occur when this is recognized and the "trust us" mentality (including one that says we should trust the people who will supposedly verify all the open code) is abandoned. Please read the extensive writings on Rebecca's website www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html as well as Peter Neumann's for more information on the subject. And for those of you who are convinced, PLEASE encourage all communities who happened to purchase fully-electronic voting systems to have them retrofitted with printers BEFORE the November general election. Brazil is doing just that, right now, with 3% of the 400,000 voting machines they purchased back in 2000 (more may follow).
Slashdot Mirror
Face it, corporations are in the business of making money, if they can reduce their costs by taking jobs elsewhere, they will do it.
Not that this is a bad thing, inefficiencies are weeded out, and companies can continue to make money.
Plus, the outsourced country benefits more than the whiny liberals care to admit. These jobs pay more than the local average, treat their workers a hell of a lot better, and boosts their economy.
So as a whole, this is not really a bad thing, except for the people losing their jobs. This is the free market at work.
i've seen some pretty dumb petitions, I can't believe this one made slashdot. Of course, when you have michael posting the story, you can't rule anything out.
If you want to sign petitions, this site has them all.
This obsession with "Diversity" in everything in American Life by some of the liberal elites is strange.
There are already a wide range of views and opinions on all media forms, but for some, they hate that a few have such disproportionate share of the audience.
I say, what the hell is so wrong with this?
You can't force people to watch or read something they don't want, but these diversity types would have you think that somehow your choices are being limited by some strange powerful force.
In this age of the Internet, anybody can be publisher, broadcaster, or viewer, so these rule changes reflect this new reality we live in.
Did Fox News somehow hypnotized people to watch them? No, people liked what they saw and switched from CNN, MSNBC, or whatever. Look at your local magazine rack..who's fault is it that the Nation or the Socialist News aren't the bestsellers?
BTW, this moderation by agreement is priceless.
This "big media monopoly" is such a myth. The networks, newspapers, internet sites compete viciously against each other.
I see plenty of choices on tv, radio, and the Internet than ever before.
This media monopoly is just another bogeyman the leftists have made up as part of their "all big corporations are evil" campaign.
Firstly, filter it if you don't like it.
I love how the same people decrying internet filters and censorship would suggest that I apply it to myself simply because I don't agree with their viewpoints.
Secondly, I believe it's very important to keep track of any and all movments of the biggest, richest, most powerful company in the world.
Seriously..get over yourself. It sounds like you're the same psycho nerd who stalked and hated the hot girl in school simply because you couldn't get her.
Despite your obvious trolling, ...
On slashdot, anybody who doesn't toe the party line MUST a troll.
The trolling editors seem desperate to generate pageviews and posting a Microsoft piece almost guarantees to inflame and troll enough users to accomplish this.
Look at this story...what's really that new or interesting here? This looks like just another opportunity for slashbots and "M$" haters to get their kicks.
The more reasonable readers don't get off on that kind of stuff. Please editors, this is getting old and boring.
FK's main point is absolutely valid and correct, IMO. Michael is truely a cancer on this site. Just think, if a reader writes what he did as a comment, he would be modded to -1 in no time. But time and time again, he is allowed to get away with trolling, baiting, distorting, lying to push his little platform of his.
I also find it amusing the editors sooo hate Microsoft, but have no problem taking ad money to fund them. Got hypocrisy?
bandwidth ain't free, you know.
Can someone explain how this example constitutes censorship? From what I read, this incident was completely blown out of proportion. It wasn't because he wanted to cover up the statues, it was to provide a better backdrop for the cameras.
Using this as an example of "censorship" or to say that free expression has been muzzled is a little dubious. It puts the whole list into question of the motives and partisanship behind making it.
But of course it makes slashdot because it fits with their worldview.
An idiotic comment equating Bush with Hitler is "insightful".
Please, don't piss on my leg, and tell me it's raining, and don't tell me there's no liberal bias on slashdot because you would be wrong.
Nobody thinks bashing-over-the-head stuff is funny (except for maybe the French).
I will stop loading slashdot today, except for the ever insightful twirlip's page, until this idiocy stops.
If nothing else was learned before 9-11, it's that we don't need to be provoked or engaged to be targetted by a bunch of islamo-facsists.
that the nutjobs protesting the upcoming war with the "no blood for oil" slogan have no idea what they're talking about.
Michael conveniently left this part out of his headline, which served to make this bigger flamebait than it really is.
Here's some news for you. When people can get something for free, quality is not usually the biggest priority, but when you ask people to pay for the same thing, then it becomes one. That's why people aren't going to pay, for reasons other than goodwill and support.
If you look up the word professionl in the dictionary, people here are referring to your utter inabilities to "conform to the standards of a profession", not your "great skill". All the spelling errors, bad links, and unclosed tags shows you guys can't even bother to use a spell checker or goto the linked site. That isn't high school newspaper quality, let alone CNN quality.
If you guys can't show some effort into making the stories halfway readable, then most people, including the parent poster, see a site just not worth paying money to people who won't put the effort into working for it.
Here's some easier ways of actually getting more subscribers without writing a single line of code.
Spell check.
Correct grammar.
News that is actually timely and relevant.
Lose the inane commentary from paranoid jerks like michael, who add nothing new to the discussion and only serve to trollbait the users.
Listen to the readers, instead of waiving all the criticisms as trolls.
Lose the moderation system. It doesn't work, and never has.
That's a good start to people paying. Run it professionally.
The only reason I would ever consider subscribing is if salon was worth paying for. Right now, it simply isn't. Once in a while, they have a good story, but for the most part, they recycle the same tripe and offer very little new insight I couldn't get anywhere else.
But I was turned off by how the Editor-In-chief wrapped thesmelves as some crusaders for free speech, as if their death would be one less voice of reason. That's really not a valid reason for why anybody should be supporting them. They shouldn't kid themselves or their readers that they are a business, and out to make money like anybody else. Putting up the right wing conspiracy as a bogeymen to solicit donations is pretty disgusting for event them.
I certainly echo that sentiment. But I think the concept of privacy in this context is completely overblown by some people. Having any kind of privacy on air travel has been blown away since metal detectors were installed, and for good reason.
It's not like people have a fundamental right to privacy when traveling on a plane. If you people haven't learned from 9/11 by now, airplanes have been a target for terrorists for years, and will likely continue to be. It's the easiest way to cause terror and destruction.
And "profiling" is a much better way of stopping terrorists instead of stripping down some 80 year old grandma from Kansas City all in the name of political correctness. Using this information might give the Feds another tool to identify and apprehend these evildoers without causing a massive inconvenience and slowdown to others.
So you slashbots should come down from your high horse.
I must speak out for the "silent majority" that does not find Dave Barry funny whatsover. I laugh exactly 0 times from this interview, for a grand total of 0 for all the Dave Barry stuff I've read tried to read.
What is it about him I don't like? He's like the Robin Williams of print. All he does is talk and talk and talk, but if you actually listen to what he's saying, he's not saying anything funny.
To each their own I guess, but others who hate Dave Barry, please rally here.
I love seeing these Linux based XXX stories always get posted, and then the slashbots orgasm with glee how great this is, and how they can't wait to get one.
Yea, right, like anybody will actually buy it mainly because it's Linux. Based on other Linux type items sold (games, computers), I hope these guys won't bank on the linux hippies for business. They will succeed or fail based on the product's merits, whether it does the job and whether it does it better for the price than its competitors.
So hold off on all the flag waving until you people actually try it.
What the fuck does this have to do with my rights online?? My "rights" in the workplace are limited all the time at work.
My company has blocked access to p2p applications, all sorts of website, and limit my access to my PC. Should I be crying about my rights being violated?
Where is it part of my rights that I can illegaly download music at my desk, thereby wasting bandwidth and company time?
As it turns out, open code and "thoroughly examined hardware" do not a secure system make. The problem is that the code has to get compiled, and it has to run on an operating system, and that has to run on a computer. Even if the code and hardware (if one can examine the microcode) appears to be entirely pristine, Ken Thompson explained in his classic 1984 essay "Reflections on Trusting Trust" (available online, do a Google search) that the compiler that compiled all of that code can be rigged such that malicious code can be concealed. For example: Since the dates of US National Elections are fixed to infinity (they are always the 1st Tuesday in November) and since many voting systems (as well as computer systems) rely on real-time clocks, it is certainly plausible to create a hardware trap that only goes off on election day. And that trap doesn't have to be in the voting system either, there's tallying devices, reporting software, and so on. It's a nightmare. The only sane solution is to rely on a voter-verified physical audit trail that can be READ BY HUMANS in case of the necessity for a recount. There's a lot of ways this can be performed (including one by David Chaum that allows the voter to verify that their ballot actually was entered into the final tallies), and true improvements in voting systems will only occur when this is recognized and the "trust us" mentality (including one that says we should trust the people who will supposedly verify all the open code) is abandoned. Please read the extensive writings on Rebecca's website www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html as well as Peter Neumann's for more information on the subject. And for those of you who are convinced, PLEASE encourage all communities who happened to purchase fully-electronic voting systems to have them retrofitted with printers BEFORE the November general election. Brazil is doing just that, right now, with 3% of the 400,000 voting machines they purchased back in 2000 (more may follow).