Click on the tab titled "Homepage," then under "Exclude Stories From the Homepage" locate the author you don't want to see again (in this case Michael) and check the box.
Now, the suggestion to Slashdot coders: Why not create a special section called "Ignore shitty articles by Michael?" After all, it's not that I want to exclude stories as much as I don't like my time wasted by a jackass like him.
It sounds to me like the boxes will be used in existing classrooms, albeit in remote areas. Thus, 20-30 people might be in a classroom watching a single communal TV.
Reminds me of that movie "Mosquito Coast", actually.
One way or the other, this is a great move by India. The US has some programs like this, but it'd be nice if we focused more on it.
Re:Neither candidate is dancing the hoochie coo
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
I understand what you mean. If a US worker is paid $50 an hour and an Indian worker is paid $5 for the same task, the US will lose jobs.
That's partially true. But keep in mind that those jobs only exist as long as we can pay for them. If we were only making $10k a year, I doubt that we'd be buying quite as many things - things that countries like India support. As a result, their industry would shrink.
That's not to say that I like outsourcing - but I also don't believe that we'll ever have a "global" economy. There are so many different factors that go into it - geography, weather, resources, political stability. Thus, while you may end up with some Balkanized economies (like the EU), I don't think you'll ever see a global standard.
As for the fry-flipping, someone does have to be the engineer... have you tasted fries at McDonald's? They could use a good engineering of that cooking process.
Re:Neither candidate is dancing the hoochie coo
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
The housing industry is going to have to figure out how to sell housing for less than $10k?
No - you're going to have to figure out a way to make enough money to pay for a house under current market conditions. Or, if you're confident that it'll happen, wait until the housing market tanks and buy when it falls that low. That goes for cars as well.
Your expectations on market pricing just aren't thought out - after all, what happens to people that bought for $100k? They're supposed to get behind a crappy idea like shoving prices down?
Those same people are the ones creating jobs, and are the same people working beside you. Do you want to explain to them why it's rational that the money they put in should be washed away just so you can have a house?
I'm not a homeowner yet, and have been busting ass to get a mortgage (as you may have as well.) I completely sympathize with you when it comes to home prices - trust me - like I said, I live in the valley where prices *to start* are around $450k.
I want prices down as much as you. At the same time, I also don't think that my happiness in owning a home should be derived by tanking someone else's investment.
As well, if you think that a solution like the one you offered will offset any perceived recession, keep in mind that the equity lost by existing homeowners would destroy not their lives, but also the financial institutions which mortgaged them - and it would create an instant drain on social services.
Re:Neither candidate is dancing the hoochie coo
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Agreed. Twice today we've had whining that draws directly from the Kerry camp:
1. It's a bad economy, and things are getting worse. 2. Google's evil, because searching for John Kerry in the news section shows a lot of negative articles.
First off, the economy isn't doing badly - I'm right here in the valley, and things are picking up quite nicely. Is it at dotcom levels? No - and that's ok too. After all, the dotcom era was essentially a lot of people spending money while providing no real service or product. Sooner or later, the economy pays the price for that kind of crap.
Second, Kerry's getting more negative articles written about him because his campaign is virtually tripping over itself to incur more PR drubbings. The race was Kerry's to lose, and he's well on his way if they don't get it together.
One way or the other, it's a joke to try to disguise this as some sort of outsourcing article... try attaching an example to your editorial commentary.
Try right-clicking Putty, then set the compatibility to Win2k. I found some hang with that too, but it responded like normal after the compatibility mode switch was put on.
I've seen some drag on my system since putting SP2 on, but it's really a double-edged sword.
However, in my experience it's harder now for sites to push ActiveX controls and executables to your PC now, unless you do a bit of tweaking or visit a deliberately malicious site.
Considering the system drag that occurs when the average user installs spyware inadvertently, I'd say the SP2 drag ought to be cancelled out for the time being, as it's a bit harder for spyware to propogate under it.
I'd be interested as to how they define which packets are multimedia, and which are data/text-based. It seems to me that there would have to be some sort of identifier on each packet in order to set a priority. As such, it sounds like it could easily be streamlined into a DRM scheme, so I wouldn't think that the RIAA/MPAA would mind at all.
Of course, I'm not a packet expert, so this ability may be available already...
From the nameservers it looks like he's serving out of his own house (as I posted up a few notches).
That said, if he wants to put in a trouble ticket to www.dynamicname.com, he might have a bit of trouble:
"The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your browser settings."
I've heard of throttling, but self-throttling seems a bit extreme.
While I'm happy to see the decision from the 9th Circuit, it's WAY too early to pop the champagne.
Don't forget the the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has their decisions overturned by the Supreme Court constantly. The pledge of allegiance case is a recent example.
I doubt we'll even get to the INDUCE act before this is nullified.
I'm not entirely happy with the popup blocker they've included, as it doesn't seem to be that configurable. However, the idea of blocking unsolicited ports is by no means a bad thing.
The vast majority of PC problems these days are rooted in the fact that most users are lazy, and don't want to be bothered with details. Perhaps they can read tax forms, but a simple Windows dialog? Forget it.
If users can't muster up more than an ounce of effort to secure their PC, they shouldn't be using one. Just as a driver needs to make sure their car is roadworthy, PC users need to be sure that their systems have at least some rudimentary method of protection. It's just not that hard, and it's not too much to ask.
If computer users can't manage to get their heads around simple dialogs (which SP2 questions pretty much are), they deserve the trouble they get... perhaps them being offline would reduce the spam & DDoS zombies.
I suppose wishing those people offline is a fantasy, but it certainly would help reduce the idiot factor on the net.
The 15 seconds of fame that the submitter anticipated must have spurred him to try to extend it to 30.
Note to submitters: if you're going to write out a long submission, throw in some good porn at the end. We deserve *something* for suffering through your inability to WRAP IT UP!
It shouldn't be surprising that any enterprise-level organization would wait for some period of time before deploying something like this - that's been going on forever.
For example, we found on Win2k SP4 that Hummingbird was failing to make a constant connection on some installs with a VIA chipset. As a result, we delayed the rollout until we had a solid solution to the issue.
Any company that chooses to apply patches and service packs without relying on outside experience and independent testing - they're just begging for trouble. It's hard to sympathize with that...
"Because it carries no fuel and keeps accelerating over almost unlimited distances, it is the only technology now in existence that can one day take us to the stars."
This may be true, but it'll take another technology to take you there safely: brakes.
This whole "keeps accelerating" schtick concerns me from a self-preservation point of view...
It indicates that content providers have to do a series of lookups to verify you are within their scope of coverage. Proxy detection is apparently in place (how good though is hard to say without testing).
Still, the Olympics have been boring as hell since 84. Plus, considering the Balco (sp?) steroid scandal and how the USOC is reacting to it, it's hard to trust that the athletes aren't all hopped up anyhow.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering the utter shit that Michael's been approving lately, I'd just about decided to kill the bookmark to the site and go my merry way.
/. Preferences
Then I remembered that you *can* exclude stories posted by any of the Slashdot supermods, or whatever the hell you call them. Just go to:
Click on the tab titled "Homepage," then under "Exclude Stories From the Homepage" locate the author you don't want to see again (in this case Michael) and check the box.
Now, the suggestion to Slashdot coders: Why not create a special section called "Ignore shitty articles by Michael?" After all, it's not that I want to exclude stories as much as I don't like my time wasted by a jackass like him.
I can see the charter now:
1. Notice spyware problem.
2. Announce commission to study spyware problem.
3. Approves resolution condemning spyware problem.
4. Watch as spyware problem continues.
5. Repeat steps 3-4
Bob Goatse is spinning in his grave if he has indeed lost that distinction.
It sounds to me like the boxes will be used in existing classrooms, albeit in remote areas. Thus, 20-30 people might be in a classroom watching a single communal TV.
Reminds me of that movie "Mosquito Coast", actually.
One way or the other, this is a great move by India. The US has some programs like this, but it'd be nice if we focused more on it.
I understand what you mean. If a US worker is paid $50 an hour and an Indian worker is paid $5 for the same task, the US will lose jobs.
That's partially true. But keep in mind that those jobs only exist as long as we can pay for them. If we were only making $10k a year, I doubt that we'd be buying quite as many things - things that countries like India support. As a result, their industry would shrink.
That's not to say that I like outsourcing - but I also don't believe that we'll ever have a "global" economy. There are so many different factors that go into it - geography, weather, resources, political stability. Thus, while you may end up with some Balkanized economies (like the EU), I don't think you'll ever see a global standard.
As for the fry-flipping, someone does have to be the engineer... have you tasted fries at McDonald's? They could use a good engineering of that cooking process.
The housing industry is going to have to figure out how to sell housing for less than $10k?
No - you're going to have to figure out a way to make enough money to pay for a house under current market conditions. Or, if you're confident that it'll happen, wait until the housing market tanks and buy when it falls that low. That goes for cars as well.
Your expectations on market pricing just aren't thought out - after all, what happens to people that bought for $100k? They're supposed to get behind a crappy idea like shoving prices down?
Those same people are the ones creating jobs, and are the same people working beside you. Do you want to explain to them why it's rational that the money they put in should be washed away just so you can have a house?
I'm not a homeowner yet, and have been busting ass to get a mortgage (as you may have as well.) I completely sympathize with you when it comes to home prices - trust me - like I said, I live in the valley where prices *to start* are around $450k.
I want prices down as much as you. At the same time, I also don't think that my happiness in owning a home should be derived by tanking someone else's investment.
As well, if you think that a solution like the one you offered will offset any perceived recession, keep in mind that the equity lost by existing homeowners would destroy not their lives, but also the financial institutions which mortgaged them - and it would create an instant drain on social services.
Agreed. Twice today we've had whining that draws directly from the Kerry camp:
1. It's a bad economy, and things are getting worse.
2. Google's evil, because searching for John Kerry in the news section shows a lot of negative articles.
First off, the economy isn't doing badly - I'm right here in the valley, and things are picking up quite nicely. Is it at dotcom levels? No - and that's ok too. After all, the dotcom era was essentially a lot of people spending money while providing no real service or product. Sooner or later, the economy pays the price for that kind of crap.
Second, Kerry's getting more negative articles written about him because his campaign is virtually tripping over itself to incur more PR drubbings. The race was Kerry's to lose, and he's well on his way if they don't get it together.
One way or the other, it's a joke to try to disguise this as some sort of outsourcing article... try attaching an example to your editorial commentary.
I hear Dan Rather has a new story brewing on record falsification.
Try right-clicking Putty, then set the compatibility to Win2k. I found some hang with that too, but it responded like normal after the compatibility mode switch was put on.
I've seen some drag on my system since putting SP2 on, but it's really a double-edged sword.
However, in my experience it's harder now for sites to push ActiveX controls and executables to your PC now, unless you do a bit of tweaking or visit a deliberately malicious site.
Considering the system drag that occurs when the average user installs spyware inadvertently, I'd say the SP2 drag ought to be cancelled out for the time being, as it's a bit harder for spyware to propogate under it.
I'd be interested as to how they define which packets are multimedia, and which are data/text-based. It seems to me that there would have to be some sort of identifier on each packet in order to set a priority. As such, it sounds like it could easily be streamlined into a DRM scheme, so I wouldn't think that the RIAA/MPAA would mind at all.
Of course, I'm not a packet expert, so this ability may be available already...
Excellent thread. Nothing to add really, but the parent threads provide good, clear insight that I'd never thought about.
Just thought I'd throw out a thanks for the insight!
Yes - I do have a question.
WTF does this have to do with technology?
Oh wait... it uses ELECTRICITY! I get it now, forgive me for the interruption...
From the nameservers it looks like he's serving out of his own house (as I posted up a few notches).
That said, if he wants to put in a trouble ticket to www.dynamicname.com, he might have a bit of trouble:
"The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your browser settings."
I've heard of throttling, but self-throttling seems a bit extreme.
Another example of why you shouldn't host from a dynamic connection...
NS1.DYNAMICNAME.COM
NS2.DYNAMICNAME.COM
Good.
Sucks for Siemens. Heh... a twofer!
They're not talking about the gameplay. They're talking about the entry to market, which is what IT managers do.
The article itself isn't exactly that kind to the company anyhow, so calling it a hoax or bullshit is stretching things just a bit.
While I'm happy to see the decision from the 9th Circuit, it's WAY too early to pop the champagne.
Don't forget the the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has their decisions overturned by the Supreme Court constantly. The pledge of allegiance case is a recent example.
I doubt we'll even get to the INDUCE act before this is nullified.
I'm not entirely happy with the popup blocker they've included, as it doesn't seem to be that configurable. However, the idea of blocking unsolicited ports is by no means a bad thing.
The vast majority of PC problems these days are rooted in the fact that most users are lazy, and don't want to be bothered with details. Perhaps they can read tax forms, but a simple Windows dialog? Forget it.
If users can't muster up more than an ounce of effort to secure their PC, they shouldn't be using one. Just as a driver needs to make sure their car is roadworthy, PC users need to be sure that their systems have at least some rudimentary method of protection. It's just not that hard, and it's not too much to ask.
If computer users can't manage to get their heads around simple dialogs (which SP2 questions pretty much are), they deserve the trouble they get... perhaps them being offline would reduce the spam & DDoS zombies.
I suppose wishing those people offline is a fantasy, but it certainly would help reduce the idiot factor on the net.
The 15 seconds of fame that the submitter anticipated must have spurred him to try to extend it to 30.
Note to submitters: if you're going to write out a long submission, throw in some good porn at the end. We deserve *something* for suffering through your inability to WRAP IT UP!
It shouldn't be surprising that any enterprise-level organization would wait for some period of time before deploying something like this - that's been going on forever.
For example, we found on Win2k SP4 that Hummingbird was failing to make a constant connection on some installs with a VIA chipset. As a result, we delayed the rollout until we had a solid solution to the issue.
Any company that chooses to apply patches and service packs without relying on outside experience and independent testing - they're just begging for trouble. It's hard to sympathize with that...
And how do you plan on landing? In a pretty little spiral?
"Because it carries no fuel and keeps accelerating over almost unlimited distances, it is the only technology now in existence that can one day take us to the stars."
This may be true, but it'll take another technology to take you there safely: brakes.
This whole "keeps accelerating" schtick concerns me from a self-preservation point of view...
No, it's just a convergence of bipolar readers feeling the same way. Give them a few minutes, there'll be some flip-flopping.
It indicates that content providers have to do a series of lookups to verify you are within their scope of coverage. Proxy detection is apparently in place (how good though is hard to say without testing).
Still, the Olympics have been boring as hell since 84. Plus, considering the Balco (sp?) steroid scandal and how the USOC is reacting to it, it's hard to trust that the athletes aren't all hopped up anyhow.