And what's the alternative? The EPA can regulate whatever it wants based on, "Because I feel like it"? "Because I'm the government, so you should trust me"? "Because I said so"?
Are you seriously advocating allowing the EPA to base its regulations on non-science?!
Yeah, sure, the GOP is the anti-science party...riiiiight...
If taxes support the U.S. participation in the Olympics, then it's not unreasonable to require the exclusive network covering them to provide coverage for free to taxpayers.
I hope by your saying "Cue" that you're joking. That 50% "doing nothing" is being refitted, maintained, trained, built, and doing onshore work that supports the Navy. And in the event of a major conflict, that 50% can't be produced out of thin air.
The modern advertising business model was created by professional military psy-ops who were laid off when the cold war ended and they started selling their skills to whoever would pay and using them on anyone and everyone.
That's a very interesting assertion. I've never heard of it before. Do you have any references where I could read more? Also, what about before the Cold War ended?
What you get out of paying taxes that go toward protecting our "amateur" athletes as they travel the world is that when you get real good at speed skating they'll protect you too, free of charge. In return, those athletes pay their taxes, and it goes to things that sometimes benefit you more directly than it benefits them.
Neither of you get free TV content out of the deal.
That's the kind of logic that gets us Obamacare, where you pay for medical care you literally can never require nor desire, and other people pay for your medical care. Neither of you get free medical care out of the deal.
Each generation of these computers just gets more and more transistors. Engineers should stop doing this incremental size-increase crap and just go for the maximum. The incremental approach would appear to cost more money in the long run.
There is another way for Slashdot to die, it could die through doing the same old same old for the same old visitors.
Eh, I think you still don't get it. Consider this: "There is another way for books to die, they could die through doing the same old same old for the same old readers." Yet, books have been around for thousands of years, because they work. They well-fulfill their intended purpose. Radio and movies and TV and online video haven't replaced books, and they never will.
Slashdot is like a book in that it has a simple function: allow people to have reasonably (or comparably) intelligent discussions about topics of interest in a reasonably efficient way. Slashdot needs a redesign in the same way that books need to be redesigned: it doesn't, and they don't. Minor changes can make it more efficient, and that would be great.
Basically, you're begging the question: who says Slashdot needs to change? Dice? How do they know? They just wasted some money on a site they didn't understand--that doesn't mean the site needs to change to suit their needs; that doesn't mean they need to change it to be like their other projects. They are the ones who need to change; they need to learn to understand what Slashdot is, not what they wish it would be.
1. If lack of submissions was the problem, the solution is to go hunt down articles to post until the number of submissions hits critical mass. It's kind of like starting a new FOSS project: the best, most successful projects are the ones where the creator just does it, and after the project hits a critical mass, it attracts other people, and finally becomes self-sustaining. The projects that try to get people before code (or in this case, content) usually go nowhere, unless there's capital involved.
2. The third time might be the charm, but I'm not sure the time is ripe yet. That Dice financial report seemed to indicate Slashdot was "reduced to zero", but here it is still going, and they're still talking about continuing to work on it. The thing is, as you know, geeks are lazy. I don't think enough people will move on from Slashdot until Dice really kills it, either by pulling the plug or closing the "classic" UI. But if (when?) that happens, people will want an alternative, and they'll start looking for one. I think it's kind of like the Google Reader situation: people saw the handwriting on the wall, and then they read the official announcement, but until it actually closed down, the mass exodus was just a trickle. So my suggestion here is to get ready to relaunch Technocrat, and especially prepare a few people who would be committed to hunting down content rather than wait for submissions, but don't flip the switch until Slashdot actually flatlines.
I'm afraid I can't answer this, since I'm not part of the design team. I will ask them to share their thoughts on design choices, but I can't promise anything.
And here, dear reader, we see why the very existence of "design teams" is a problem. If Slashdot had originally been made by a "design team," we wouldn't even be here today. Designers should never be in charge.
The hammer quite a bit. The modern hammers with sprung steel heads, claws (and other attachments) and ergonomic handles especially those designed to mitigate RSI have in fact changed significantly.
You missed the point. Those are evolutionary changes. The basic "UI" of a hammer is the same.
Sadly, I'm afraid I may disagree about throwing a fit. I dislike childishness as much as you, but when a product or service "goes corporate," the new people in charge are so narcissistic that it seems like they are simply incapable of grokking that the changes they want to make need to be abandoned altogether. They can't comprehend that their pet project that they've spent months working on is and always will be inferior to what already exists. They can't comprehend that an option exists other than replacing what exists with their precious. If you said to them, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," they would give you an empty stare in return, and then unpause and keep doing the same thing they've been doing.
So sometimes I think that the only thing that can get through to these corporate bozos is being as loud and obnoxious as possible. It still probably won't work, but it's the only thing that has a chance.
...What does that even mean? Do you even hear yourself? What is it with constantly attaching genital slang to every other word?
Besides, I'll never understand using genital slang to denigrate people. When I hear a guy call someone a dick, I can't help but wonder, "Is something wrong with his penis? Doesn't he like his own penis? Shouldn't he think of his penis in a positive way? Shouldn't it be like a compliment? Or is he broadcasting his very personal medical problem to the world?"
Which is the problem with religions, they require that you can't actually think for yourself.
That's what would be called a generalization, a logical fallacy. Not to mention a false dilemma: plenty of people think for themselves and are religious. But according to you, I can't think for myself, so what I just said must be irrational, parroted babble. I guess I should be killed.
I agree with most of what you said, and I hope it's modded up.
I don't agree about abortion being mostly socio-economic--at least, not from many pro-life perspectives. I can call something a crime and not join the police, but that doesn't make me a hypocrite. Besides, how do you know what pro-life people are or are not doing to help needy mothers? That's just a generalization, not an argument.
Slashdot Mirror
And what's the alternative? The EPA can regulate whatever it wants based on, "Because I feel like it"? "Because I'm the government, so you should trust me"? "Because I said so"?
Are you seriously advocating allowing the EPA to base its regulations on non-science?!
Yeah, sure, the GOP is the anti-science party...riiiiight...
Hypocrite.
Who would use GPS to navigate inside a parking garage?
If taxes support the U.S. participation in the Olympics, then it's not unreasonable to require the exclusive network covering them to provide coverage for free to taxpayers.
I hope by your saying "Cue" that you're joking. That 50% "doing nothing" is being refitted, maintained, trained, built, and doing onshore work that supports the Navy. And in the event of a major conflict, that 50% can't be produced out of thin air.
Capitalism is doomed to decay into an extreme, unless there is a way to punish people for being jerks.
You could say the same for government, but at least capitalism doesn't put people into power by law, permanently.
Who funds the IOC? Who funds the OC in each participating nation?
The modern advertising business model was created by professional military psy-ops who were laid off when the cold war ended and they started selling their skills to whoever would pay and using them on anyone and everyone.
That's a very interesting assertion. I've never heard of it before. Do you have any references where I could read more? Also, what about before the Cold War ended?
What you get out of paying taxes that go toward protecting our "amateur" athletes as they travel the world is that when you get real good at speed skating they'll protect you too, free of charge. In return, those athletes pay their taxes, and it goes to things that sometimes benefit you more directly than it benefits them.
Neither of you get free TV content out of the deal.
That's the kind of logic that gets us Obamacare, where you pay for medical care you literally can never require nor desire, and other people pay for your medical care. Neither of you get free medical care out of the deal.
Does the USOC get any taxpayer money?
If so, U.S. citizens have already paid to watch the U.S. teams compete.
Each generation of these computers just gets more and more transistors. Engineers should stop doing this incremental size-increase crap and just go for the maximum. The incremental approach would appear to cost more money in the long run.
We could plant merlot grapes in Norway or in the Sahara so they
would be ready when the climate changes to favor them.
Yeah...we could plant grapes in the desert so that, someday, when it's not a desert anymore, the grapes will be ready...
This is the kind of "thinking" that alarmists do. "We have to plant the grapes NOW so that they'll be ready in time for the climate disaster!"
Meanwhile, life goes on. The sad part is how much time and money is wasted on ideas like this that could actually be doing some good instead.
Wait...you mean...APK was right?!
Why are we still writing text-based text?
Why are we still writing text-based communication?
Why are we still using languages with words and grammar and syntax?
Why aren't we communicating with pictures?
Why aren't we communicating with thoughts?
Why was this story posted on Slashdot?
There is another way for Slashdot to die, it could die through doing the same old same old for the same old visitors.
Eh, I think you still don't get it. Consider this: "There is another way for books to die, they could die through doing the same old same old for the same old readers." Yet, books have been around for thousands of years, because they work. They well-fulfill their intended purpose. Radio and movies and TV and online video haven't replaced books, and they never will.
Slashdot is like a book in that it has a simple function: allow people to have reasonably (or comparably) intelligent discussions about topics of interest in a reasonably efficient way. Slashdot needs a redesign in the same way that books need to be redesigned: it doesn't, and they don't. Minor changes can make it more efficient, and that would be great.
Basically, you're begging the question: who says Slashdot needs to change? Dice? How do they know? They just wasted some money on a site they didn't understand--that doesn't mean the site needs to change to suit their needs; that doesn't mean they need to change it to be like their other projects. They are the ones who need to change; they need to learn to understand what Slashdot is, not what they wish it would be.
Don't like complaints about beta? Shut up and go, or stop whining. You're simply polluting the sigs with you[sic] idiocy.
The corporate bozos clearly don't respond to intelligent, rational discussion. Loud protesting is our only hope.
Be Switzerland if you want, but what will you do when there's no Slashdot left? Whose side are you on, anyway?
Thanks for posting, Bruce. Here are my two cents:
1. If lack of submissions was the problem, the solution is to go hunt down articles to post until the number of submissions hits critical mass. It's kind of like starting a new FOSS project: the best, most successful projects are the ones where the creator just does it, and after the project hits a critical mass, it attracts other people, and finally becomes self-sustaining. The projects that try to get people before code (or in this case, content) usually go nowhere, unless there's capital involved.
2. The third time might be the charm, but I'm not sure the time is ripe yet. That Dice financial report seemed to indicate Slashdot was "reduced to zero", but here it is still going, and they're still talking about continuing to work on it. The thing is, as you know, geeks are lazy. I don't think enough people will move on from Slashdot until Dice really kills it, either by pulling the plug or closing the "classic" UI. But if (when?) that happens, people will want an alternative, and they'll start looking for one. I think it's kind of like the Google Reader situation: people saw the handwriting on the wall, and then they read the official announcement, but until it actually closed down, the mass exodus was just a trickle. So my suggestion here is to get ready to relaunch Technocrat, and especially prepare a few people who would be committed to hunting down content rather than wait for submissions, but don't flip the switch until Slashdot actually flatlines.
I'm afraid I can't answer this, since I'm not part of the design team. I will ask them to share their thoughts on design choices, but I can't promise anything.
And here, dear reader, we see why the very existence of "design teams" is a problem. If Slashdot had originally been made by a "design team," we wouldn't even be here today. Designers should never be in charge.
I don't code and I don't study user interface design, so I'm not qualified to offer reasons why the beta is bad. I'm just a user.
"I don't cook and I don't go to culinary school, so I'm not qualified to offer reasons why the food is bad. I'm just an eater."
Please, stop encouraging them to ignore us. No one is more qualified to say why something is bad than the person who uses it!
The hammer quite a bit. The modern hammers with sprung steel heads, claws (and other attachments) and ergonomic handles especially those designed to mitigate RSI have in fact changed significantly.
You missed the point. Those are evolutionary changes. The basic "UI" of a hammer is the same.
Sadly, I'm afraid I may disagree about throwing a fit. I dislike childishness as much as you, but when a product or service "goes corporate," the new people in charge are so narcissistic that it seems like they are simply incapable of grokking that the changes they want to make need to be abandoned altogether. They can't comprehend that their pet project that they've spent months working on is and always will be inferior to what already exists. They can't comprehend that an option exists other than replacing what exists with their precious. If you said to them, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," they would give you an empty stare in return, and then unpause and keep doing the same thing they've been doing.
So sometimes I think that the only thing that can get through to these corporate bozos is being as loud and obnoxious as possible. It still probably won't work, but it's the only thing that has a chance.
dickpunch
...What does that even mean? Do you even hear yourself? What is it with constantly attaching genital slang to every other word?
Besides, I'll never understand using genital slang to denigrate people. When I hear a guy call someone a dick, I can't help but wonder, "Is something wrong with his penis? Doesn't he like his own penis? Shouldn't he think of his penis in a positive way? Shouldn't it be like a compliment? Or is he broadcasting his very personal medical problem to the world?"
I disagree. People do single out Christianity above other religions. They're afraid to criticize some other religions. Wouldn't want to offend them.
why religious people should be killed
...Do you comprehend what you just said?
Which is the problem with religions, they require that you can't actually think for yourself.
That's what would be called a generalization, a logical fallacy. Not to mention a false dilemma: plenty of people think for themselves and are religious. But according to you, I can't think for myself, so what I just said must be irrational, parroted babble. I guess I should be killed.
And they call Christians intolerant bigots.
I agree with most of what you said, and I hope it's modded up.
I don't agree about abortion being mostly socio-economic--at least, not from many pro-life perspectives. I can call something a crime and not join the police, but that doesn't make me a hypocrite. Besides, how do you know what pro-life people are or are not doing to help needy mothers? That's just a generalization, not an argument.