agree...i hate that we have to hijack threads to say this but they need to stop
plz Dice...stop...just stop
slashdot's 'look and feel' is fine how it is...ok, some could say its dated...but the is **not** to hack the content down to a big 'feed' that buries content under graphics
leave the main layout the same! tinker with logos/colors/menu types etc. but **don't remove whole sidebars** and put giant squares of color where informative text used to be
this is the worst trend in "U/X" right now....the idea that less information is somehow better and that users somehow prefer all content from one giant feed pipe
please...just stop...
if you want to make it look snappy, fine, but dont reduce the complexity & information level
how the fuck did user #3526197 get my username? we can open accounts with dupe usernames??? WTF
this is globajustin #574257....the one with the mod points...and I want to know, how could a citizen get INFORMATION ON HURRICAN SANDY FUND ACCOUNTABILITY
from records of how people voted???
they can't...it requires a professional **journalist**
I'm not sure I disagree overall, Rockoon, but this point is incorrect:
While the channels disagree in an opinionated way, they still report on the exact same set of stories.
Not at all true.
That's like comparing home-made preserves from your garden to those packets of jelly you get at the diner.
Like comparing a T-bone steak to a tofu-burger.
Like...
you get it...your problem is false equivalence. If you look at content, MSNBC and Fox News report on many stories that the other does not...in fact, they differ almost down the line **EXCEPT** on major national stories...even THEN...
ex: Bengazi Attack
That's just one example. The event has been covered drastically different and is a exemplar of how they differ predictably.
Also, Fox News is *not* a news channel. They do not do journalism. Fox News immitates journalism to sell advertismements, and markets itself to conservatives, so the fake news they purvey has a conservative slant...
but it's **fake journalism** with a slant...Fox News rarely reaches the standard of actual journalism
MSNBC has people like Rachel Maddow who actually report **news** in a professional journalistic presentation style & with the same rigor. Yes, it is somewhat slanted to a progressive (not 'left') standpoint...but it's actual journalism more often...much more often.
So both are slanted, one more than the other...and both report news....one much more often than the other.
bad comparison...Fox News shouldn't be mentioned in conversations about journalism!
Let's hear it. List it out. Explain an alternative.
I am open to what you have to say but I know that whatever you say will most likely have the government, a private corporation, and/or the 'news media' involved in how you obtain it in some way.
All 3 of those would get the standard trolling response on/. of, "...pssht...you trust X? your an idiot"
(X being govt, biz, or media)
So stop the nonstop counterpoint bullshit...save that for Nye/Ham...how would someone get reliable information, say, for Hurricane Sandy Relief efforts and if any corruption has turned up???
Hurricane Sandy accountability...how would i get that the 'non-idiot' way?
it's just a 'psychological' tactic if you will...eventually people will learn to expect it and adapt...eventually someone will get more right answers and beat him
the strategy is sound, but it is going to have decreasing marginal returns until it is virtually abated by another person's superior ability
remember like I said it's about who answers the most questions right not how they are picked
as far as entertainment value, it depends on Jeopardy & the other contestants.
Alex could mention his strategy briefly in the introductions...like, "lets see if any of tonights new challengers can crack Whatshisname's chaos strategy...here's the first clue"
what this guy is doing **can** be part of the fun, IMHO
maybe jeopardy could do a blog post on their site or something to address fans and keep it light
like I said, it's more of a smokescreen than an actual skill...his skill is **knowing the answers**
yeah i agree loonycyborg...but, taking the cybernetic perspective, we are looking at all the ways his playing of the 'metagame' affect the outcome and in that analysis, it isn't causing him to 'win' directly, but it does give an advantage in that he has marginally less uncertainty
Yes! "Common Carriage" is definitely the answer. Nice work kenh.
About policy, you're way off however.
First, Congress is submitting this law. Congress cannot order the FCC to "simply reclassify ISP's"...in fact that's exactly what the ISP's want because they are prepared to challenge **that** directly in court and if they win in court then it's decided.
You say 'simply reclassify ISP's'...Common Carriage law precedent is the right way to go but Congress cannot do that by law...its not their jurisdiction!
This law is the only thing Democrats in Congress can do. The president is attempting to work within the system to avoid over-use of 'executive privalidge'.
Both parties suck, but they aren't the same. They are both bad for the country, and they both produce bad law and bad policy, and they sometimes agree in their badness, but they are not the same.
use *this issue*
obviously both parties are different, but how are **both** bad for the country, bad law, and bad policy?
how is the Democrat law bad policy?
explain it....in detail...and describe your idea of what is better...
otherwise you're just another troll...just because you add the caveat "they are different" when you grip "parties both suck" doesn't make your argument any less fallacious, reductive, or stupid.
so let's see the specific examples and your suggestions for a net neutrality policy that wouldn't 'suck'
It can be correct, but still be flamebait and/or trolling.
It can be controversial but not flamebait and/or trolling.
From GP's perspective he feels one group of people are essentially pounding their heads into a brick wall...let's have X represent that.
If people are doing X, then it is reasonable to ask, "Why do people do X?"
It is especially relevant, some might say controversial, because some members of X post here on/.
Yes, I agree flamebaits/trolls can contain accurate information, but its wrong to judge something as being harmful to discussion just by virtue of being controversial.
he's using game theory to *disorient his opponents* by creating *uncertainty* for them but not himself
that's all that's happening here...he puts his opponents (and himself) at a disadvantage because he's disturbing the expected game flow. Only he has the benefit of **knowing what to expect** which allows him to concentrate more on thinking up the right answer.
it's a good strategy, nothing you could write a thesis on...it's more like a smokescreen tactic.
he's winning because he gets the answers right...people are complaining because of how he handles himself and because it makes it harder for them to play along at home
the researchers themselves dont...from the abstract:
Voters, we find, actually intend to judge presidents on cumulative growth. However, since that characteristic is not readily available to them, voters inadvertently substitute election-year performance
blame the candidates and the news media...both are obviously not doing their jobs.
candidates, because...holy crap they're supposed to be *running* for office. they can't blame others for everything...they are responsible for how they present their case.
news media...obviously idiots. If you want to call people stupid, call ***NEWS PRODUCERS*** stupid fucking idiots. You can thrown in the TV company executives in there too. They have *no idea* what they are doing in regards to the 4th Estate & informing the populace.
I have to fault SoulSkill & all nerds here as well. Its a cop out to say "all people are idiots" as a solution or explanation to every problem. It's reductive and unworthy of our industry. Blaming the user by default *hurts our industry* because it alienates us from the users, and from our own work.
Systems need correction. Blaming the people the system is designed to serve when a feedback loop occurs is illogical!
that's why EA's simulator can predict well...it's based on probabilities of events based on statistics from individual players over their career. you can plug in any players into the roster and their system does the math
sure, a coach like Bill Walsh can make a system for a team that becomes so consistent that it *could* be analyzed over several years...but that level of consistency is very rare...the 49'ers west coast offense spanned two QB's, Montana and Young and multiple coaches
Here, people have been absolutely fucking _crucified_ for daring to even suggest that Snowden is something less than the greatest hero the world has ever seen.
yeah I got this treatment...
I think it's bots and paid commenters who work for PR companies that make the wave of comments, like in the Snowden example.
Look at the comments on *this* article...several well reasoned, non 'black and white' comments...but look back at an older Snowden article and the commenters are rabidly on-sided.
I really think we've entered the full on 'brave new 1984' territory with these sockpuppet accounts, AC bots, and paid commetors
At some point it very likely that he did indeed have altruistic motives, but there's no denying that Snowden's hubris got him mixed with shady characters who were not at all looking out for his interest.
I was very happy to see this article come across the/. feed. WE NEED MORE OF TFA.
the hero/villain narrative is completely reductive and not fit to use for examining Snowden's actions.
I hope this ends soon. Robert Oppenheimer and others proposed a central global authority to control the world's plutonium. Since we know we only have so much left, each interested country could take part in a new organization that starts from scratch with no historical precedents hanging over it and use the plutonium only for space exploration.
Each country could & would want to contribute because everyone wants to get back into space & nuclear power helps alot.
In general I think nuclear power's time has come. You can list all the dangers but we have the same vulnerability with anything. Just look at the recent rail cars carrying oil products that crashed and burned in Canada almost destroying a whole town & killing 30+ people.
Note that my explanation isnt quite commonly accepted but IMHO it is the loose consensus among scientists who I respect.
This guy, Lawrence M. Krauss would definitely disagree with my characterization of what happens at the Event Horizon.Here he is on the Colbert Report talking about his (bogus IMHO) theories. He's great but I just differ.
See, in the Quantum Foam, Heat Death universe that I propose & Hawking is against thermodynamics is maintained because the Event Horizon itself, the very edge, has angular momentum, etc and can emmit radiation
Here's the difference, at the Event Horizon the Holographic moment is when anything touches the actual Event Horizon it instantly becomes Quantum Entangled then **obliterated**
The black hole obliterates everything into pure nothingness/randomness, which preserves the Thermodynamics laws & works with QED via Quantum Foam theories.
it irked me a little to find myself agreeing with him a few months ago.
this happens to me too...fanbois screw up the whole spectrum, b/c I'm not nearly as strongly 'anti-Hawking' as the fanbois are the opposite...it's the same with all fanbois. Another example, Gerard 't Hooft is a spokesman for Mars One, something Im highly critical of...but 'tHooft is of course an amazing physicist.
Hawking is still a real scientist. I'd love to have a converstation with him in some manner.
to develop my Event Horizon comment further, I should have said, "the event horizon of the black hole obliterates everything after the holographic moment"
so in a sense, the instant after anything meets the event horizon, it becomes quantum entangled at the edge & then becomes pure randomness, which is the same as being destroyed..all information then is retained at the moment of destruction...the eventn horizon itself is the balance preserving the thermodynamics laws as it expands in relation to what it absorbs and sometimes emits radiation of its own...
Who do you think manufactures Apple's computers, if not the likes of Foxconn and Pegatron?
I'm not defending outsourcing or bad labor practices, but there's a big difference between **assembly** and **design**
Parent is right to say that HP's computers are designed and assembled in China w/ a logo slapped on them. That's different than what Apple does.
As someone else pointed out below, the architecture is designed by Apple's engineers in Cuppertino. They issue *specifications* that manufacturers must meet.
Slashdot Mirror
agree...i hate that we have to hijack threads to say this but they need to stop
plz Dice...stop...just stop
slashdot's 'look and feel' is fine how it is...ok, some could say its dated...but the is **not** to hack the content down to a big 'feed' that buries content under graphics
leave the main layout the same! tinker with logos/colors/menu types etc. but **don't remove whole sidebars** and put giant squares of color where informative text used to be
this is the worst trend in "U/X" right now....the idea that less information is somehow better and that users somehow prefer all content from one giant feed pipe
please...just stop...
if you want to make it look snappy, fine, but dont reduce the complexity & information level
how the fuck did user #3526197 get my username? we can open accounts with dupe usernames??? WTF
this is globajustin #574257....the one with the mod points...and I want to know, how could a citizen get INFORMATION ON HURRICAN SANDY FUND ACCOUNTABILITY
from records of how people voted???
they can't...it requires a professional **journalist**
seriously if they were trying to troll in order to stifle discussion about this topic, that mycleanPC thing kinda worked...
reminds me of APK...
maybe this is a level 2 deployment of the APK chatbot AI
This is a strong move by the EFF and Mozilla.
wtf is Apple going to do? promise they will offer the same protection?
I hate that Firefox can't get on the Apple App Store, and I like Apple products. But this...this is bullshit.
Will Apple somehow integrate a similar HTTPS into Safari?
I'm not sure I disagree overall, Rockoon, but this point is incorrect:
Not at all true.
That's like comparing home-made preserves from your garden to those packets of jelly you get at the diner.
Like comparing a T-bone steak to a tofu-burger.
Like...
you get it...your problem is false equivalence. If you look at content, MSNBC and Fox News report on many stories that the other does not...in fact, they differ almost down the line **EXCEPT** on major national stories...even THEN...
ex: Bengazi Attack
That's just one example. The event has been covered drastically different and is a exemplar of how they differ predictably.
Also, Fox News is *not* a news channel. They do not do journalism. Fox News immitates journalism to sell advertismements, and markets itself to conservatives, so the fake news they purvey has a conservative slant...
but it's **fake journalism** with a slant...Fox News rarely reaches the standard of actual journalism
MSNBC has people like Rachel Maddow who actually report **news** in a professional journalistic presentation style & with the same rigor. Yes, it is somewhat slanted to a progressive (not 'left') standpoint...but it's actual journalism more often...much more often.
So both are slanted, one more than the other...and both report news....one much more often than the other.
bad comparison...Fox News shouldn't be mentioned in conversations about journalism!
Then where **do** they get their information?
Let's hear it. List it out. Explain an alternative.
I am open to what you have to say but I know that whatever you say will most likely have the government, a private corporation, and/or the 'news media' involved in how you obtain it in some way.
All 3 of those would get the standard trolling response on /. of, "...pssht...you trust X? your an idiot"
(X being govt, biz, or media)
So stop the nonstop counterpoint bullshit...save that for Nye/Ham...how would someone get reliable information, say, for Hurricane Sandy Relief efforts and if any corruption has turned up???
Hurricane Sandy accountability...how would i get that the 'non-idiot' way?
it's just a 'psychological' tactic if you will...eventually people will learn to expect it and adapt...eventually someone will get more right answers and beat him
the strategy is sound, but it is going to have decreasing marginal returns until it is virtually abated by another person's superior ability
remember like I said it's about who answers the most questions right not how they are picked
as far as entertainment value, it depends on Jeopardy & the other contestants.
Alex could mention his strategy briefly in the introductions...like, "lets see if any of tonights new challengers can crack Whatshisname's chaos strategy...here's the first clue"
what this guy is doing **can** be part of the fun, IMHO
maybe jeopardy could do a blog post on their site or something to address fans and keep it light
like I said, it's more of a smokescreen than an actual skill...his skill is **knowing the answers**
yeah i agree loonycyborg...but, taking the cybernetic perspective, we are looking at all the ways his playing of the 'metagame' affect the outcome and in that analysis, it isn't causing him to 'win' directly, but it does give an advantage in that he has marginally less uncertainty
Yes! "Common Carriage" is definitely the answer. Nice work kenh.
About policy, you're way off however.
First, Congress is submitting this law. Congress cannot order the FCC to "simply reclassify ISP's"...in fact that's exactly what the ISP's want because they are prepared to challenge **that** directly in court and if they win in court then it's decided.
You say 'simply reclassify ISP's'...Common Carriage law precedent is the right way to go but Congress cannot do that by law...its not their jurisdiction!
This law is the only thing Democrats in Congress can do. The president is attempting to work within the system to avoid over-use of 'executive privalidge'.
you're full of false equivocation.
one party is actually putting forth a **policy** that would actually fix the problem
that's not rhetoric, that's not 'posture' that's actual action in the real world.
you do understand that ultimately perception is not reality right? there is an end to the bullshit rhetoric and facade of politics...
this is a cop out:
use *this issue*
obviously both parties are different, but how are **both** bad for the country, bad law, and bad policy?
how is the Democrat law bad policy?
explain it....in detail...and describe your idea of what is better...
otherwise you're just another troll...just because you add the caveat "they are different" when you grip "parties both suck" doesn't make your argument any less fallacious, reductive, or stupid.
so let's see the specific examples and your suggestions for a net neutrality policy that wouldn't 'suck'
It can be controversial but not flamebait and/or trolling.
From GP's perspective he feels one group of people are essentially pounding their heads into a brick wall...let's have X represent that.
If people are doing X, then it is reasonable to ask, "Why do people do X?"
It is especially relevant, some might say controversial, because some members of X post here on /.
Yes, I agree flamebaits/trolls can contain accurate information, but its wrong to judge something as being harmful to discussion just by virtue of being controversial.
exactly.
he's not winning "using game theory"...
he's using game theory to *disorient his opponents* by creating *uncertainty* for them but not himself
that's all that's happening here...he puts his opponents (and himself) at a disadvantage because he's disturbing the expected game flow. Only he has the benefit of **knowing what to expect** which allows him to concentrate more on thinking up the right answer.
it's a good strategy, nothing you could write a thesis on...it's more like a smokescreen tactic.
he's winning because he gets the answers right...people are complaining because of how he handles himself and because it makes it harder for them to play along at home
the researchers themselves dont...from the abstract:
blame the candidates and the news media...both are obviously not doing their jobs.
candidates, because...holy crap they're supposed to be *running* for office. they can't blame others for everything...they are responsible for how they present their case.
news media...obviously idiots. If you want to call people stupid, call ***NEWS PRODUCERS*** stupid fucking idiots. You can thrown in the TV company executives in there too. They have *no idea* what they are doing in regards to the 4th Estate & informing the populace.
I have to fault SoulSkill & all nerds here as well. Its a cop out to say "all people are idiots" as a solution or explanation to every problem. It's reductive and unworthy of our industry. Blaming the user by default *hurts our industry* because it alienates us from the users, and from our own work.
Systems need correction. Blaming the people the system is designed to serve when a feedback loop occurs is illogical!
pep rally. A high school pep rally mixed with a never ending argument.
each side cheers for themselves & at the end everyone debates the other side as to who won the debate.
it's really about analyzing players not a team
that's why EA's simulator can predict well...it's based on probabilities of events based on statistics from individual players over their career. you can plug in any players into the roster and their system does the math
sure, a coach like Bill Walsh can make a system for a team that becomes so consistent that it *could* be analyzed over several years...but that level of consistency is very rare...the 49'ers west coast offense spanned two QB's, Montana and Young and multiple coaches
that's the rare exception
I'm happy to see that many /.'ers are criticizing TFA & Wolfram Alpha
Here's my $0.02...
Their data set is fucking ridiculous...they hooked in **HISTORICAL** stats for the teams for several decades.
There is absolutely zero relationship between how the '82 Broncos played to today's game.
The fact that these researchers used this as their data set is laughable. We should all join in mocking this bullshit study.
I think it's about music, movies, Amazon original programming **AND** games.
It's like a xbox Marketplace only Amazon.
Amazon is really jealous of Netflix's success, they've really pushed their original programming on the Amazon Prime.
It's weird that Amazon is producing TV shows....weirder: a few of them are actually really great.
yeah I got this treatment...
I think it's bots and paid commenters who work for PR companies that make the wave of comments, like in the Snowden example.
Look at the comments on *this* article...several well reasoned, non 'black and white' comments...but look back at an older Snowden article and the commenters are rabidly on-sided.
I really think we've entered the full on 'brave new 1984' territory with these sockpuppet accounts, AC bots, and paid commetors
Snowden was blackmailed.
At some point it very likely that he did indeed have altruistic motives, but there's no denying that Snowden's hubris got him mixed with shady characters who were not at all looking out for his interest.
I was very happy to see this article come across the /. feed. WE NEED MORE OF TFA.
the hero/villain narrative is completely reductive and not fit to use for examining Snowden's actions.
I hope this ends soon. Robert Oppenheimer and others proposed a central global authority to control the world's plutonium. Since we know we only have so much left, each interested country could take part in a new organization that starts from scratch with no historical precedents hanging over it and use the plutonium only for space exploration.
Each country could & would want to contribute because everyone wants to get back into space & nuclear power helps alot.
In general I think nuclear power's time has come. You can list all the dangers but we have the same vulnerability with anything. Just look at the recent rail cars carrying oil products that crashed and burned in Canada almost destroying a whole town & killing 30+ people.
Thnx Anita Hunt.
Note that my explanation isnt quite commonly accepted but IMHO it is the loose consensus among scientists who I respect.
This guy, Lawrence M. Krauss would definitely disagree with my characterization of what happens at the Event Horizon.Here he is on the Colbert Report talking about his (bogus IMHO) theories. He's great but I just differ.
See, in the Quantum Foam, Heat Death universe that I propose & Hawking is against thermodynamics is maintained because the Event Horizon itself, the very edge, has angular momentum, etc and can emmit radiation
Here's the difference, at the Event Horizon the Holographic moment is when anything touches the actual Event Horizon it instantly becomes Quantum Entangled then **obliterated**
The black hole obliterates everything into pure nothingness/randomness, which preserves the Thermodynamics laws & works with QED via Quantum Foam theories.
this happens to me too...fanbois screw up the whole spectrum, b/c I'm not nearly as strongly 'anti-Hawking' as the fanbois are the opposite...it's the same with all fanbois. Another example, Gerard 't Hooft is a spokesman for Mars One, something Im highly critical of...but 'tHooft is of course an amazing physicist.
Hawking is still a real scientist. I'd love to have a converstation with him in some manner.
to develop my Event Horizon comment further, I should have said, "the event horizon of the black hole obliterates everything after the holographic moment"
so in a sense, the instant after anything meets the event horizon, it becomes quantum entangled at the edge & then becomes pure randomness, which is the same as being destroyed..all information then is retained at the moment of destruction...the eventn horizon itself is the balance preserving the thermodynamics laws as it expands in relation to what it absorbs and sometimes emits radiation of its own...
this is an extention of the holographic principle
I'm not defending outsourcing or bad labor practices, but there's a big difference between **assembly** and **design**
Parent is right to say that HP's computers are designed and assembled in China w/ a logo slapped on them. That's different than what Apple does.
As someone else pointed out below, the architecture is designed by Apple's engineers in Cuppertino. They issue *specifications* that manufacturers must meet.
Big difference.