Ummm... Ok, nice segue into a major work of misdirection, there. I don't agree or disagree with you. As I said originally, I think an argument over media bias could be made either way (you have at least proven 1/2 of that contention).
It is invalid to make comparason of individual cases of media coverage, as if it is some zero sum game where every story has the unreported counter-story that subtracts from the total.
You're right, and this is part of why the whole list is bunk. It's a stunt (a leftist stunt, BTW).
You see the media as liberal leaning...
No, I don't, and I never said that I did. You are categorizing me to elevate your own self-worth. Everyone else is "sad" in your world, part of the "drooling masses", just sheep being led to the slaughter. Enlighten us, O Wise One! Impart your long-winded wisdom upon us!
G.W. Bush kills children, and I don't like it. (if you get my meaning.)
WTF? Your meaning? Sure, you've devolved into incoherant ranting, that's what.
Oh, let's see. Ok: "Kerry killed babies, raped women and burned villages and admitted to it before congress. Why isn't the press all over this? Where is the media blitz about it?" Hmph.
After five years of making thoughtful and informed posts, I have some karma to burn. I'll regret having posted this when I see that "-5 Troll" beside it later today -- but I figure, a guy's got a right to let off some steam.
I don't think you have anything to worry about. It looks like only the Bush supporters are getting modded down in this thread.
My point is that the list is partisan (on the left). Your take is that they were criticizing conservatives because they were in power. But if you look at the list from 2000, when the dems were in power, there are NO articles criticizing any democrats, but the current list has 7 articles criticizing specific conservative or republican politicians.
Ergo, it's *not* balanced, it *is* left-leaning. Get it?
It's not about left or right, but who's in power and who isn't.
Hmmm... I wonder... Ok, since the dems were in power in 2000, there should be lots of stories from the 2000 censored list about how they were abusing their power, let me just check... the 2000 list. Nope. Not a one. Your theory is a bust.
It is impossible to report an "unbiased story" if the facts themselves are biased.
This makes my point very well. The list itself is obviously left-leaning.
Criticizing the fact that 7 of the stories target "bad-acting republicans" as simply coincidence or "not unreasonable" is pretty disingenious; the implication is that democrats can do no wrong.
I wasn't really getting into the idea of whether the media in general is liberal or not, as you seem to imply. I think a case could be argued either way.
Comparisons often center on HOW things are reported rather than WHAT is reported. For instance, the killing of Matthew Shepard by 2 homophobes in Laramie, WY recieved a huge amount of national media coverage. Contrast this to the case of 2 homosexuals from California that kidnapped, raped, and killed a 14-year-old boy that almost no one heard about. Is this biased reporting? Was the 2nd case "censored" by the media?
I agree that conservatives generally would stand up in favor of personal freedom and civil liberties (isn't that redundant?), and I think most support reasonable environmental protections (I'm assuming most liberals don't go as far left as ALF and Earth First!).
I think the perception that the list of stories is "left leaning" has as much to do with the lean of the stories themselves as the subject matter.
Ignoring whether the stories have any bias or agenda, however, let's look at the list:
3 of the stories mention republicans by name, describing unflattering activity.
7 of the stories criticize activities by the US government, linking republicans to the activity.
The #1 story is about "Wealth Inequality".
There are many phrases in the list identified with a leftist agenda: "Bush Administration Censors...", "Threatens Intellectual Freedom...", "...Represses Labor Unions...".
The stories are pretty much ALL inflammatory, and obviously slanted. Like in story #7: "Bush has the capability to turn the courts over to ultra right-wing ideologues." Hmmm... possibly left leaning.
You may or may not agree that some of these issues deserve more discussion in the mainstream media. I had heard most of these stories before I saw the list, so I don't think any in way they were censored, so much as they were uninteresting and/or overblown.
Still, let's call a spade a spade. Left-leaning? Well, yea.
There is nothing moderate about the GOP. They are racist (anti-gay), ignorant (theist)
Funny, I didn't know homosexuality was associated with race. Can you be gay and mixed race, or only bisexual?
I see that we have also now accepted that anyone with a belief in god is obviously ignorant - maybe now people will stop quoting Einstein like he was some genius or something.
My judgements are strickly personal opinion. If you want to check out the experiences that lead to my conclusions (YMMV), check out a few downloads from Etree's Bittorrents, and compare them to the crap available on sugarmegs. You can even find music converted from the same sources.
Comparing lossless to lossy compression isn't fair, so do what I do and convert the lossless stuff to MP3 for your favorite portable (I burn them to CDRW's which play on everything I've got).
Except that WMA is the *worst* music compression format ever, bar none (assuming, that is, you have ears).
Converting a song to WMA is kind of like bootlegging a concert by sitting in the nosebleed section of a coliseum and recording with a palm-sized dictaphone with a built-in mic. Sure it sounds a *little* like the music. But who would want to listen to it. Much less *pay* for it.
I'd rather listen to my dad play Glenn Miller Orchestra tunes on a kazoo than be subjected to anything encoded in WMA.
Don't even get me started on all that "Please wait while we contact the server and check out your license to play this song..." crap that goes in Windows Media Player.
If this is going to be the competition for iTunes, they've got nothing to worry about.
It worked so well, maybe next time they'll convince the voter to throw out the government that supports free speech... then the ones that support women's sufferage... then the ones that are against islamic law...
"Lock your door" is always good advice, of course. But you don't want to present an attractive target either.
What worked for me: Paper towels on the windows and newspapers and peanut shells all over the floor. Sure, it was a mess, but nobody ever noticed that there was anything worth stealing in there.
And don't worry about what the chicks will think - if they're drunk enough to go into your dorm room at all, they're not going to notice your decor.
If you think these companies are going to bend, you've got another thing coming.
You sound like Biff: "Make like a tree, and get out of here". If I had cane, I'd bop you in the head with it, and say "You sound like an idiot when you say it wrong."
It s/b: "If you think blah blah blah, you've got another think coming."
Normally I would agree with you. However the original poster metioned that he was passing flags to the emerge command to compile things the way he wanted it, and forced a "masked" package to install.
In portage, some packages are masked because they are development versions, and not ready for prime time. So, the guy was already using some advanced (and obscure) techniques, not recommended for "newbies", then complaining because things got screwed up.
If he had been using emerge the "easy" way, those problems would not have happened.
Then you did it wrong. Don't just pass flags in when you install unless you want them temporarily. Instead, add them to make.config like you're supposed to, and they'll be there when up upgrade.
And why did you do a
emerge lynx
without doing a
emerge -p lynx
first. And how the hell do you "accidentally" unmask a package?
You must be purposefully trying to spread FUD about Gentoo to make that kind of complaint about portage.
Wrong. Copyright is a *contract*, just like a mortgage loan. When Walt created Mickey, and invoked his copyright, the deal was that ownership would revert to "public domain" (me) when the copyright expired.
What if your mortgage company sent a letter after you had paid off the loan saying "You never owned your house in the first place, so we've decided to keep it for 20 more years!". "Oh, and we paid off some congressmen to make it OK for us to do that. Your rent will be the same as your old mortgage payment."
(yes, I said steal, let go of your state of denial, nerd)
And how, exactly, is the "Sony Bono copyright extension act" *not* stealing. See, copyright is a deal (see the constitution) where the people (the folks who purportedly authorize government intrusion, BTW) allow artists to maintain a monopoly on their works for a certain period of time. At the end of that time, that work becomes public domain. That is, it belongs to everyone. The artist is compensated.
So, for example, Walt Disney creates Mickey Mouse and produces some cartoons. He is provided a monopoly to make money from that work, and in return it will belong to everyone in 2001. Well, Walt was WELL compensated for producing it, and now he's dead, and Mickey should be ours.
Instead, Eisner buys a few congressmen, and they steal Mickey from us! Mickey Mouse is a cultural icon. He's part of the American consciousness.
Lots of other stuff was stolen from us, too. A lot of it are things that the corporations can't make money on, but they're like "hey, we can't just give away our assets", so it will sit in a vault and the tape or film or whatever it's on will deteriorate until it's gone forever.
This is actually closer to the real definition of stealing, because we are deprived forever of the item, not just an opportunity to make money from it, not just an exclusive right to make copies.
So we complain, we try to point out to them why they are wrong, but they just ignore us. So, we just ignore them, too. We just turn our backs on the bastards that have stolen our culture and our heritage and are trying to take everything else away from us, too. We turn our backs and just say "Fuck you. We're going to do our own thing". We're going to take our country back, one way or another. So you just keep taking money from the traitors that are exploiting us, and sending our jobs over seas, and leading us down the road to a litigation-based economy (how sustainable is that?). You take their money, and pass the laws they want, and we will ignore you more and more. Until your laws don't matter to anyone anymore, and you become irrelevant.
I can definately see the utility in having those keys, and you've pointed out some good usefulness for them.
I spend more time on command lines and doing text editing, though, and need typing speed. I've tried other keyboards, but this one is by far the fastest (for me).
I kind of liked the split-board one integrated into the chair, too. I could definately get used to that. Out of my price range, tho.
Sorry, but you must be thinking of a different keyboard - mine has a plastic frame, not metal (although it is pretty heavy, and would do plenty of damage as a blunt instrument).
Besides, I don't use them at work. I use this crappy Dell "quiet key" keyboard. I can't type as fast on it, though.
And no, I don't think I'm better than you. But I do use a better keyboard. So does my wife. She won't use any other keyboard after trying out that old IBM. And all she uses it for is email and Dreamweaver.
I still use the IBM clackety-clack keyboards almost exclusively (AT-style, though). Best keyboard ever made, IMHO. And I do just fine without the extra "Windows keys", thank you very much.
No problem when they start getting dirty, I just pop it in the dishwasher for a cycle. Comes out nice and clean. Leave it out to dry for a couple of days and it works fine.
I've tried that with other keyboards, too, but most of them don't survive it.
You've obviously heard more of Weird Al's songs than me, so I defer to your opinion. I did check out "The Saga Begins", and you're right that it falls into the same category as the JibJab song - the subject of the parody is obviously not the original song.
Thank you, but I'm not the typical/. reader who posts about things he has no clue about.
Slashdot Mirror
It is invalid to make comparason of individual cases of media coverage, as if it is some zero sum game where every story has the unreported counter-story that subtracts from the total.
You're right, and this is part of why the whole list is bunk. It's a stunt (a leftist stunt, BTW).
You see the media as liberal leaning...
No, I don't, and I never said that I did. You are categorizing me to elevate your own self-worth. Everyone else is "sad" in your world, part of the "drooling masses", just sheep being led to the slaughter. Enlighten us, O Wise One! Impart your long-winded wisdom upon us!
G.W. Bush kills children, and I don't like it. (if you get my meaning.)
WTF? Your meaning? Sure, you've devolved into incoherant ranting, that's what.
Oh, let's see. Ok: "Kerry killed babies, raped women and burned villages and admitted to it before congress. Why isn't the press all over this? Where is the media blitz about it?" Hmph.
Shit. Why did I bother replying to this?
I don't think you have anything to worry about. It looks like only the Bush supporters are getting modded down in this thread.
Rant away! Lots of + mods for liberals today!
The trouble with you Is the trouble with me. Got two good eyes But we still don't see. -- Robert Hunter, "Workingman's Dead"
Ergo, it's *not* balanced, it *is* left-leaning. Get it?
Hmmm... I wonder... Ok, since the dems were in power in 2000, there should be lots of stories from the 2000 censored list about how they were abusing their power, let me just check... the 2000 list. Nope. Not a one. Your theory is a bust.
This makes my point very well. The list itself is obviously left-leaning.
Criticizing the fact that 7 of the stories target "bad-acting republicans" as simply coincidence or "not unreasonable" is pretty disingenious; the implication is that democrats can do no wrong.
I wasn't really getting into the idea of whether the media in general is liberal or not, as you seem to imply. I think a case could be argued either way.
Comparisons often center on HOW things are reported rather than WHAT is reported. For instance, the killing of Matthew Shepard by 2 homophobes in Laramie, WY recieved a huge amount of national media coverage. Contrast this to the case of 2 homosexuals from California that kidnapped, raped, and killed a 14-year-old boy that almost no one heard about. Is this biased reporting? Was the 2nd case "censored" by the media?
I think the perception that the list of stories is "left leaning" has as much to do with the lean of the stories themselves as the subject matter.
Ignoring whether the stories have any bias or agenda, however, let's look at the list:
There are many phrases in the list identified with a leftist agenda: "Bush Administration Censors...", "Threatens Intellectual Freedom...", "...Represses Labor Unions...".
The stories are pretty much ALL inflammatory, and obviously slanted. Like in story #7: "Bush has the capability to turn the courts over to ultra right-wing ideologues." Hmmm... possibly left leaning.
You may or may not agree that some of these issues deserve more discussion in the mainstream media. I had heard most of these stories before I saw the list, so I don't think any in way they were censored, so much as they were uninteresting and/or overblown.
Still, let's call a spade a spade. Left-leaning? Well, yea.
Funny, I didn't know homosexuality was associated with race. Can you be gay and mixed race, or only bisexual?
I see that we have also now accepted that anyone with a belief in god is obviously ignorant - maybe now people will stop quoting Einstein like he was some genius or something.
Thanks for edumacating me about all this.
Comparing lossless to lossy compression isn't fair, so do what I do and convert the lossless stuff to MP3 for your favorite portable (I burn them to CDRW's which play on everything I've got).
Converting a song to WMA is kind of like bootlegging a concert by sitting in the nosebleed section of a coliseum and recording with a palm-sized dictaphone with a built-in mic. Sure it sounds a *little* like the music. But who would want to listen to it. Much less *pay* for it.
I'd rather listen to my dad play Glenn Miller Orchestra tunes on a kazoo than be subjected to anything encoded in WMA.
Don't even get me started on all that "Please wait while we contact the server and check out your license to play this song..." crap that goes in Windows Media Player.
If this is going to be the competition for iTunes, they've got nothing to worry about.
It worked so well, maybe next time they'll convince the voter to throw out the government that supports free speech... then the ones that support women's sufferage... then the ones that are against islamic law...
Not funny. I beleive that would be "In My Arrogant Opinion".
woot.
What worked for me: Paper towels on the windows and newspapers and peanut shells all over the floor. Sure, it was a mess, but nobody ever noticed that there was anything worth stealing in there.
And don't worry about what the chicks will think - if they're drunk enough to go into your dorm room at all, they're not going to notice your decor.
Correction: According to "Automatic Update", it will be between 78 and 223 MB.
You sound like Biff: "Make like a tree, and get out of here". If I had cane, I'd bop you in the head with it, and say "You sound like an idiot when you say it wrong."
It s/b: "If you think blah blah blah, you've got another think coming."
Geez! I *hate* that.
In portage, some packages are masked because they are development versions, and not ready for prime time. So, the guy was already using some advanced (and obscure) techniques, not recommended for "newbies", then complaining because things got screwed up.
If he had been using emerge the "easy" way, those problems would not have happened.
And why did you do a
without doing a first. And how the hell do you "accidentally" unmask a package?You must be purposefully trying to spread FUD about Gentoo to make that kind of complaint about portage.
Wrong. Copyright is a *contract*, just like a mortgage loan. When Walt created Mickey, and invoked his copyright, the deal was that ownership would revert to "public domain" (me) when the copyright expired.
What if your mortgage company sent a letter after you had paid off the loan saying "You never owned your house in the first place, so we've decided to keep it for 20 more years!". "Oh, and we paid off some congressmen to make it OK for us to do that. Your rent will be the same as your old mortgage payment."
And how, exactly, is the "Sony Bono copyright extension act" *not* stealing. See, copyright is a deal (see the constitution) where the people (the folks who purportedly authorize government intrusion, BTW) allow artists to maintain a monopoly on their works for a certain period of time. At the end of that time, that work becomes public domain. That is, it belongs to everyone. The artist is compensated.
So, for example, Walt Disney creates Mickey Mouse and produces some cartoons. He is provided a monopoly to make money from that work, and in return it will belong to everyone in 2001. Well, Walt was WELL compensated for producing it, and now he's dead, and Mickey should be ours.
Instead, Eisner buys a few congressmen, and they steal Mickey from us! Mickey Mouse is a cultural icon. He's part of the American consciousness.
Lots of other stuff was stolen from us, too. A lot of it are things that the corporations can't make money on, but they're like "hey, we can't just give away our assets", so it will sit in a vault and the tape or film or whatever it's on will deteriorate until it's gone forever.
This is actually closer to the real definition of stealing, because we are deprived forever of the item, not just an opportunity to make money from it, not just an exclusive right to make copies.
So we complain, we try to point out to them why they are wrong, but they just ignore us. So, we just ignore them, too. We just turn our backs on the bastards that have stolen our culture and our heritage and are trying to take everything else away from us, too. We turn our backs and just say "Fuck you. We're going to do our own thing". We're going to take our country back, one way or another. So you just keep taking money from the traitors that are exploiting us, and sending our jobs over seas, and leading us down the road to a litigation-based economy (how sustainable is that?). You take their money, and pass the laws they want, and we will ignore you more and more. Until your laws don't matter to anyone anymore, and you become irrelevant.
They do!
I can definately see the utility in having those keys, and you've pointed out some good usefulness for them.
I spend more time on command lines and doing text editing, though, and need typing speed. I've tried other keyboards, but this one is by far the fastest (for me).
I kind of liked the split-board one integrated into the chair, too. I could definately get used to that. Out of my price range, tho.
Besides, I don't use them at work. I use this crappy Dell "quiet key" keyboard. I can't type as fast on it, though.
And no, I don't think I'm better than you. But I do use a better keyboard. So does my wife. She won't use any other keyboard after trying out that old IBM. And all she uses it for is email and Dreamweaver.
No problem when they start getting dirty, I just pop it in the dishwasher for a cycle. Comes out nice and clean. Leave it out to dry for a couple of days and it works fine.
I've tried that with other keyboards, too, but most of them don't survive it.
Thank you, but I'm not the typical /. reader who posts about things he has no clue about.
I see, well, I sometimes am!!
Mr. Moore? Is that you?