Actually, some have said that fundamentalist* Christians (also known as the Protestants: the Puritans, the Lutherians, the Calvinists and others) were the ones that dragged Europe kicking and screaming to the Modern Age, or at least played a major role in this process by making it ethical to do things that weren't considered ethical before (like making a profit on your investments).
* The word 'fundamentalist' means that they suggested returning to what Christianity was, in their opinion, about and abolishing all the excesses and anachronisms of Catholicism. The aim of Islamic fundamentalists is the same as that of all Christian fundamentalists -- to reform Islam. For some, of course, this also means Yay! Jihad! but there's much more to Islamic fundamentalism than just destroying Israel.
According to Soviet history books (I'm not familiar with modern Russian ones), all great inventions were actually made by Russians. The bicycle was invented by a serf called Yegveni Prussakov, and the steam engine not by James Watt but yet another Russian serf. Neither of these inventions never made it "big" at that time, though, as the society was not ready for them and the reactionary landowners simply had these things destroyed (and the serfs beaten for wasting valuable iron).
Another piece of historical trivia: at the beginning of its existence, the [Soviet] Red Army functioned as a voluntary formation, without ranks or insignia. Democratic elections selected the officers.
FTA: The political bias is obvious. Yes, and so's yours, Mr. Roblimo. Next time, could you please try to make a news article more like an article and less like a political rant by cutting straight to the point (ie asking people if they can confirm or deny this), instead of ranting endlessly about the situation in Saudi Arabia?
In short, it's anything you want it to be. A blog is really nothing else than just a way of organizing and publishing web content; only a bit more structured than a "traditional" personal website. I use mine (not going to link it here) to post short fiction and essays to entertain my friends. But there are many other uses besides this. You can do this, for instance. Or this. Or even this or this. As you can see, there's quite a lot of ways you can use a blog.
First of all, I can't see what NASA's budget has to do with the amount of money spent in Iraq. Comparing the two is a purely rhetorical move, intended to show that NASA's budget is small -- which it isn't. $16 billion is actually quite a lot of money. Secondly, just pumping shitloads of cash into NASA (also known as the 'rob from the rich and give to the needy' approach) will not solve anything. All in all, your comment's hardly insightful; in fact, it's completely contentless. But hey, this is Slashdot, the place where the blind can see and the legless walk.
"Millions of new users every week" *is* misleading. It's simply not true.
I wasn't aware that they used this slogan to promote Firefox. I must say that this is where I would draw the line between what's ok and what's not. For me, it is ok to boast with "150,000,000 downloads", but talking about "millions of new users every week" would probably already be a lie. And no, I would not be ok with this -- not even if we were talking about McDonalds.
"The Firefox community are a bunch of immature fanbois" hardly qualifies as a correct premise in my book, as I can't see how you can prove a statement like this. Had he simply said that he found the Firefox ads immoral as the use of statistics was misleading, it'd have been something he could have made arguments for or against that I could have agreed or disagreed with. But it seems to me that his intention was simply to rant about how the Firefox community suck, not to make a proper argument for or against something.
If you accept that download figures are meaningless (and I don't se you arguing that point), then what on earth is the point of making a big fuss over them, if not to mislead people?
I agree that the download figures are meaningless. However, I can't see how quoting these figures is worse than any other trick used in advertising. Of course one can keep using this kind of rhetorics for only so long; at one point, they will have to come up with something new, at which point the community will start chanting the new slogan. But I still can't see how this is a sign of them being immature.
This story is nothing but a blatant troll. It has no content other than "the Firefox community are immature". The only proof the author offers to support his claim is that "the number of total Firefox downloads is misleading". I can't really tell what one has to do with the other, as the author has sort of jumped to the conclusion...nay, not even that. He's first come up with the idea that the members of the Firefox community are immature, and only then tried to come up with "arguments" to prove this.
Personally, I can't see anything wrong with the promotional tactics "criticized" in the article. It is, after all, an easier way to get the message across than the ones the author of the article suggests ("Release updates, innovative extensions and add interesting features (not necessary by default) to promote with value", which, while a good thing, is hardly a good way to promote Firefox).
Yeah, I know, I shouldn't have fed the troll. But it felt so bloody good I just couldn't help myself:7
"News for nerds. Stuff that matters"? I dunno, that's just a guess. What does that mean to you?
Well, if you look at the articles posted to this site, it turns out that there are also many things besides science that matter.
So you complain about childish jokes but you think a religious bashfest is any better?
Yeah, I do. It's a lot more interesting to read.
Maybe you see it as insightful because you agree with the modders but it doesn't bring anything to the surface except for resentment and the kind of groupthink mentallity that helps the likes of the KKK and Al-Quada.
The only comment in this thread that I actually found insightful was this one. I can, of course, hardly justify going through all that garbage in this thread to learn this one piece of information. I could just as well have spent this time in the library, reading a commentary to the book of Revelations. Other than that... it's not as if any of the arguments used in this thread were new. And the Religion vs. Science thing has been beaten to death so many times that I've lost count. Yes, you could say that these arguments only serve to bring the groupthink to the surface, but 'groupthink' isn't necessarily all bad. For one, it helps to keep the group together. Of course this doesn't mean that everyone thinks in exactly the same way (mind you, I don't think KKK or Al Quaeda members all think in exactly the same way, either), but they do share at least some of the traits of this mentality.
What threat? I don't see a threat here.
Yet you're complaining about pseudo-scientific stories and sensationalism:7
stories that are clearly non-scientific and that do not benifit the slashdot community.
How can you tell what benefits the Slashdot community and what doesn't? How can you tell that scientific stories would benefit the community, but non-scientific wouldn't? In many cases, there isn't really much one can say about science stories. Typically, you'll just end up with a ton of bad jokes and childish humor. But if a story like this one here gets posted, you'll first of all get tons of comments questioning these ideas, and secondly, tons of highly modded comments (at the moment, there's about 45 +4/+5 comments in this thread, which is quite a lot) -- meaning that lots of people agree with what's said in these comments. There's also lots of comments about religion that the readers can agree or disagree with. They can feel that they're a part of a greater whole, a community.
Of course this doesn't mean that there wouldn't be a Slashdot community if there weren't any such 'controversial' stories around. Generally, they're just good for creating lots of comments, which only 30% of registered Slashdot users read (if my memory serves me correct; in any case, it's quite a small number), while others come here for just the news on tech and science. However, defending a community from outside threat (as in this thread), whether it be real or imagined, has always been an effective method of maintaining it.
As someone pointed out to me yesterday, notice that Homer's car is lefthand drive while Marge's is righthand drive.
Yeah, it's a bit strange, given that Ladas (it's what Homer is driving, and yes, I'm laughing -- Homer Simpson is driving a bloody Lada!) were, to my knowledge, made righthand drive as well.
Rubbish. You're all too eager to put all the blame on the editors, but while there's certainly some truth to this, you're all but forgetting about the readers. You're forgetting that it's the Slashdot readers/users that write most of the stories. The editors can only choose from what they're being sent.
The Slashdot readership has changed over the years. In the four years you've been a registered user, Slashdot has gained almost four hundred thousand (or maybe fewer; there's probably an awful lot of people with several accounts) new registered users. As it is, the Slashdot readerbase is quite big and it's hardly a wonder that such a great mass of people has a mass taste when it comes to what they prefer to read -- sensationalist headlines, YRO and other 'general interest' stories.
If you look at the reaction to his death, then Pope John Paul II certainly seems to have had quite a big an authority figure even outside the Roman Catholic countries. Pope Benedict seems to enjoy some as well.
Sheesh. Those societies ended because of a LACK of modern Capitalism.
They all had their own Francis Fukuyamas, though, claiming that the society they lived in was the best thing ever invented by man (and approved by God himself) and would never go away.
Slashdot Mirror
* The word 'fundamentalist' means that they suggested returning to what Christianity was, in their opinion, about and abolishing all the excesses and anachronisms of Catholicism. The aim of Islamic fundamentalists is the same as that of all Christian fundamentalists -- to reform Islam. For some, of course, this also means Yay! Jihad! but there's much more to Islamic fundamentalism than just destroying Israel.
According to Soviet history books (I'm not familiar with modern Russian ones), all great inventions were actually made by Russians. The bicycle was invented by a serf called Yegveni Prussakov, and the steam engine not by James Watt but yet another Russian serf. Neither of these inventions never made it "big" at that time, though, as the society was not ready for them and the reactionary landowners simply had these things destroyed (and the serfs beaten for wasting valuable iron).
Only if you also agree with calling all modern Western inventions French.
Another piece of historical trivia: at the beginning of its existence, the [Soviet] Red Army functioned as a voluntary formation, without ranks or insignia. Democratic elections selected the officers.
Butt-cheeks, even.
Exactly.
FTA: The political bias is obvious. Yes, and so's yours, Mr. Roblimo. Next time, could you please try to make a news article more like an article and less like a political rant by cutting straight to the point (ie asking people if they can confirm or deny this), instead of ranting endlessly about the situation in Saudi Arabia?
Does Slashdot, as a news source, really have to spread this sort of unconfirmed information?
And I cannot belive I totally forgot about this one!
In short, it's anything you want it to be. A blog is really nothing else than just a way of organizing and publishing web content; only a bit more structured than a "traditional" personal website. I use mine (not going to link it here) to post short fiction and essays to entertain my friends. But there are many other uses besides this. You can do this, for instance. Or this. Or even this or this. As you can see, there's quite a lot of ways you can use a blog.
First of all, I can't see what NASA's budget has to do with the amount of money spent in Iraq. Comparing the two is a purely rhetorical move, intended to show that NASA's budget is small -- which it isn't. $16 billion is actually quite a lot of money. Secondly, just pumping shitloads of cash into NASA (also known as the 'rob from the rich and give to the needy' approach) will not solve anything. All in all, your comment's hardly insightful; in fact, it's completely contentless. But hey, this is Slashdot, the place where the blind can see and the legless walk.
War on poverty? What's that about, gunning down all the poor people?
I wasn't aware that they used this slogan to promote Firefox. I must say that this is where I would draw the line between what's ok and what's not. For me, it is ok to boast with "150,000,000 downloads", but talking about "millions of new users every week" would probably already be a lie. And no, I would not be ok with this -- not even if we were talking about McDonalds.
"The Firefox community are a bunch of immature fanbois" hardly qualifies as a correct premise in my book, as I can't see how you can prove a statement like this. Had he simply said that he found the Firefox ads immoral as the use of statistics was misleading, it'd have been something he could have made arguments for or against that I could have agreed or disagreed with. But it seems to me that his intention was simply to rant about how the Firefox community suck, not to make a proper argument for or against something.
I agree that the download figures are meaningless. However, I can't see how quoting these figures is worse than any other trick used in advertising. Of course one can keep using this kind of rhetorics for only so long; at one point, they will have to come up with something new, at which point the community will start chanting the new slogan. But I still can't see how this is a sign of them being immature.
Personally, I can't see anything wrong with the promotional tactics "criticized" in the article. It is, after all, an easier way to get the message across than the ones the author of the article suggests ("Release updates, innovative extensions and add interesting features (not necessary by default) to promote with value", which, while a good thing, is hardly a good way to promote Firefox).
Yeah, I know, I shouldn't have fed the troll. But it felt so bloody good I just couldn't help myself :7
Maybe it's time to re-read the works of one Charles Hoy Fort?
Well, if you look at the articles posted to this site, it turns out that there are also many things besides science that matter. So you complain about childish jokes but you think a religious bashfest is any better?
Yeah, I do. It's a lot more interesting to read.
Maybe you see it as insightful because you agree with the modders but it doesn't bring anything to the surface except for resentment and the kind of groupthink mentallity that helps the likes of the KKK and Al-Quada.
The only comment in this thread that I actually found insightful was this one. I can, of course, hardly justify going through all that garbage in this thread to learn this one piece of information. I could just as well have spent this time in the library, reading a commentary to the book of Revelations. Other than that... it's not as if any of the arguments used in this thread were new. And the Religion vs. Science thing has been beaten to death so many times that I've lost count. Yes, you could say that these arguments only serve to bring the groupthink to the surface, but 'groupthink' isn't necessarily all bad. For one, it helps to keep the group together. Of course this doesn't mean that everyone thinks in exactly the same way (mind you, I don't think KKK or Al Quaeda members all think in exactly the same way, either), but they do share at least some of the traits of this mentality.
What threat? I don't see a threat here.
Yet you're complaining about pseudo-scientific stories and sensationalism :7
How can you tell what benefits the Slashdot community and what doesn't? How can you tell that scientific stories would benefit the community, but non-scientific wouldn't? In many cases, there isn't really much one can say about science stories. Typically, you'll just end up with a ton of bad jokes and childish humor. But if a story like this one here gets posted, you'll first of all get tons of comments questioning these ideas, and secondly, tons of highly modded comments (at the moment, there's about 45 +4/+5 comments in this thread, which is quite a lot) -- meaning that lots of people agree with what's said in these comments. There's also lots of comments about religion that the readers can agree or disagree with. They can feel that they're a part of a greater whole, a community.
Of course this doesn't mean that there wouldn't be a Slashdot community if there weren't any such 'controversial' stories around. Generally, they're just good for creating lots of comments, which only 30% of registered Slashdot users read (if my memory serves me correct; in any case, it's quite a small number), while others come here for just the news on tech and science. However, defending a community from outside threat (as in this thread), whether it be real or imagined, has always been an effective method of maintaining it.
Actually, it's a Flash file. Disabling Adblock might help ;)
Yeah, it's a bit strange, given that Ladas (it's what Homer is driving, and yes, I'm laughing -- Homer Simpson is driving a bloody Lada!) were, to my knowledge, made righthand drive as well.
Here's a YouTube link (found on MetaFilter)
Five fingers on each hand? No yellow skin and blue hair? Gimme a break.
Rubbish. You're all too eager to put all the blame on the editors, but while there's certainly some truth to this, you're all but forgetting about the readers. You're forgetting that it's the Slashdot readers/users that write most of the stories. The editors can only choose from what they're being sent.
The Slashdot readership has changed over the years. In the four years you've been a registered user, Slashdot has gained almost four hundred thousand (or maybe fewer; there's probably an awful lot of people with several accounts) new registered users. As it is, the Slashdot readerbase is quite big and it's hardly a wonder that such a great mass of people has a mass taste when it comes to what they prefer to read -- sensationalist headlines, YRO and other 'general interest' stories.
If you look at the reaction to his death, then Pope John Paul II certainly seems to have had quite a big an authority figure even outside the Roman Catholic countries. Pope Benedict seems to enjoy some as well.
They all had their own Francis Fukuyamas, though, claiming that the society they lived in was the best thing ever invented by man (and approved by God himself) and would never go away.