There was never a golden age of literature when everyone read authors that meet your approval. If people are reading more breezy escapism and genre fiction today than they were before, I'd look at why they feel they need that escapism. Anyway, even a hack can write a pretty good book every once in a while -- especially given that most hacks are unnaturally prolific.
It's always 1993 here. In fact, when I come to Slashdot, Heart-Shaped Box is always playing on the radio, everyone is playing that new game Doom, and I have a life. Ah, it's grand to come to Slashdot!
Yes, that happens sometimes. People get a bit fanatical about reverting vandalism. The best thing to do is to always use an edit summary with polite, neutral language that directly cites Wikipedia policy. For example: "remove unverifiable, unsourced statement, per [[WP:V]]" or even just say something terse like "unsourced". That will signal to people that you're at least vaguely familiar with Wikipedia's policies and not a simple vandal who likes to randomly remove sentences.
When people challenge you, tell them the burden of proof lies on them. You can cite [[WP:BURDEN]], Wikipedia policy which explicitly states this.
To some extent. Its use is controversial and losing support, but there are still some old school hold-outs who swear by it. I think what we're seeing is a few of these hold-outs lashing out in a last, desperate attempt to save their image, but, with some luck, this will end up being the final nail in their coffin.
I've tried making that argument, but most people won't really care until it becomes a talking point beaten to death by demagogues on TV. Also, I cringed a bit when I read that summary, because every phrase screams "leftist academic". That's one of the quickest and easiest ways to get dismissed by moderates and center-right allies.
Sounds a lot like Mozilla's attempts to clone everything that Google does, except in a half-assed way. Kind of funny, really, because I hadn't actually thought to connect Steve Ballmer and Asa Dotzler like that before. When you think about it, though, they seem pretty similar. Neither Microsoft nor Mozilla seem terribly interested in actually doing anything until Apple/Google do it first.
Well, yeah. But Google has an enviable image and works in emerging markets, where they can set consumer expectations. Microsoft has a crap image and works in entrenched markets, where customers have strong opinions and entrenched ways doing things. This is a bit of a simplification, of course, but I think it helps to explain why people complain so much about everything that Microsoft does, while they give Google a free pass.
There's a difference between opt-in and covert actions taken without permission.
However, I don't see why anyone would let MIT have access to their e-mail account, just so that they can simulate having the civil liberties violated. But, then again, I don't see the point to a lot of things that get posted to Slashdot.
I don't think it's necessarily right wing nutjobs. More likely, it's just plain old ordinary nutjobs, plus some authoritarian, nationalist nutjobs. There are plenty of Libertarians that support WikiLeaks and Snowden, and Libertarians are pretty far to the right.
Wikipedia is mirrored by several sites. Additionally, anyone can download the entirety of the site, if they wish.
If the WMF pulled the plug tomorrow, there'd still be mirrors, hardcopy versions (check out the number of published books on Amazon that are nothing but printed Wikipedia articles), the official Wikipedia 1.0 hardcopy version, and numerous partial mirrors that were reconstructed through browser caches.
Oh, please. Wikipedia doesn't discriminate against offline sources; in fact, it encourages their use. The problem that you're coming up against is notability. Notability is established by adding sources -- online or offline -- to an article. Completely unsourced articles are essentially useless, because there's no verifiability, only original research. If you want to publish original research, put it on your blog. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; does not publish original research.
Yeah, I saw. Surprising. Even more surprising, he seems quite proud of his accomplishments and fiercely loyal to Gillard/Labor. I don't know what to say. I guess it's easy to criticize from the outside, and minor incremental advances are better than regression... but who can help but be disappointed?
I still don't understand how Peter Garrett could turn into such a "team player" and moderate, after decades of activism. I guess it goes to show how much politicians have to sell out in order to make it to the top levels.
Even as an American, I considered Garrett something of a hero when I was growing up. It was a shock to find out what's become of him today.
That kind of ironic parody might sell to hipsters and postmodernists, but I don't think that would really be enough to recoup your costs. So-called "art video games" are known for doing stuff like this, but I don't know of any examples offhand.
Ever since the early days, there has been a loud minority of people proclaiming that Tiger Direct is run by scammers. This reputation has kept me from ever buying anything from them. If these allegations are true, then maybe Tiger Direct does deserve that reputation.
"Spirit of the law" is more of a liberal thing. Our current court leans a bit to the conservative side, and they tend to be more concerned with "letter of the law". Of course, both sides would probably dispute such simplistic characterizations, but that's pretty much how it works out in practice.
Yeah, I have to admit that it sounds like nothing but a paycheck. Given that the last two Terminator films were pretty forgettable, I'm hoping that they just do a reboot. Wipe everything clean, start with a brand new story, and get a real director (with a real name, not a nickname).
If they do a reboot, they could bring in Arnie in a small role. Make him a military leader responsible for pushing through Skynet, rewarded for his years of service to the country by being the first 3D model used to create a humanoid Terminator. That could work. It would even explain why he's 60-65 years old, yet the Terminator looks half that age. See? It's not hopeless. It's just incredibly unlikely that this will turn into a good film.
Yeah. It's impressive that he's gotten this far, but the credulous, easily-impressed headline (and story) left me similarly annoyed. It's basically some manga nerd remaking the classic 80s graphical adventure games. Instead of calling it what it is, they decided to run it as some kind of revolutionary, radical new approach to video games. The guy himself isn't necessarily responsible for that, though. He has no control over how the media present his story. Sounds like an decent guy with a decent project, but it's not really all that interesting to me. Aren't most indie games made by guys who think their ideas are underrepresented and underappreciated in mainstream gaming?
The United States doesn't really have a left-wing party. There's the Green Party and the Socialist Party, but neither of them is relevant in any meaningful way. I suggest that you vote with the Greens or Socialists, if you're truly interested in left-wing politics, even if they are irrelevant. It may not accomplish much, but you'll be able to sleep better at night. If you're more of a centrist or right winger, then I suggest the Libertarian Party, which are at least supportive of freedom, even if they are free market fundamentalists. I can respect their stance on freedom, at the very least... which is more than I can do for most political parties.
There's also the Social Justice Party, but I don't know much about them. The Greens piss me off every once in a while, with their anti-technology, neo-luddite rhetoric. Social Justice seems like a decent alternative, if you're into progressive, left-wing politics and don't want to go full-on socialist.
Slashdot Mirror
Just give it a few days and there will be delicious drama all over the place.
There was never a golden age of literature when everyone read authors that meet your approval. If people are reading more breezy escapism and genre fiction today than they were before, I'd look at why they feel they need that escapism. Anyway, even a hack can write a pretty good book every once in a while -- especially given that most hacks are unnaturally prolific.
It's always 1993 here. In fact, when I come to Slashdot, Heart-Shaped Box is always playing on the radio, everyone is playing that new game Doom, and I have a life. Ah, it's grand to come to Slashdot!
Yes, that happens sometimes. People get a bit fanatical about reverting vandalism. The best thing to do is to always use an edit summary with polite, neutral language that directly cites Wikipedia policy. For example: "remove unverifiable, unsourced statement, per [[WP:V]]" or even just say something terse like "unsourced". That will signal to people that you're at least vaguely familiar with Wikipedia's policies and not a simple vandal who likes to randomly remove sentences.
When people challenge you, tell them the burden of proof lies on them. You can cite [[WP:BURDEN]], Wikipedia policy which explicitly states this.
Hardly. California elected both Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger governor.
To some extent. Its use is controversial and losing support, but there are still some old school hold-outs who swear by it. I think what we're seeing is a few of these hold-outs lashing out in a last, desperate attempt to save their image, but, with some luck, this will end up being the final nail in their coffin.
I've tried making that argument, but most people won't really care until it becomes a talking point beaten to death by demagogues on TV. Also, I cringed a bit when I read that summary, because every phrase screams "leftist academic". That's one of the quickest and easiest ways to get dismissed by moderates and center-right allies.
Sounds a lot like Mozilla's attempts to clone everything that Google does, except in a half-assed way. Kind of funny, really, because I hadn't actually thought to connect Steve Ballmer and Asa Dotzler like that before. When you think about it, though, they seem pretty similar. Neither Microsoft nor Mozilla seem terribly interested in actually doing anything until Apple/Google do it first.
Yeah? When was that? The 1950s?
Well, yeah. But Google has an enviable image and works in emerging markets, where they can set consumer expectations. Microsoft has a crap image and works in entrenched markets, where customers have strong opinions and entrenched ways doing things. This is a bit of a simplification, of course, but I think it helps to explain why people complain so much about everything that Microsoft does, while they give Google a free pass.
There's a difference between opt-in and covert actions taken without permission.
However, I don't see why anyone would let MIT have access to their e-mail account, just so that they can simulate having the civil liberties violated. But, then again, I don't see the point to a lot of things that get posted to Slashdot.
You're an asshole, but you're a moderately funny asshole. That kind of makes up for being an asshole. But you're still an asshole.
I don't think it's necessarily right wing nutjobs. More likely, it's just plain old ordinary nutjobs, plus some authoritarian, nationalist nutjobs. There are plenty of Libertarians that support WikiLeaks and Snowden, and Libertarians are pretty far to the right.
I think they'd rather just cover their eyes and ears.
thats right, become a vandal and disrupt the wiki in order to save it.
the wikiwhiners are out in full force tonight
Wikipedia is mirrored by several sites. Additionally, anyone can download the entirety of the site, if they wish.
If the WMF pulled the plug tomorrow, there'd still be mirrors, hardcopy versions (check out the number of published books on Amazon that are nothing but printed Wikipedia articles), the official Wikipedia 1.0 hardcopy version, and numerous partial mirrors that were reconstructed through browser caches.
I'm not worried.
Oh, please. Wikipedia doesn't discriminate against offline sources; in fact, it encourages their use. The problem that you're coming up against is notability. Notability is established by adding sources -- online or offline -- to an article. Completely unsourced articles are essentially useless, because there's no verifiability, only original research. If you want to publish original research, put it on your blog. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; does not publish original research.
Yeah, I saw. Surprising. Even more surprising, he seems quite proud of his accomplishments and fiercely loyal to Gillard/Labor. I don't know what to say. I guess it's easy to criticize from the outside, and minor incremental advances are better than regression... but who can help but be disappointed?
I still don't understand how Peter Garrett could turn into such a "team player" and moderate, after decades of activism. I guess it goes to show how much politicians have to sell out in order to make it to the top levels.
Even as an American, I considered Garrett something of a hero when I was growing up. It was a shock to find out what's become of him today.
That kind of ironic parody might sell to hipsters and postmodernists, but I don't think that would really be enough to recoup your costs. So-called "art video games" are known for doing stuff like this, but I don't know of any examples offhand.
Ever since the early days, there has been a loud minority of people proclaiming that Tiger Direct is run by scammers. This reputation has kept me from ever buying anything from them. If these allegations are true, then maybe Tiger Direct does deserve that reputation.
"Spirit of the law" is more of a liberal thing. Our current court leans a bit to the conservative side, and they tend to be more concerned with "letter of the law". Of course, both sides would probably dispute such simplistic characterizations, but that's pretty much how it works out in practice.
Yeah, I have to admit that it sounds like nothing but a paycheck. Given that the last two Terminator films were pretty forgettable, I'm hoping that they just do a reboot. Wipe everything clean, start with a brand new story, and get a real director (with a real name, not a nickname).
If they do a reboot, they could bring in Arnie in a small role. Make him a military leader responsible for pushing through Skynet, rewarded for his years of service to the country by being the first 3D model used to create a humanoid Terminator. That could work. It would even explain why he's 60-65 years old, yet the Terminator looks half that age. See? It's not hopeless. It's just incredibly unlikely that this will turn into a good film.
Yeah. It's impressive that he's gotten this far, but the credulous, easily-impressed headline (and story) left me similarly annoyed. It's basically some manga nerd remaking the classic 80s graphical adventure games. Instead of calling it what it is, they decided to run it as some kind of revolutionary, radical new approach to video games. The guy himself isn't necessarily responsible for that, though. He has no control over how the media present his story. Sounds like an decent guy with a decent project, but it's not really all that interesting to me. Aren't most indie games made by guys who think their ideas are underrepresented and underappreciated in mainstream gaming?
The United States doesn't really have a left-wing party. There's the Green Party and the Socialist Party, but neither of them is relevant in any meaningful way. I suggest that you vote with the Greens or Socialists, if you're truly interested in left-wing politics, even if they are irrelevant. It may not accomplish much, but you'll be able to sleep better at night. If you're more of a centrist or right winger, then I suggest the Libertarian Party, which are at least supportive of freedom, even if they are free market fundamentalists. I can respect their stance on freedom, at the very least... which is more than I can do for most political parties.
There's also the Social Justice Party, but I don't know much about them. The Greens piss me off every once in a while, with their anti-technology, neo-luddite rhetoric. Social Justice seems like a decent alternative, if you're into progressive, left-wing politics and don't want to go full-on socialist.