I would partially agree with the statement, but the truth of the matter is that the only media outlets that covered gamergate largely were Milo Yiannopoulos and Christina Hoff Sommers, who are both associated with right-wing organizations. If you ever monitor the ongoings of Gamergate forums, there is much bellyaching against "leftists" or "SJWs" from a slice of the population that doesn't really have too much interaction with politics at large. When these kids see corruption within their small sphere of awareness being hand-waved away as being only cover for misogynists, it is very easy for bad actors to blame corruption on the "liberal media".
Many of these gamers are kids that don't read the news or follow politics much at all. They have no sense of history to understand that for most of human history up to even a few decades ago, women were largely seen as property. They see "feminists" as outsiders trying to destroy their main source of entertainment.
one of the aspects of gamergate that really bothers me is the immediate dismissal of anyone that suggests corruption is a problem is just using it as a cover for misogyny. It has led to an attitude that corruption is only a problem among liberals.
Do you think that corporate sponsored politicians undermining women's health is a bigger problem than depictions of women in art? And what would you propose could be done to disassociate arguments against corruption from gamergate?
But now, all your online activities are recorded pretty much permanently for everyone to see (sorry, privacy policies or settings just encourage people to spill the beans).
Or they could re-release their history as a special edition with revisions, and wait for the original copies to go obsolete.
We can only do these things if the robot masters decide they will use the fruits of robot labor to do these things. Why would they pay for any of these things when there are other robot companies to buy out and absorb or politicians to bribe?
I believe the idea that unions are still relevant is a popular message among the corporate media. For example when Hostess went bankrupt in 2012 due to mismanagement, the press reported mostly that the business would have to close if the unions didn't make concessions. Never mind the fact that they had previously made many concessions in the past, and the new contract would result in wages barely over minimum wage yet would not touch executive bonuses. OCP owns the police.
We want to take our current content and all the stuff that matters to this community and deliver it on a site that still speaks to the interests and habits of our current audience, but that is, at the same time, more accessible and shareable by a wider audience.
I think the problem is that if you build an engine for a wider audience at the cost of the community, you'll be left with nothing. There are plenty of other "shiny" websites for the mass audience. The community that was built at Slashdot is the real value of the brand. If the parent company wants to build a website with a mass appeal, they should build one from scratch and spin Slashdot off into a separate company.
There was one person that posted "Beta is fine, Beta is great", but the comment text itself was how to improve things that fell short. It seems like a forgone conclusion that once the new system goes live, most people that contribute to the Slashdot community will leave and never come back.
I sure am glad these conglomerates are in the position to buy out these companies and make them more successful by using proven business tactics. Let's give them another round of tax-cuts for creating jobs!
I think it's more analogous to new Digg than/r/politics. The awful Digg website design drove off users never to return. There are several other sub-Reddit that took the place of/r/politcs. Hell, we could even make a slashdot-esque sub-reddit.
Which country do you live in? In the US, where I live, teachers' unions have been crushed by scab organizations like "Teach for America", charter schools, and private school vouchers programs.
If you look at the link I posted above, there is a model that shows how the spoiler effect is real. This has happened in the real world many times. For recent examples look at Perot and Nader taking away votes from candidates that lost their elections. What is your evidence that this effect is a fallacy?
You could see it that way, but it is more likely that by not voting you are giving the supporters evil person better leverage by not working against them. Your only chance is to get the good person to win the primary, but if you don't it's giant douche or turd sandwich.
". Our current president is the most conservative president our country has ever had, "
well, there it is. The stupidest statement on slashdot to date.
He's not the *most* conservative, but he could easily be within the top 5. He hasn't enacted a single "liberal" action or policy that didn't have corporate backing.
You make a sensible argument, but overlook a couple of key factors.
In the US, ostensibly we ARE the government ("We the people" and all that). We only have crony capitalists of both parties in power because the majority of the populous turns a blind eye while the minority funds them through the primaries/general election and puts them into power. Your complaints go to a larger problem that aren't really relevant here.
The rocket industry NEEDS oversight. These things in the wrong hands are basically weapons.
If you read the article, they basically suspended the regulations for a period of time to allow commercial flight to take off. At the time, they expected many flights to have taken place so there would be some safety data to analyze. The problem is when hundreds of flights were expected, they only had 12. I think this is just propaganda against sensible safety regulations. What will probably happen is the regulations will be relaxed for a few more years, but there probably aren't enough resources in this agency to provide proper oversight.
But thankfully it is not preventing you from storing chemicals of unknown danger in shoddy equipment next to a river that provides 300,000 people with their water. Because freedom!
Don't be absurd. If you're really concerned about government over-regulation of breathing, I recommend you go to a heavily populated area in either India or China. Our government doesn't need to tell us to breathe, but emission controls here actually do improve your experience. Truth of the matter is that we do need some common entity to oversee things like flying. I suppose next you'll say that we don't need the government telling airlines how to secure their cockpits, schedule takeoffs and landings to avoid collisions, or inspect their planes for mechanical failures, etc.
We were talking about a hypothetical scenario where the cost of hard drives used by Dropbox would become relevant to the OP as analogy to the cost of music vs record labels royalties to artists. In this example, Dropbox has as much influence on the market of hard drives as the music industry has on music royalties in the real world. Basically Dropbox forced the margins down on hard drives so much that most companies are forced to exit the business. As a result, you can't get Pandora music in this hypothetical world, because no one makes hard drives anymore.
Where do you think the stream comes from? Little musicians playing live on the other end of the tube? The music is being stored on a disk somewhere, even if you don't own it.
Slashdot Mirror
GamerGate is not a partisan movement.
I would partially agree with the statement, but the truth of the matter is that the only media outlets that covered gamergate largely were Milo Yiannopoulos and Christina Hoff Sommers, who are both associated with right-wing organizations. If you ever monitor the ongoings of Gamergate forums, there is much bellyaching against "leftists" or "SJWs" from a slice of the population that doesn't really have too much interaction with politics at large. When these kids see corruption within their small sphere of awareness being hand-waved away as being only cover for misogynists, it is very easy for bad actors to blame corruption on the "liberal media".
Many of these gamers are kids that don't read the news or follow politics much at all. They have no sense of history to understand that for most of human history up to even a few decades ago, women were largely seen as property. They see "feminists" as outsiders trying to destroy their main source of entertainment.
one of the aspects of gamergate that really bothers me is the immediate dismissal of anyone that suggests corruption is a problem is just using it as a cover for misogyny. It has led to an attitude that corruption is only a problem among liberals. Do you think that corporate sponsored politicians undermining women's health is a bigger problem than depictions of women in art? And what would you propose could be done to disassociate arguments against corruption from gamergate?
But now, all your online activities are recorded pretty much permanently for everyone to see (sorry, privacy policies or settings just encourage people to spill the beans).
Or they could re-release their history as a special edition with revisions, and wait for the original copies to go obsolete.
We can only do these things if the robot masters decide they will use the fruits of robot labor to do these things. Why would they pay for any of these things when there are other robot companies to buy out and absorb or politicians to bribe?
So you really trying to say that it's #rupertsfault that pedophiles exist? One person in a group is responsible for everone else?
I believe the idea that unions are still relevant is a popular message among the corporate media. For example when Hostess went bankrupt in 2012 due to mismanagement, the press reported mostly that the business would have to close if the unions didn't make concessions. Never mind the fact that they had previously made many concessions in the past, and the new contract would result in wages barely over minimum wage yet would not touch executive bonuses. OCP owns the police.
We want to take our current content and all the stuff that matters to this community and deliver it on a site that still speaks to the interests and habits of our current audience, but that is, at the same time, more accessible and shareable by a wider audience.
I think the problem is that if you build an engine for a wider audience at the cost of the community, you'll be left with nothing. There are plenty of other "shiny" websites for the mass audience. The community that was built at Slashdot is the real value of the brand. If the parent company wants to build a website with a mass appeal, they should build one from scratch and spin Slashdot off into a separate company.
There was one person that posted "Beta is fine, Beta is great", but the comment text itself was how to improve things that fell short. It seems like a forgone conclusion that once the new system goes live, most people that contribute to the Slashdot community will leave and never come back.
I sure am glad these conglomerates are in the position to buy out these companies and make them more successful by using proven business tactics. Let's give them another round of tax-cuts for creating jobs!
I think it's more analogous to new Digg than /r/politics. The awful Digg website design drove off users never to return. There are several other sub-Reddit that took the place of /r/politcs. Hell, we could even make a slashdot-esque sub-reddit.
It is definitely worse. The screen real estate is not used very well.
Which country do you live in? In the US, where I live, teachers' unions have been crushed by scab organizations like "Teach for America", charter schools, and private school vouchers programs.
strong voice != absolute power. It's a straw man argument to say that he was advocating for absolute power on behalf of the teachers' union.
If you look at the link I posted above, there is a model that shows how the spoiler effect is real. This has happened in the real world many times. For recent examples look at Perot and Nader taking away votes from candidates that lost their elections. What is your evidence that this effect is a fallacy?
You could see it that way, but it is more likely that by not voting you are giving the supporters evil person better leverage by not working against them. Your only chance is to get the good person to win the primary, but if you don't it's giant douche or turd sandwich.
When your world-view is no longer based on reality, reporting the truth should appear to be biased against you.
All third-parties do is introduce a spoiler effect, making the more similar candidate lose.
". Our current president is the most conservative president our country has ever had, " well, there it is. The stupidest statement on slashdot to date.
He's not the *most* conservative, but he could easily be within the top 5. He hasn't enacted a single "liberal" action or policy that didn't have corporate backing.
The App store TOS prohibits releasing software that is GPL. You can find your favorite source if you google "app store gpl".
You make a sensible argument, but overlook a couple of key factors.
In the US, ostensibly we ARE the government ("We the people" and all that). We only have crony capitalists of both parties in power because the majority of the populous turns a blind eye while the minority funds them through the primaries/general election and puts them into power. Your complaints go to a larger problem that aren't really relevant here.
The rocket industry NEEDS oversight. These things in the wrong hands are basically weapons.
If you read the article, they basically suspended the regulations for a period of time to allow commercial flight to take off. At the time, they expected many flights to have taken place so there would be some safety data to analyze. The problem is when hundreds of flights were expected, they only had 12. I think this is just propaganda against sensible safety regulations. What will probably happen is the regulations will be relaxed for a few more years, but there probably aren't enough resources in this agency to provide proper oversight.
But thankfully it is not preventing you from storing chemicals of unknown danger in shoddy equipment next to a river that provides 300,000 people with their water. Because freedom!
Don't be absurd. If you're really concerned about government over-regulation of breathing, I recommend you go to a heavily populated area in either India or China. Our government doesn't need to tell us to breathe, but emission controls here actually do improve your experience. Truth of the matter is that we do need some common entity to oversee things like flying. I suppose next you'll say that we don't need the government telling airlines how to secure their cockpits, schedule takeoffs and landings to avoid collisions, or inspect their planes for mechanical failures, etc.
We were talking about a hypothetical scenario where the cost of hard drives used by Dropbox would become relevant to the OP as analogy to the cost of music vs record labels royalties to artists. In this example, Dropbox has as much influence on the market of hard drives as the music industry has on music royalties in the real world. Basically Dropbox forced the margins down on hard drives so much that most companies are forced to exit the business. As a result, you can't get Pandora music in this hypothetical world, because no one makes hard drives anymore.
Where do you think the stream comes from? Little musicians playing live on the other end of the tube? The music is being stored on a disk somewhere, even if you don't own it.