I'd like to have more faith in people as well, but let's face it, controversy drives hits and that, unfortunately, is what it is all about today. Why else would Jon Katz write for Slashdot, for example? He's good at polarizing people and whipping them into a foaming frenzy. That equals more hits, pageviews, etc.
The only reason I read Slashdot is for the discussion on the less controversial subjects. Linux vs. Windows, PC vs. Apple, etc. will inevitably turn into a debate over political ideology, so I just ignore those articles. A lot of the sci/tech weblogs seem to do a better job on news than Slashdot these days, but then again, there is usually no forum for discussion.
Is it just me or do Slashdot stories seem to be getting more tabloidish? Too bad such junk sells!
Yes, folks the reason Netscape's browsers suck is all Microsoft's fault. No offence to anyone, but everytime I read a comment like this it makes me think of those militia wackos and their "new world order" conspiracy.
"But as a consumer brand Netscape is defined by the browser. With Communicator 2000 in the next couple of months also including some of the goodies AOL has been keeping on its secret list, the Netscape brand is going to be back with a bang."
Err, could you elaborate on this? We need facts please, otherwise it is just vaporware promises.
I can't see Netscape winning back the browser wars. They have just pissed their market share away and haven't made much of an effort to remain competitive. Maybe Mozilla can change this, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I'd rather wait as long as it takes for Blizzard to release a bug free (mostly), well playtested game. I've spent too much money on games that were poorly designed and implemented because they were rushed to market to make a quick buck.
Blizzard gets a lot of loyalty from me because I don't have to guess if their games will be good or not. They always are because they take the time to do things right.
I wish you could say the same for other software companies, who shall remain nameless!
Get a fast, compact browser up and running first. I just want to surf the web fast and I don't need all of that other crap since I use other programs for e-mail and newsgroups anyway.
I think the problem is that most people are blinded by flash and glitz. They think that a program is better just because it has a lot of fancy features, even though they won't use them anyway. Sheer ignorance.
If Mozilla wants to compete, get the basic browser working FIRST, worry about all of the gewgaws later. If they do so, they'll have my loyalty.
"Very true, but MS does their damndest to make sure everyone uses their propriatary extensions and not standards."
Uh, how, pray tell, can they do that?!? It is up to the person writing the HTML. I'm working on my first web page and I want it to look good on ANY browser. I just want it to be compliant with the W3C standards. If your browser isn't compliant, than switch to one that does. . .
"No, I was simply saying that any one company controling the browser market would be a Very Bad Thing. The popular analogy is, what if a single company owned the patents on the printing press?"
Nonsense. There are plenty of other browser options on the market, NS, Opera, Lynx and many others. Microsoft is not putting a gun to anyone's head to use IE. (I use NS 4.08 BTW)
Not surprisingly, some of the questions were stupid and hostile (no surprise, this IS Slashdot after all) but most seemed reasonable to me.
Jeez, if the guy didn't want to answer any questions he shouldn't have agreed to it in the first place. Personally, I'd like to see Q and A from less controversial characters (especially those who just seem to be media whores), because we would get better thought out questions and better thought out answers. Just my 2 cents.
I've enjoyed most of the Q and As up to now, but it shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone how this turned out given this guy's attitude. Let's not waste time on such people in the future.
Yes, It is just so they can pump more ads onto your screen and get more gross hits. That's why I almost never read CNET or ZDNET. Takes too damn long to download their pages and I don't think it is good to reward rampant commercialism and bad web design with hits. If I do, I turn the images off, which unfortunately defeats the purpose of having a graphical web browser!
I'm not knowledgeable enough to build my own K7 based system. I want to support AMD to keep competition on Intel and I have been waiting months to shell out the money for an K7 based system. I keep waiting because of all of the talk about motherboard problems. Or is just this FUD?
I'm going to have to buy a prebuilt system. I want it to be a K7. The problem is that the better known companies like Compaq and Gateway 2000 have dumped AMD products for Intel (correct me if I'm mistaken). Can anyone suggest a reliable manufacturer of prebuilt K7 systems?
This is the classic westerner's view of the world.
"I'm doing great, so everyone else in the world must be too!" What rubbish. The vast majority of humans live in desperate poverty and misery and overpopulation is a major factor. Try working in a third world sweatshop for 20 cents an hour. My guess is you won't enjoy it.
"Combined, we find that people will always be looking for a way to build a better mouse trap, or, in this case, get more use out of less copper, find different ways to grow more livestock, etc. As world population grows, there are many more consumers who are looking for options, and the entrepeneur wins."
I disagree. Natural resources are still finite, not infinite (at least on Earth). Technology may solve all of our problems eventually, but I'm not betting on it. Technology often has unforseen side effects that prove to be destructive.
I think the original article is fallacious in the extreme. Most studies show the population RATE decreasing over time, but the population is not likely to level off until 10 billion or so.
Don't forget, just because you read it on Slashdot doesn't mean it is true!
I realize that this article was tagged as "humor" but come on, cut us some slack here! I don't need a woman to cook my meals, rub my shoulders, or run my bathwater. I'm an adult, thank you, I can do all of those things myself. This article makes me think that all geeks are supposed to want a surrogate mother instead of a girlfriend. Maybe insecure guys do; I don't!
I'm far from politically correct, but I think if I was a female Slashdot reader I'd be more than a little bit offended by this article.
Some simple advice that works wonders:
1. Find someone with common interests. This is very important over the long haul because you'll have more stuff to do together, talk about, etc. If you don't have anything in common it probably won't last because someone will get bored. I'd rather be with someone that I can talk geeky stuff with.
2. Don't be taken in by appearances. I do agree with that part of the article. And no, you shouldn't treat women as walking sex objects!
3. Be yourself!!! Let that be your mantra! If you accept who you are others will too. If you try to be someone that you are not, than any following relationships will be based on dishonesty and that WILL leads to disaster. Don't play games.
This works well for me. But, if you are a guy and you let your penis or testosterone level run your life, maybe it won't!
8 US Senators are space aliens! Giant mantises destroy Brazilian village! Satan emerges from oil well fire in Russia! B-17 bomber found on the moon!
And how could we forget the infamous "Batboy"!
No, I'm not making this up. These were actual articles and quite frankly, I'm just not that creative! The Onion is OK, but I get a little tired of its "tee hee, look how clever and cynical we are!" attitude. Its been done to death. To me, the Weekly World News is a hell of a lot more entertaining.
"topic drift: One thing I'd like to see is Karma adjusted by number of posts. People who gain karma by simply posting a whole damn lot, some fraction of which gains them points, should not have the same reputation as people who post once or twice a week, but consistently get moderated up"
I agree wholeheartedly. It is preferable that quality posts take precedence over quantity. I often see the same few people posting the same basic posts over and over. I'd prefer a wider variety of informed opinions.
Also, I think that "funny" posts should not increase points. What is funny to one person may be completely stupid to another. This would not be a problem, but half of the posts kicked up to two points seem to be the same type of lame humor. I prefer information to supposed "humor".
Thought I might get some insightful commentary on Open Source (which I am no expert on). Instead we get the usual marxism/socialism/capitalism is good/evil/whatever political brouhaha.
Is there ANY way to keep a discussion on Open Source from disintigrating into an argument over systems of government? Anytime such a debate becomes polarized through personal politics there is little to be learned.
I don't intend this to be flamebait, but I wonder if the positive attention from Jane's is being treated as some sort of external validation for a lot of Slashdot readers.
Cringley wrote,
"Maybe this was in the mind of the folks at Jane's , the British publishers of defense information who through this week their cyber terrorism research at the ners who read Slashdot, hoping for some inexpensive proofreading to keep Jane's from making their own big mistakes."
A condecending statement, to be sure, but it seems accurate to me. Let's face it, this was an easy way for Jane's to get some quick, free information. As to anyone getting paid for freely submitted opinions, I'll believe that when I see it. I have a great deal of respect for Jane's. I own several of their fine publications. Just thought someone should play devil's advocate here. This seems like yet another "us vs. them" argument.
Maybe I'm too much of a cynic. Or maybe Cringley was just trolling for hits via the Slashdot effect. Hey, it is the easiest way today for any technology writer to insure a massive number of hits!
As was pointed out many times in the response to the Katz article, keeping up with the accelerating pace of technology is a choice, not a requirement for survival. I could identify with a lot of points made in the Salon article such as not being able to keep up with or wade through all of the information that is pushed at us through media. Up until recently it was driving me crazy and making me feel empty. So I gave up on trying to keep up.
I've felt much better since then!
I know that I'm not cut out for the ultra fast paced, cell phone and PDA lifestyle. I need plenty of free time to pursue my own interests and a low stress occupation. I guess I'll never be an IPO billionaire, but my sanity is more important to me than money, status or fame. That's a choice I have made and I'm happy with it.
Technology is not the problem. Seems to me that greed, keeping up with the Jones's, and doing what we think society expects of us are the REAL problems!
Most of my searches are general in nature. I don't want to wade through zillions of links that don't relate to what I'm looking for, like on Altavista. With Google!, I can find good general resources fast and with a minimum of fuss.
I've never understood why so many people swear by Altavista. I've never found it to be even remotely useful, it is just like all of the other bloated portal sites. I use Fast Search instead. It seems to have better results than Altavista (I've compared them side by side) and doesn't have any stupid graphical ad banners (at least for the time being).
I have completely had it with Netscape crashing at the absolute worst possible time, the stalled downloads, the freezes, the infuriating "Document: Done" freeze where it won't let you click on links, not rendering pages after downloading, the list goes on and on!
I'm switching to IE 5 for now, but I'm seriously considering shelling out the bucks for Opera. Opera has worked well for me, no crashes, fast, not a system resource hog on my old computer and the latest version still fits on a 3.5 floppy. At this point it would be worth it just to avoid all of the Netscape crashes and all of the IE security issues.
I haven't kept up with Mozilla. I thought it was supposed to be a small and fast browser without all of the bloat. Yet I see the latest Win 32 compile is over 5 Megs zipped. Much smaller than IE 5 or NN 4.x I admit but what I really would like is a stripped down version of JUST the browser. I don't want all of the smart search, e-commerce, radio, netcasting, mail and newsreaders. I have other, faster ways of handling all of that. It would be great if Netscape and Microsoft would release "light" versions of their bloatware, but I guess that's nothing but a fantasy.
My solution is just arm everyone, man and woman and child to the teeth. Give 'em all fully automatic rifles! That way you have an armed balance of power and people will be to afraid to start anything. When everyone is packing a gun we will all be a lot safer!
Yes, I'm being sarcastic.
Well said. You can't win with some people
on
WinLinux 2000
·
· Score: 1
I think that WinLinux, etc. is a very GOOD thing. People aren't going to mess with Linux as long as it is intimidating or very difficult to install. It doesn't matter whether the Linux zealots like it or not. Anything that can allow Windows users to try Linux without being intimidated can only lead to more users adopting Linux.
Unfortunately, you just can't win with a portion of the Linux community; you get flamed to a crisp either way. Sad but true. Linux users need to get over this "us vs. them" argument.
Feel free to use whatever OS works for YOU! If anyone out there wants to give you crap for that, ignore 'em. Most of us have better things to do than waste our time on such nonsense.
The stopwords in Google! searches are my only quibble. If a phrase is inside double quotes you shouldn't have to add a plus so that the stopword will be included. That should be assumed since that is why you use double quotes to begin with!
Still, for my method of searching, you can't come close to matching Google!. It saves time that I would waste looking through zillions of hits on most of the other search engines. I'll keep using it even if they add ad banners.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like to have more faith in people as well, but let's face it, controversy drives hits and that, unfortunately, is what it is all about today. Why else would Jon Katz write for Slashdot, for example? He's good at polarizing people and whipping them into a foaming frenzy. That equals more hits, pageviews, etc.
The only reason I read Slashdot is for the discussion on the less controversial subjects. Linux vs. Windows, PC vs. Apple, etc. will inevitably turn into a debate over political ideology, so I just ignore those articles. A lot of the sci/tech weblogs seem to do a better job on news than Slashdot these days, but then again, there is usually no forum for discussion.
Is it just me or do Slashdot stories seem to be getting more tabloidish? Too bad such junk sells!
Woohoo! All hail the Microsoft conspiracy!!
Yes, folks the reason Netscape's browsers suck is all Microsoft's fault. No offence to anyone, but everytime I read a comment like this it makes me think of those militia wackos and their "new world order" conspiracy.
"But as a consumer brand Netscape is defined by the browser. With Communicator 2000 in the next
couple of months also including some of the goodies AOL has been keeping on its secret list, the
Netscape brand is going to be back with a bang."
Err, could you elaborate on this? We need facts please, otherwise it is just vaporware promises.
I can't see Netscape winning back the browser wars. They have just pissed their market share away and haven't made much of an effort to remain competitive. Maybe Mozilla can change this, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I disagree.
I'd rather wait as long as it takes for Blizzard to release a bug free (mostly), well playtested game. I've spent too much money on games that were poorly designed and implemented because they were rushed to market to make a quick buck.
Blizzard gets a lot of loyalty from me because I don't have to guess if their games will be good or not. They always are because they take the time to do things right.
I wish you could say the same for other software companies, who shall remain nameless!
I agree with this 100 percent.
Get a fast, compact browser up and running first. I just want to surf the web fast and I don't need all of that other crap since I use other programs for e-mail and newsgroups anyway.
I think the problem is that most people are blinded by flash and glitz. They think that a program is better just because it has a lot of fancy features, even though they won't use them anyway. Sheer ignorance.
If Mozilla wants to compete, get the basic browser working FIRST, worry about all of the gewgaws later. If they do so, they'll have my loyalty.
"Very true, but MS does their damndest to make sure everyone uses their propriatary extensions and not standards."
Uh, how, pray tell, can they do that?!? It is up to the person writing the HTML. I'm working on my first web page and I want it to look good on ANY browser. I just want it to be compliant with the W3C standards. If your browser isn't compliant, than switch to one that does. . .
"No, I was simply saying that any one company controling the browser market would be a Very Bad
Thing. The popular analogy is, what if a single company owned the patents on the printing press?"
Nonsense. There are plenty of other browser options on the market, NS, Opera, Lynx and many others. Microsoft is not putting a gun to anyone's head to use IE. (I use NS 4.08 BTW)
Not surprisingly, some of the questions were stupid and hostile (no surprise, this IS Slashdot after all) but most seemed reasonable to me.
Jeez, if the guy didn't want to answer any questions he shouldn't have agreed to it in the first place. Personally, I'd like to see Q and A from less controversial characters (especially those who just seem to be media whores), because we would get better thought out questions and better thought out answers. Just my 2 cents.
I've enjoyed most of the Q and As up to now, but it shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone how this turned out given this guy's attitude. Let's not waste time on such people in the future.
Would anyone on Slashdot give a damn?
My guess is probably not.
Can you say "vaporware"?!? I knew you could!
Let's here it for pathetic self validation!!!
Let Linux stand on its own merits. I could care less whether its it is on "Jepoardy" or not.
This article gets a big fat yawn. . .
Yes, It is just so they can pump more ads onto your screen and get more gross hits. That's why I almost never read CNET or ZDNET. Takes too damn long to download their pages and I don't think it is good to reward rampant commercialism and bad web design with hits. If I do, I turn the images off, which unfortunately defeats the purpose of having a graphical web browser!
I'm not knowledgeable enough to build my own K7 based system. I want to support AMD to keep competition on Intel and I have been waiting months to shell out the money for an K7 based system. I keep waiting because of all of the talk about motherboard problems. Or is just this FUD?
I'm going to have to buy a prebuilt system. I want it to be a K7. The problem is that the better known companies like Compaq and Gateway 2000 have dumped AMD products for Intel (correct me if I'm mistaken). Can anyone suggest a reliable manufacturer of prebuilt K7 systems?
Thanks.
"Six Billion Add Feeling Fine"
This is the classic westerner's view of the world.
"I'm doing great, so everyone else in the world must be too!" What rubbish. The vast majority of humans live in desperate poverty and misery and overpopulation is a major factor. Try working in a third world sweatshop for 20 cents an hour. My guess is you won't enjoy it.
"Combined, we find that people will always be looking for a way to build a better mouse trap, or, in this
case, get more use out of less copper, find different ways to grow more livestock, etc. As world
population grows, there are many more consumers who are looking for options, and the entrepeneur wins."
I disagree. Natural resources are still finite, not infinite (at least on Earth). Technology may solve all of our problems eventually, but I'm not betting on it. Technology often has unforseen side effects that prove to be destructive.
I think the original article is fallacious in the extreme. Most studies show the population RATE decreasing over time, but the population is not likely to level off until 10 billion or so.
Don't forget, just because you read it on Slashdot doesn't mean it is true!
I realize that this article was tagged as "humor" but come on, cut us some slack here! I don't need a woman to cook my meals, rub my shoulders, or run my bathwater. I'm an adult, thank you, I can do all of those things myself. This article makes me think that all geeks are supposed to want a surrogate mother instead of a girlfriend. Maybe insecure guys do; I don't!
I'm far from politically correct, but I think if I was a female Slashdot reader I'd be more than a little bit offended by this article.
Some simple advice that works wonders:
1. Find someone with common interests. This is very important over the long haul because you'll have more stuff to do together, talk about, etc. If you don't have anything in common it probably won't last because someone will get bored. I'd rather be with someone that I can talk geeky stuff with.
2. Don't be taken in by appearances. I do agree with that part of the article. And no, you shouldn't treat women as walking sex objects!
3. Be yourself!!! Let that be your mantra! If you accept who you are others will too. If you try to be someone that you are not, than any following relationships will be based on dishonesty and that WILL leads to disaster. Don't play games.
This works well for me. But, if you are a guy and you let your penis or testosterone level run your life, maybe it won't!
Yes, but the Onion doesn't have articles like:
8 US Senators are space aliens!
Giant mantises destroy Brazilian village!
Satan emerges from oil well fire in Russia!
B-17 bomber found on the moon!
And how could we forget the infamous "Batboy"!
No, I'm not making this up. These were actual articles and quite frankly, I'm just not that creative! The Onion is OK, but I get a little tired of its "tee hee, look how clever and cynical we are!" attitude. Its been done to death. To me, the Weekly World News is a hell of a lot more entertaining.
"topic drift: One thing I'd like to see is Karma adjusted by number of posts. People who gain karma by
simply posting a whole damn lot, some fraction of which gains them points, should not have the same
reputation as people who post once or twice a week, but consistently get moderated up"
I agree wholeheartedly. It is preferable that quality posts take precedence over quantity. I often see the same few people posting the same basic posts over and over. I'd prefer a wider variety of informed opinions.
Also, I think that "funny" posts should not increase points. What is funny to one person may be completely stupid to another. This would not be a problem, but half of the posts kicked up to two points seem to be the same type of lame humor. I prefer information to supposed "humor".
Holy Cow, an honest to god troll that isn't an AC!!
Damn, now I'm going to have to give more respect to Anonymous Cowards. . .
I completely agree.
Thought I might get some insightful commentary on Open Source (which I am no expert on). Instead we get the usual marxism/socialism/capitalism is good/evil/whatever political brouhaha.
Is there ANY way to keep a discussion on Open Source from disintigrating into an argument over systems of government? Anytime such a debate becomes polarized through personal politics there is little to be learned.
I don't intend this to be flamebait, but I wonder if the positive attention from Jane's is being treated as some sort of external validation for a lot of Slashdot readers.
Cringley wrote,
"Maybe this was in the mind of the folks at Jane's , the British publishers of defense information who through this week their cyber terrorism research at the ners who read Slashdot, hoping for some inexpensive proofreading to keep Jane's from making their own big mistakes."
A condecending statement, to be sure, but it seems accurate to me. Let's face it, this was an easy way for Jane's to get some quick, free information. As to anyone getting paid for freely submitted opinions, I'll believe that when I see it. I have a great deal of respect for Jane's. I own several of their fine publications. Just thought someone should play devil's advocate here. This seems like yet another "us vs. them" argument.
Maybe I'm too much of a cynic. Or maybe Cringley was just trolling for hits via the Slashdot effect. Hey, it is the easiest way today for any technology writer to insure a massive number of hits!
As was pointed out many times in the response to the Katz article, keeping up with the accelerating pace of technology is a choice, not a requirement for survival. I could identify with a lot of points made in the Salon article such as not being able to keep up with or wade through all of the information that is pushed at us through media. Up until recently it was driving me crazy and making me feel empty. So I gave up on trying to keep up.
I've felt much better since then!
I know that I'm not cut out for the ultra fast paced, cell phone and PDA lifestyle. I need plenty of free time to pursue my own interests and a low stress occupation. I guess I'll never be an IPO billionaire, but my sanity is more important to me than money, status or fame. That's a choice I have made and I'm happy with it.
Technology is not the problem. Seems to me that greed, keeping up with the Jones's, and doing what we think society expects of us are the REAL problems!
Most of my searches are general in nature. I don't want to wade through zillions of links that don't relate to what I'm looking for, like on Altavista. With Google!, I can find good general resources fast and with a minimum of fuss.
I've never understood why so many people swear by Altavista. I've never found it to be even remotely useful, it is just like all of the other bloated portal sites. I use Fast Search instead. It seems to have better results than Altavista (I've compared them side by side) and doesn't have any stupid graphical ad banners (at least for the time being).
I'm forced to agree with you.
I have completely had it with Netscape crashing at the absolute worst possible time, the stalled downloads, the freezes, the infuriating "Document: Done" freeze where it won't let you click on links, not rendering pages after downloading, the list goes on and on!
I'm switching to IE 5 for now, but I'm seriously considering shelling out the bucks for Opera. Opera has worked well for me, no crashes, fast, not a system resource hog on my old computer and the latest version still fits on a 3.5 floppy. At this point it would be worth it just to avoid all of the Netscape crashes and all of the IE security issues.
I haven't kept up with Mozilla. I thought it was supposed to be a small and fast browser without all of the bloat. Yet I see the latest Win 32 compile is over 5 Megs zipped. Much smaller than IE 5 or NN 4.x I admit but what I really would like is a stripped down version of JUST the browser. I don't want all of the smart search, e-commerce, radio, netcasting, mail and newsreaders. I have other, faster ways of handling all of that. It would be great if Netscape and Microsoft would release "light" versions of their bloatware, but I guess that's nothing but a fantasy.
My solution is just arm everyone, man and woman and child to the teeth. Give 'em all fully automatic rifles! That way you have an armed balance of power and people will be to afraid to start anything. When everyone is packing a gun we will all be a lot safer!
Yes, I'm being sarcastic.
I think that WinLinux, etc. is a very GOOD thing. People aren't going to mess with Linux as long as it is intimidating or very difficult to install. It doesn't matter whether the Linux zealots like it or not. Anything that can allow Windows users to try Linux without being intimidated can only lead to more users adopting Linux.
Unfortunately, you just can't win with a portion of the Linux community; you get flamed to a crisp either way. Sad but true. Linux users need to get over this "us vs. them" argument.
Feel free to use whatever OS works for YOU! If anyone out there wants to give you crap for that, ignore 'em. Most of us have better things to do than waste our time on such nonsense.
The stopwords in Google! searches are my only quibble. If a phrase is inside double quotes you shouldn't have to add a plus so that the stopword will be included. That should be assumed since that is why you use double quotes to begin with!
Still, for my method of searching, you can't come close to matching Google!. It saves time that I would waste looking through zillions of hits on most of the other search engines. I'll keep using it even if they add ad banners.
If you think Slashdot posters are the "mentally elite" of anything you are pretty damn stupid!!
Personally, I don't think you added anything of merit to the discussion. Get off your damn high horse. Smoke a doobie or get laid or something!!