Quentin is a badass. Breakin' into computers, wasting the school's money, depriving the football team of uniforms. Sounds like my kind of guy. Man, I wish I had the *opportunity* to make those kinds of choices when I was growing up. I could use Quentin to change my grades, and his l33t friend Joey to snag me free warez.
Somebody else mentioned the movie Gattaca, but I just wanted to throw this in: there's a great episode of the Twilight Zone, season 5, called "Number 12 Looks Just Like You," which is really relevant to this conversation. It's about the effects of a society where nobody has any flaws. Anybody else seen this one?
Your opinion follows the same lines of those presented by RMS in an opinion he wrote on the subject. While "killing Microsoft" may seem more immediately gratifying, making them play fair would work much better in the long run.
I am very excited by the possibilities of this technology. Just imagine it: a really good speech recognition system coupled with a really good natural language analyzer coupled with a good speech generator. What do you get? The comm/computer system from Star Trek:TNG. Hell, there's probably enough "Computer Voice" samples of Majel Barrett to at least give the speech generation software a good starting place.
Who needs a Palm Pilot when you can walk down the hall hands free as the briefs you on your next meeting, or allows you to read and compose your mail on the way to work. My hands shake.
My only concern: the people who design this system would need to included Star Trekish terminology and attitude into the list of things the computer could do. Example:
-- "Computer, please replay voice mail message 9 starting at time index 0-mark-9-5."
[computer chimes, message plays]
"Computer, message 9 sounds garbled. Run a level-three diagnostic on message integrity."
[pause]
"Diagnostic complete. Message shows signs of type-1 file corruption."
"Damn it!"
"Error: cannot comply with that directive" --
If we could just get that far, then I'd be happy. Actually, no that's wrong. If we could just get that far, then invent warp drive, replicators, transporters, inertial dampeners, and holodecks, *then* I'd be happy.
"Software as a service," no "dogmatic commitment" to the Intel platform, and new hardware (a low-cost NC).
vs.
"Software as a bunch of bits," a "somewhat dogmatic commitment" to the Intel platform, and the ability to run on old discarded hardware (a really, really low-cost NC).
IT would be better to turn one of your computers as a router
Not where I live. My router doesn't have to do NAT, since I get real-world IPs. I've got USWest DSL, near Seattle, and I get several dynamic IPs, and they are real IP addresses, not Private NATted addresses. Everything works like I'm a real host on the Internet, for all of my machines. The service is an absolute dream now - real bridging, no NAT, no firewall, just beautiful fast (above advertised speed) service for $50 total cost. I shudder to think that USWest would ever, ever change their policy, but thankfully I can switch to another ISP if I ever have to (Unlike cable!)
I saw the headline, so just to make sure, I tried going to www.n-word.com, and that didn't work, so then I tried www."n-word".com, and that didn't work either. Then, I did a whois lookup, and it said n-word.com wasn't registered. Then, I thought, aha - the N in NAACP stands for National, so maybe they registered national.com, but no, that's National Semiconductor, Inc. What "N-word" could they be possibly be referring to?
:-)
In all seriousness, I don't see what the big deal is. Some people have said that it's hypocritical for Slashdotters to say squatting is bad yet still let the NAACP register domains that "aren't theirs."
Well, I say hogwash. I, for one don't believe organizations have an inherent right to a domain, for reasons like they own a trademark or a copyright. I don't like domain name squatting for the most part, but do I think we should pass a law to outlaw it? No! True, it's not nice to squat a domain away from someone, but considering what other companies do with domains for profit alone, it's kind of nice to see someone squat for good, rather than evil.
As long as the American regime is still pushing cryptography as something that will let evil terrophiles reign free, I wouldn't hold my breath.
I have to say, that word, terrorphile, is great. I mean, it makes sense when you think of it (one?) as the conglomerated argument against crypto, but it also makes sense when you think of a terrorphile as like this evil maniacal genius with a long mustache who receives a jolt of pleasure each time he does something to invoke terror.
It's the best word since CommuNazi. I suggest we adopt terrorphile as a word to be used to mock those who argue against strong cryptography.
There's also updated packages and x86 emulation software.
Really? I didn't know there was any sort of x86 emulation for Linux on the Mac. Does anybody know more about this? What sort of emulation? Is it just for Linux binaries, or could one boot up Win98? What license is it under? Is it just like ibcs, or something more? If anybody has any more info about this, I'd like to know!
Dude, you really need to just link to the article. I know you credit David Brin at the bottom, but you really, really need to not do that - just post the link to the original article. Even if you had put a simple 'This article appeared in the June 15th edition of Salon Magazine and was written by David Brin,' at the top; that would have been better than what you did. Because basically, unless you read the entire article, people don't know you didn't write it, and that's one step above plagiarism, but not by much.
Ross
P.S. Unless, that is, you actually are David Brin, in which case you should have made that fact more clear. (Somehow I doubt it)
Could somebody explain to me how (or perhaps why) some of the top-of-the-line Intel-based servers claim to support even more than 4 Gigs of ram? The page for the new IBM Netfinity 8500R, for example claims that it supports "Up to 16GB ECC SDRAM". How is that even possible, since I thought 32-bit architecture made 4 Gigs the max addressable limit, period. Am I wrong? Are they simply selling a capacity nobody can use? This has confused me ever since I first heard about it.
I think all of these ideas are potentially good, but they all have one thing in common: they are all too complicated. Slashdot moderation should be simple and to the point. A percentage system, for example just about quadruples the complexity of the system.
I do agree, however, with your point #3, (you said 2 twice, everybody makes typos) it would be cool if you could customize Slashdot to a very fine-grained level. But that would be best done with some sort of scripting language (SlashScript?) or something similar that would give you total control over infrequently-selected options. Otherwise, adding 20-30 more User Preferences options is only going to make it more diffucult for newbies, or those who have trouble navigating large amounts of data all at once (such as myself). "My Slashdot" is hard enough as it is.
Good ideas, though, I just don't think we should use them.:-) I totally agree that the "previous proposals" you identified are not the best solutions by a long shot.
I know Rob joked about doing M3 and M4, but I think that with these most recent changes, the game of one-upsmanship(sp?) will only get worse. Here are some alternatives as I see them:
Part of the problem with DoS-type troll posts, like yesterday's, is that even if you are browsing the article at +2, you'll still see '1 reply beneath your threshold' even for -1 posts. This makes sense if you're reading at +3, and there's a score of 2, 1, or even 0, but think about it: very infrequently is a valid post moderated to -1.
There is so little abuse of this, why not just make it so that if somebody gets moderated down to -1, you don't see it, even as a '1 reply below your threshold'. If you cruise at -1 (which, really, only good moderators and info-gluttons really do), you'll see everything, but that way, even if I'm reading at 0, there is no way I'll see a -1 post that is devoid of merit, but I still could see an 0 Score AC post that could potentially be very worth my while.
That way, we don't have to worry about confusing "meta moderation" or any such other silliness. If moderator abuse is really such an issue, just tighten the moderator guidelines.
BTW, I'm not a big fan of +1 AC posting. I think that +1 AC, along with banning all ACs altogether, will only cause people to start creating junk accounts, posting once, and then abandoning their account, which nobody really wants.
Also, I just wanted to say, I liked someone else's idea of (only for mass violations from one single IP address) banning an entire/24 IP block, identifying the IP address and UID of the violator to anybody who tries to get to Slashdot from that range, telling them, "Sorry, somebody in your subnet has broken the rules. The violator was at so-and-so IP address. Have your network administrator find out who they are, and make them stop doing what they're doing."
I like these ideas simply because they are easily enforceable without modifying the way Slashdot currently is presented to the user (Which is pretty damn well, thank you Mr. Malda!).
I suggest that everyone who sent a vulgar letter to Unisys and now regrets it should pick up the phone and send flowers to Cheryl.
What an awful, sexist, materialistic idea.
First off, you make it sound as if Unisys is somehow absolved from their morally abhorrent behavior because they're not demanding $5000 from every website. Oh, thank you so much Unisys for allowing me to use a technology that you barely even own. Thank you so for continuing to restrict my freedom, but in such a way that is just acceptable enough to keep the angry hordes at bay.
Second, the notion that women in general are somehow less capable to handle flamage (especially a woman who works for a company whose primary source of income revolves around the Internet) because they are more apt to become emotional is outdated and only serves to propagate negative stereotypes about women. I think we can all agree that if your message had said,
...should pick up the phone and send flowers to Mark at Unisys
People would be like, "why would we send flowers to a guy?".
I personally didn't flame Unisys, and I think flaming people is a bad idea (well, except maybe you, right now:)) but do I think Unisys, or anybody who works there deserves our sympathy? No! Perhaps this Cheryl, who, for all I know, is very upset, will quit her job because of this, or at least step back from the situation and realize that there are indeed moral issues involved in choosing an employer.
But you don't even give her that chance. She's just an innocent bystander in the man's world of software businesses. She doesn't think or make any decisions herself, she is only acted upon. Her only possible reaction to the situation is defense. I don't know if you personally know Cheryl, or what, but I think if you do, you would be serving her better by explaining to her why she was flamed, rather than just kissing the proberbial "owwie" and saying "It's alright, the mean men are gone now - look, here's some flowers!"
I know of a few truly leet Geocities WHY I USE LINUX AND HERE IS MY DOG'S PICTURE websites...
Funny you should mention that. If memory serves, it would seem that Slashdot already has one page almost exactly like that under its "information umbrealla." Check out http://slashdot.org/features/99/03/2 0/2059255.shtml
So *that's* why Slashdot was such as hot property.
Here's what really bewilders me - If you were to take, say, an E-Machine, which currently reails for about $400, take out the CD-ROM, Hard Drive, USB, Sound Card and Modem, and what do you have? Essentially, a thin client which could retail for about $225-$275. Why don't companies just sell netbootable Linux-on-a-flashram x86 small-form-factoredboxes for ultra cheap? Would it not be the same thing as these $700 thinclients?
...the spokeswoman said the computer was expected to be off line for some periods of time ``as customer feedback is assessed and integrated into the system...''
I love it when marketroids encounter an unexpected directive. They seem to revert to their native dialect, marketspeak. I mean, c'mon - "feedback is assessed and integrated into the system?" What the hell does that even mean? She might as well have said "Beep. Marketshare. Assessment. Issue. Beep."
Some day, we may even need translators just to understand those guys. It'll be like that scene in Star Wars:
Uncle Owen: What I really need is a droid that understands the binary language of my marketing department.
C3PO: Marketroids! Sir -- My first job was programming apologists... very similar to your marketroids. You could say...
Owen: Do you speak technobabble?
C3PO: Of course I can, sir. It's like a second language for me...
Okay, so the whole idea behind a Lin/WinModem is to save the manufacturer money so that in turn save the end user money, right? The article even says that on a 400Mhz computer, 10-15% of performance can be bled off by software modems. So, 400Mhz * 12.5(average)% (I know this is probably all awful math, but bear with me) is 50Mhz. So really, in order to regain that extra 50Mhz is to buy a 450Mhz processor. In Pentium II land, this can be the difference between $200 and $300.
So it boils down to this - I can either buy:
a PII-400 and hardware modem for $300 or a PII-450 and Winmodem for $330
It looks tempting to buy the 450, but remember performance is similar on either machine. The only difference is that on the more expensive machine, it crashes a whole lot more, and you're tied to the OS-flavor-of-the-month (Windows, and now Linux I guess)
Before you go spouting out blatant lies about the situation, perhaps you should check your facts. Slashdot actually posted the story China sentences crackers to death on December 28th, the day *before* rootshell did.
What were you trying to prove? Oh, I see - you were just posting flamebait. Sorry to have interrupted.
Baloney. I didn't get the letter, and yet I'm angry about this situation too. Not because I feel like those who got the letter were entitled to stock, but because of how those who have worked hard have been jerked around - and those who got the letter don't deserve to be jerked around! It was like this -
Redhat: You've worked long and hard, and your sacrifice and willingness to do our dirty work for no reward has paid off! We'd like to offer a small token of our appriciation, just talk to our friend E*Trade about collecting it.
Programmer: wow, thanks - it's good to hear someone appriciates my work. I'll go talk to E*Trade
Progammer(to E*Trade): So, I'm, um, here to see if I can get in on the IPO, like RedHat. Here's my money!
E*Trade: So, you're an experienced investor, right.
Programmer: Uh, well not exactly.
E*Trade: Well, then you are a member of the Bourgeois elite, right?
Programmer: Well, no, that's kind of why I'm here because I value -
E*Trade(Interrupting) WHAT, ARE YOU STUPID? WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT LINUX? YOU'LL JUST LOSE ALL YOUR MONEY ANYWAY YOU FILTHY COMMONER. WE'RE JUST PROTECTING YOU FROM YOUR OWN STUPIDITY.
Of course that's an oversimplification, but basically, Redhat is rewarding coders for being smart and ambitious and naive (in a good Linuxy sort of way) and E*Trade is punishing them for the same qualities. It sucks.
Personaly, I'm most outraged with the way that SEC regulations are designed to keep the rich richer and the poor poorer as is exemplified through this IPO, but that's another post altogether.
I liked the show, and I kind of like the idea of doing a daily five-minute thing, but I'm not exactly sure if it's the best use of time.
I think it would be neat if the Slashdot show was kind of patterned after the NPR show Car Talk. Here's how it could work: The show starts, formalities are dispensed, Taco/Hemos say what they want to say about the past week, etc. Then they start reading through a list of some of the more interesting stories from the past week. In advance, they'll have looked at who posted some interesting (moderated up) replies to the story and contacted that person via email about talking on the show at whatever time the show was recorded. The person could then be called and put on hold until it was their turn to talk. Then that person could read their original post over the phone, and discuss the issue over the phone with the guys. It wouldn't have to be posters either - It could be, for instance, the guy who invented the smallest webserver, or recalled the gif library or Bruce Perens, or Larry Wall, or whoever. You could have two people on the phone at once, debating a topic on the air, whatever.
You could go through anywhere from 3-10 stories, and the show would be, I think, quality. Most importantly, it make the show reader-centric, which is what has made Slashdot so cool in the first place.
That way, you can still have callers, but the show doesn't have to be live, and you can edit out all the silliness that is associated with phones or whatnot, and MEEPT, and stupid callers, and everything else. And, if everyone's busy on a Friday, you could do it on Thursday, and still play it on Saturday. AND, if you were ever at a convention or something, you could do recorded broadcasts from there.
So, in conclusion: Longer! On Satuday! Pre-Taped! Poster-centric!
Powers that be - I humbly submit this for your consideration.
Slashdot Mirror
Quentin is a badass. Breakin' into computers, wasting the school's money, depriving the football team of uniforms. Sounds like my kind of guy. Man, I wish I had the *opportunity* to make those kinds of choices when I was growing up. I could use Quentin to change my grades, and his l33t friend Joey to snag me free warez.
Somebody else mentioned the movie Gattaca, but I just wanted to throw this in: there's a great episode of the Twilight Zone, season 5, called "Number 12 Looks Just Like You," which is really relevant to this conversation. It's about the effects of a society where nobody has any flaws. Anybody else seen this one?
Your opinion follows the same lines of those presented by RMS in an opinion he wrote on the subject. While "killing Microsoft" may seem more immediately gratifying, making them play fair would work much better in the long run.
I am very excited by the possibilities of this technology. Just imagine it: a really good speech recognition system coupled with a really good natural language analyzer coupled with a good speech generator. What do you get? The comm/computer system from Star Trek:TNG. Hell, there's probably enough "Computer Voice" samples of Majel Barrett to at least give the speech generation software a good starting place.
Who needs a Palm Pilot when you can walk down the hall hands free as the briefs you on your next meeting, or allows you to read and compose your mail on the way to work. My hands shake.
My only concern: the people who design this system would need to included Star Trekish terminology and attitude into the list of things the computer could do. Example:
--
"Computer, please replay voice mail message 9 starting at time index 0-mark-9-5."
[computer chimes, message plays]
"Computer, message 9 sounds garbled. Run a level-three diagnostic on message integrity."
[pause]
"Diagnostic complete. Message shows signs of type-1 file corruption."
"Damn it!"
"Error: cannot comply with that directive"
--
If we could just get that far, then I'd be happy. Actually, no that's wrong. If we could just get that far, then invent warp drive, replicators, transporters, inertial dampeners, and holodecks, *then* I'd be happy.
Ross
Given the choice of:
"Software as a service," no "dogmatic commitment" to the Intel platform, and new hardware (a low-cost NC).
vs.
"Software as a bunch of bits," a "somewhat dogmatic commitment" to the Intel platform, and the ability to run on old discarded hardware (a really, really low-cost NC).
I'd choose the latter any day.
IT would be better to turn one of your computers as a router
Not where I live. My router doesn't have to do NAT, since I get real-world IPs. I've got USWest DSL, near Seattle, and I get several dynamic IPs, and they are real IP addresses, not Private NATted addresses. Everything works like I'm a real host on the Internet, for all of my machines. The service is an absolute dream now - real bridging, no NAT, no firewall, just beautiful fast (above advertised speed) service for $50 total cost. I shudder to think that USWest would ever, ever change their policy, but thankfully I can switch to another ISP if I ever have to (Unlike cable!)
I saw the headline, so just to make sure, I tried going to www.n-word.com, and that didn't work, so then I tried www."n-word".com, and that didn't work either. Then, I did a whois lookup, and it said n-word.com wasn't registered. Then, I thought, aha - the N in NAACP stands for National, so maybe they registered national.com, but no, that's National Semiconductor, Inc. What "N-word" could they be possibly be referring to?
:-)
In all seriousness, I don't see what the big deal is. Some people have said that it's hypocritical for Slashdotters to say squatting is bad yet still let the NAACP register domains that "aren't theirs."
Well, I say hogwash. I, for one don't believe organizations have an inherent right to a domain, for reasons like they own a trademark or a copyright. I don't like domain name squatting for the most part, but do I think we should pass a law to outlaw it? No! True, it's not nice to squat a domain away from someone, but considering what other companies do with domains for profit alone, it's kind of nice to see someone squat for good, rather than evil.
Ross
As long as the American regime is still pushing cryptography as something that will let evil terrophiles reign free, I wouldn't hold my breath.
I have to say, that word, terrorphile, is great. I mean, it makes sense when you think of it (one?) as the conglomerated argument against crypto, but it also makes sense when you think of a terrorphile as like this evil maniacal genius with a long mustache who receives a jolt of pleasure each time he does something to invoke terror.
It's the best word since CommuNazi. I suggest we adopt terrorphile as a word to be used to mock those who argue against strong cryptography.
There's also updated packages and x86 emulation software.
Really? I didn't know there was any sort of x86 emulation for Linux on the Mac. Does anybody know more about this? What sort of emulation? Is it just for Linux binaries, or could one boot up Win98? What license is it under? Is it just like ibcs, or something more? If anybody has any more info about this, I'd like to know!
Thanks,
Ross
Dude, you really need to just link to the article. I know you credit David Brin at the bottom, but you really, really need to not do that - just post the link to the original article. Even if you had put a simple 'This article appeared in the June 15th edition of Salon Magazine and was written by David Brin,' at the top; that would have been better than what you did. Because basically, unless you read the entire article, people don't know you didn't write it, and that's one step above plagiarism, but not by much.
Ross
P.S. Unless, that is, you actually are David Brin, in which case you should have made that fact more clear. (Somehow I doubt it)
Could somebody explain to me how (or perhaps why) some of the top-of-the-line Intel-based servers claim to support even more than 4 Gigs of ram? The page for the new IBM Netfinity 8500R, for example claims that it supports "Up to 16GB ECC SDRAM". How is that even possible, since I thought 32-bit architecture made 4 Gigs the max addressable limit, period. Am I wrong? Are they simply selling a capacity nobody can use? This has confused me ever since I first heard about it.
Thanks.
Oh. Dammit, Slashdot is too hard, I'm going back to FidoNet. :-)
Thanks,
Ross
I think all of these ideas are potentially good, but they all have one thing in common: they are all too complicated. Slashdot moderation should be simple and to the point. A percentage system, for example just about quadruples the complexity of the system.
:-) I totally agree that the "previous proposals" you identified are not the best solutions by a long shot.
I do agree, however, with your point #3, (you said 2 twice, everybody makes typos) it would be cool if you could customize Slashdot to a very fine-grained level. But that would be best done with some sort of scripting language (SlashScript?) or something similar that would give you total control over infrequently-selected options. Otherwise, adding 20-30 more User Preferences options is only going to make it more diffucult for newbies, or those who have trouble navigating large amounts of data all at once (such as myself). "My Slashdot" is hard enough as it is.
Good ideas, though, I just don't think we should use them.
I know Rob joked about doing M3 and M4, but I think that with these most recent changes, the game of one-upsmanship(sp?) will only get worse. Here are some alternatives as I see them:
/24 IP block, identifying the IP address and UID of the violator to anybody who tries to get to Slashdot from that range, telling them, "Sorry, somebody in your subnet has broken the rules. The violator was at so-and-so IP address. Have your network administrator find out who they are, and make them stop doing what they're doing."
Part of the problem with DoS-type troll posts, like yesterday's, is that even if you are browsing the article at +2, you'll still see '1 reply beneath your threshold' even for -1 posts. This makes sense if you're reading at +3, and there's a score of 2, 1, or even 0, but think about it: very infrequently is a valid post moderated to -1.
There is so little abuse of this, why not just make it so that if somebody gets moderated down to -1, you don't see it, even as a '1 reply below your threshold'. If you cruise at -1 (which, really, only good moderators and info-gluttons really do), you'll see everything, but that way, even if I'm reading at 0, there is no way I'll see a -1 post that is devoid of merit, but I still could see an 0 Score AC post that could potentially be very worth my while.
That way, we don't have to worry about confusing "meta moderation" or any such other silliness. If moderator abuse is really such an issue, just tighten the moderator guidelines.
BTW, I'm not a big fan of +1 AC posting. I think that +1 AC, along with banning all ACs altogether, will only cause people to start creating junk accounts, posting once, and then abandoning their account, which nobody really wants.
Also, I just wanted to say, I liked someone else's idea of (only for mass violations from one single IP address) banning an entire
I like these ideas simply because they are easily enforceable without modifying the way Slashdot currently is presented to the user (Which is pretty damn well, thank you Mr. Malda!).
What do you guys think?
I suggest that everyone who sent a vulgar letter to Unisys and now regrets it should pick up the phone and send flowers to Cheryl.
...should pick up the phone and send flowers to Mark at Unisys
:)) but do I think Unisys, or anybody who works there deserves our sympathy? No! Perhaps this Cheryl, who, for all I know, is very upset, will quit her job because of this, or at least step back from the situation and realize that there are indeed moral issues involved in choosing an employer.
What an awful, sexist, materialistic idea.
First off, you make it sound as if Unisys is somehow absolved from their morally abhorrent behavior because they're not demanding $5000 from every website. Oh, thank you so much Unisys for allowing me to use a technology that you barely even own. Thank you so for continuing to restrict my freedom, but in such a way that is just acceptable enough to keep the angry hordes at bay.
Second, the notion that women in general are somehow less capable to handle flamage (especially a woman who works for a company whose primary source of income revolves around the Internet) because they are more apt to become emotional is outdated and only serves to propagate negative stereotypes about women. I think we can all agree that if your message had said,
People would be like, "why would we send flowers to a guy?".
I personally didn't flame Unisys, and I think flaming people is a bad idea (well, except maybe you, right now
But you don't even give her that chance. She's just an innocent bystander in the man's world of software businesses. She doesn't think or make any decisions herself, she is only acted upon. Her only possible reaction to the situation is defense. I don't know if you personally know Cheryl, or what, but I think if you do, you would be serving her better by explaining to her why she was flamed, rather than just kissing the proberbial "owwie" and saying "It's alright, the mean men are gone now - look, here's some flowers!"
This is the one you want.
h tml
Aww, the whole joke is ruined.
http://slashdot.org/features/99/03/20/2059255.s
I know of a few truly leet Geocities WHY I USE LINUX AND HERE IS MY DOG'S PICTURE websites...
Funny you should mention that. If memory serves, it would seem that Slashdot already has one page almost exactly like that under its "information umbrealla." Check out http://slashdot.org/features/99/03/2 0/2059255.shtml
So *that's* why Slashdot was such as hot property.
Here's what really bewilders me - If you were to take, say, an E-Machine, which currently reails for about $400, take out the CD-ROM, Hard Drive, USB, Sound Card and Modem, and what do you have? Essentially, a thin client which could retail for about $225-$275. Why don't companies just sell netbootable Linux-on-a-flashram x86 small-form-factoredboxes for ultra cheap? Would it not be the same thing as these $700 thinclients?
You can read about the solutions to last year's problem here:
http://www.ai.mit.edu/extra/icfp-contest/
...the spokeswoman said the computer was expected to be off line for some periods of time ``as customer feedback is assessed and integrated into the system...''
I love it when marketroids encounter an unexpected directive. They seem to revert to their native dialect, marketspeak. I mean, c'mon - "feedback is assessed and integrated into the system?" What the hell does that even mean? She might as well have said "Beep. Marketshare. Assessment. Issue. Beep."
Some day, we may even need translators just to understand those guys. It'll be like that scene in Star Wars:
Uncle Owen: What I really need is a droid that understands the binary language of my marketing department.
C3PO: Marketroids! Sir -- My first job was programming apologists... very similar to your marketroids. You could say...
Owen: Do you speak technobabble?
C3PO: Of course I can, sir. It's like a second language for me...
Yeah, just like that.
Okay, so the whole idea behind a Lin/WinModem is to save the manufacturer money so that in turn save the end user money, right? The article even says that on a 400Mhz computer, 10-15% of performance can be bled off by software modems. So, 400Mhz * 12.5(average)% (I know this is probably all awful math, but bear with me) is 50Mhz. So really, in order to regain that extra 50Mhz is to buy a 450Mhz processor. In Pentium II land, this can be the difference between $200 and $300.
So it boils down to this - I can either buy:
a PII-400 and hardware modem for $300
or
a PII-450 and Winmodem for $330
It looks tempting to buy the 450, but remember performance is similar on either machine. The only difference is that on the more expensive machine, it crashes a whole lot more, and you're tied to the OS-flavor-of-the-month (Windows, and now Linux I guess)
Am I the only person who thinks this way?
>Or, maybe the poster was pointing out that China
>has handed out death penalties for cracking yet
>cracks computers themselves.
Oh. Damn, you're probablly right. I just get all riled up when I think someone's attacking Slashdot. My apologies to the original poster.
Ross
Before you go spouting out blatant lies about the situation, perhaps you should check your facts.
Slashdot actually posted the story China sentences crackers to death on December 28th, the day *before* rootshell did.
What were you trying to prove? Oh, I see - you were just posting flamebait. Sorry to have interrupted.
Ross
Baloney. I didn't get the letter, and yet I'm angry about this situation too. Not because I feel like those who got the letter were entitled to stock, but because of how those who have worked hard have been jerked around - and those who got the letter don't deserve to be jerked around! It was like this -
Redhat: You've worked long and hard, and your sacrifice and willingness to do our dirty work for no reward has paid off! We'd like to offer a small token of our appriciation, just talk to our friend E*Trade about collecting it.
Programmer: wow, thanks - it's good to hear someone appriciates my work. I'll go talk to E*Trade
Progammer(to E*Trade): So, I'm, um, here to see if I can get in on the IPO, like RedHat. Here's my money!
E*Trade: So, you're an experienced investor, right.
Programmer: Uh, well not exactly.
E*Trade: Well, then you are a member of the Bourgeois elite, right?
Programmer: Well, no, that's kind of why I'm here because I value -
E*Trade(Interrupting) WHAT, ARE YOU STUPID? WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT LINUX? YOU'LL JUST LOSE ALL YOUR MONEY ANYWAY YOU FILTHY COMMONER. WE'RE JUST PROTECTING YOU FROM YOUR OWN STUPIDITY.
Of course that's an oversimplification, but basically, Redhat is rewarding coders for being smart and ambitious and naive (in a good Linuxy sort of way) and E*Trade is punishing them for the same qualities. It sucks.
Personaly, I'm most outraged with the way that SEC regulations are designed to keep the rich richer and the poor poorer as is exemplified through this IPO, but that's another post altogether.
I liked the show, and I kind of like the idea of doing a daily five-minute thing, but I'm not exactly sure if it's the best use of time.
I think it would be neat if the Slashdot show was kind of patterned after the NPR show Car Talk. Here's how it could work: The show starts, formalities are dispensed, Taco/Hemos say what they want to say about the past week, etc. Then they start reading through a list of some of the more interesting stories from the past week. In advance, they'll have looked at who posted some interesting (moderated up) replies to the story and contacted that person via email about talking on the show at whatever time the show was recorded. The person could then be called and put on hold until it was their turn to talk. Then that person could read their original post over the phone, and discuss the issue over the phone with the guys. It wouldn't have to be posters either - It could be, for instance, the guy who invented the smallest webserver, or recalled the gif library or Bruce Perens, or Larry Wall, or whoever. You could have two people on the phone at once, debating a topic on the air, whatever.
You could go through anywhere from 3-10 stories, and the show would be, I think, quality. Most importantly, it make the show reader-centric, which is what has made Slashdot so cool in the first place.
That way, you can still have callers, but the show doesn't have to be live, and you can edit out all the silliness that is associated with phones or whatnot, and MEEPT, and stupid callers, and everything else. And, if everyone's busy on a Friday, you could do it on Thursday, and still play it on Saturday. AND, if you were ever at a convention or something, you could do recorded broadcasts from there.
So, in conclusion: Longer! On Satuday! Pre-Taped! Poster-centric!
Powers that be - I humbly submit this for your consideration.