I don't care who it's submitted by, as long as what is submitted is interesting and provides the links to the original material in question.
I don't know about you, but I found Roland's article interesting and it did provide links to the original material so I could read more in-depth should the topic be of interest.
Despite what you might think, some online news sites do in fact write compelling, original articles that people enjoy reading.
Agreed.
A Slashdot submission linking to news sites that give crappy summaries with links to the full meal deal, is just as distasteful as linking to a blog site that does the same. It doesn't matter who's doing the submitting, or what the site is.
Okay, thanks for clarifying. So it's really the re-packaged crappy summary sites which you find distasteful. I don't know if your explanation applies to most other slashdotters, but there does seem to be an inordinate amount of hatred towards Roland's submissions that other, even less informative sites don't receive. Though other sites are generally one-offs and not seen with the frequency that Roland's site is.
I imagine the fact that you compared Wired to Roland's blog would be pretty insulting to the professionals who work at Wired and have put out some very interesting and original work throughout the years.
I agree that Wired is a very great source of news. No need to draw too much into what I wrote -- I used it as a comparison to try and understand your position and I didn't intend it to mean that I find Wired's writing substandard. Quite the opposite, actually.
If the guy just gave us the links to the news articles without his blog bullshit then he'd be a great poster. I don't need more crappy summaries thanks.
In this case, the blog bullshit consists of quotes from and a link to New Scientist, ditto for the LOFAR website itself along with a diagram of the LOFAR-STELLA interaction, a link to and a quote from a Reuters article, and a link to a news release in Dutch. The length of the article wouldn't fit given slashdot's typical summary size, not to mention that slashdot doesn't post images except in really rare circumstances (eg: Penny Arcade's book images).
Do you hold other sites to the same standard? What about when an article links to CNet, ZDNet, Wired, MSN, etc? A blog is really just an informal news site. Many news sites give you the crappy summaries with links to the full meal deal. The latest story on Canonical's version tracking tool links to this zdnet article which is nothing but a crappy summary for describing the actual Launchpad project. The bulk of all online news sites simply rehash the original stories -- why do you hold Roland to a different standard? Is it because it looks like he submits them himself, so you'd find a Wired posting just as distasteful if it started with "Wired's editor writes:..."?
So you think that groklaw falls in the same category? Instead of linking to groklaw's analysis slashdot should just link directly to the court documents?
To me, it sounds like you're complaining that Roland does what slashdot does -- presents stories and pays for it with ads.
I initially had that reaction too after seeing many stories posted by Roland. However, upon a bit of introspection, I couldn't find any rational basis for this feeling as the stories he submits are generally quite interesting.
So what is it about Roland's submissions that people find objectionable? If they're paid placements I can understand, but if they're simply articles which are interesting enough to get posted then where's the harm?
Now it doesn't say that the changes actually have to be documented, but I am reading "the date of any change" to mean that the date for each single change needs to be specified, which would necessitate specifying what change belongs to which date, which comes pretty close to documenting the changes.
You're right, the interpretation can be just about anything since the phrasing is poorly worded. "... stating that you changed the files and the date of any change." Um, *any* change?
4/29/2005 13:12:45.12 Added character 'm' 4/29/2005 13:12:45.89 Added character 'a' 4/29/2005 13:12:46.36 Added character 'l' 4/29/2005 13:12:47.07 Added character 'l' 4/29/2005 13:12:47.54 Added character 'o' 4/29/2005 13:12:48.28 Added character 'c'
Overrated? I think the parent post is rather insightful. According to this BBC article, DNA died almost four years ago. Suddenly, right before a movie launch of one of his works, a company that has ties to the movie industry decides to release a bunch of stories about him? I haven't read them and I'm guessing the individuals are all very sincere, but I'd question the motives of IGN. It could very well be that their motives are very sincere, but there's no harm in looking at it with a critical eye.
RMS won't let this stand! I'm sure that he'll take the next logical progression of this and not only require the release of source code, but the GPL will be modified so that developers need to comment and document every single change they make and also be available on evenings and weekends for up to an hour at a time (at no charge) to help others implement their changes.
Bottom line, everyone who isn't first place gets burned and left with a huge bill, no patents, and no $11Million.
No patents? That assumes this quantum wire can be constructed in one step. If it's more than one step, you can patent everything along the way even if you never get the final step complete -- such as making it feasible at room temperature or something. And, in failing, you might find something that works for other applications. Read up on the history of the Post-It for one such example.
What about the (theoretical) guy who says Mark doesn't go far enough?
"Hah, you have a 50 character password? Well, all of my passwords are at least 64 characters, and it has to be a sufficiently random distribution of numbers, letters, capitalization, and non-alphanumeric characters or the system automatically rejects it. And every password is issued from a one-time-pad so even if it's intercepted, nobody can do anything. All my computers are encased in bulletproof plexiglass with motion alarms activated by a combination of mercury switches, infrared detectors, and various trip sensors. My car is encased in carbonite and thawed out each morning so that someone can't plant a bomb."
Would this guy consider Mark not paranoid enough? Of course, security is really a tradeoff of risk. How much risk are you willing to take that your 16 character password is good enough? If it's protecting your recent birthday photos, then likely it's good enough. If it's protecting your nation's top nuclear secrets, then you should probably use more security there.
If he were moving forward in time, wouldn't he be posting after you?
The answer, of course, is that it depends on your frame of reference. If you're waiting for the mysterious future, moving forward in time will allow you to get the first post while the other guy's stuck in the past hitting refresh.
Golly, the president doesn't want his rivals representing him. Oh, for shame.
Sure, if this is a "Promote the Republicans" conference, you'd have a point. However, this is a forum for telecom providers and the top ones are essentially Banned by Bush(TM) because they donated to a different political party. What's next? The international committee on human rights abuses can only be attended by republicans? Foreign embassies only staffed by republicans? Want a job in the federal government... I sure hope you're a republican! After all, we don't want any rivals working for Uncle Sam, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Somehow making juice with exact proportions everytime frightens me.. There's got to be a little human in it.
A little human in your juice? WTF kind of juice are you drinking?
You're completely missing the point.
That's why I asked for clarification.
I don't care who it's submitted by, as long as what is submitted is interesting and provides the links to the original material in question.
I don't know about you, but I found Roland's article interesting and it did provide links to the original material so I could read more in-depth should the topic be of interest.
Despite what you might think, some online news sites do in fact write compelling, original articles that people enjoy reading.
Agreed.
A Slashdot submission linking to news sites that give crappy summaries with links to the full meal deal, is just as distasteful as linking to a blog site that does the same. It doesn't matter who's doing the submitting, or what the site is.
Okay, thanks for clarifying. So it's really the re-packaged crappy summary sites which you find distasteful. I don't know if your explanation applies to most other slashdotters, but there does seem to be an inordinate amount of hatred towards Roland's submissions that other, even less informative sites don't receive. Though other sites are generally one-offs and not seen with the frequency that Roland's site is.
I imagine the fact that you compared Wired to Roland's blog would be pretty insulting to the professionals who work at Wired and have put out some very interesting and original work throughout the years.
I agree that Wired is a very great source of news. No need to draw too much into what I wrote -- I used it as a comparison to try and understand your position and I didn't intend it to mean that I find Wired's writing substandard. Quite the opposite, actually.
If the guy just gave us the links to the news articles without his blog bullshit then he'd be a great poster. I don't need more crappy summaries thanks.
..."?
In this case, the blog bullshit consists of quotes from and a link to New Scientist, ditto for the LOFAR website itself along with a diagram of the LOFAR-STELLA interaction, a link to and a quote from a Reuters article, and a link to a news release in Dutch. The length of the article wouldn't fit given slashdot's typical summary size, not to mention that slashdot doesn't post images except in really rare circumstances (eg: Penny Arcade's book images).
Do you hold other sites to the same standard? What about when an article links to CNet, ZDNet, Wired, MSN, etc? A blog is really just an informal news site. Many news sites give you the crappy summaries with links to the full meal deal. The latest story on Canonical's version tracking tool links to this zdnet article which is nothing but a crappy summary for describing the actual Launchpad project. The bulk of all online news sites simply rehash the original stories -- why do you hold Roland to a different standard? Is it because it looks like he submits them himself, so you'd find a Wired posting just as distasteful if it started with "Wired's editor writes:
So you think that groklaw falls in the same category? Instead of linking to groklaw's analysis slashdot should just link directly to the court documents?
To me, it sounds like you're complaining that Roland does what slashdot does -- presents stories and pays for it with ads.
I initially had that reaction too after seeing many stories posted by Roland. However, upon a bit of introspection, I couldn't find any rational basis for this feeling as the stories he submits are generally quite interesting.
So what is it about Roland's submissions that people find objectionable? If they're paid placements I can understand, but if they're simply articles which are interesting enough to get posted then where's the harm?
Now it doesn't say that the changes actually have to be documented, but I am reading "the date of any change" to mean that the date for each single change needs to be specified, which would necessitate specifying what change belongs to which date, which comes pretty close to documenting the changes.
You're right, the interpretation can be just about anything since the phrasing is poorly worded. "... stating that you changed the files and the date of any change." Um, *any* change?
4/29/2005 13:12:45.12 Added character 'm'
4/29/2005 13:12:45.89 Added character 'a'
4/29/2005 13:12:46.36 Added character 'l'
4/29/2005 13:12:47.07 Added character 'l'
4/29/2005 13:12:47.54 Added character 'o'
4/29/2005 13:12:48.28 Added character 'c'
That could get tedious to say the least.
I just saw the counter go down. Cool, they're even counting "returns".
This is from all those Microsoft employees who didn't agree with the EULA and returned the product for a refund.
Does this mean Stallman will swim across the Atlantic 50 times?
I suppose next you will take the next logical progression of this and suggest that the ACLU are a load of Nazi's...
The new AC: 0 to Godwin in 25 minutes... longest yet!
Overrated? I think the parent post is rather insightful. According to this BBC article, DNA died almost four years ago. Suddenly, right before a movie launch of one of his works, a company that has ties to the movie industry decides to release a bunch of stories about him? I haven't read them and I'm guessing the individuals are all very sincere, but I'd question the motives of IGN. It could very well be that their motives are very sincere, but there's no harm in looking at it with a critical eye.
RMS won't let this stand! I'm sure that he'll take the next logical progression of this and not only require the release of source code, but the GPL will be modified so that developers need to comment and document every single change they make and also be available on evenings and weekends for up to an hour at a time (at no charge) to help others implement their changes.
The new GPL: free speech, free beer... freedumb.
Children, the word of the day is prior art. Can you say prior art? Good! I thought you could.
Maybe you can keep your word of the day on hold until we're discussing patents, in which case it would be applicable.
okay, well is crashs every IE I have, so I guess there's a patch for it now.
Now what will I use as useless knowledge on slashdot?
Try something arcane like female anatomy.
Bottom line, everyone who isn't first place gets burned and left with a huge bill, no patents, and no $11Million.
No patents? That assumes this quantum wire can be constructed in one step. If it's more than one step, you can patent everything along the way even if you never get the final step complete -- such as making it feasible at room temperature or something. And, in failing, you might find something that works for other applications. Read up on the history of the Post-It for one such example.
If he were moving forward in time, wouldn't he be posting after you?
:)
The answer, of course, is that it depends on your frame of reference. If you're waiting for the mysterious future, moving forward in time will allow you to get the first post while the other guy's stuck in the past hitting refresh.
Any other jokes I can kill while I'm at it?
The rest is likely all search engine bots.
Too bad you don't get it. "Post Humously" is spelled that way for a reason.
Finally, my sig is on-topic!
"... when the plane went down."
Pleasuring yourself one last time before you die?
No -- in Soviet Russia, the plane goes down on you! (Ewww...)
... they're attacking slashdot too and posting dupes!
Golly, the president doesn't want his rivals representing him. Oh, for shame.
Sure, if this is a "Promote the Republicans" conference, you'd have a point. However, this is a forum for telecom providers and the top ones are essentially Banned by Bush(TM) because they donated to a different political party. What's next? The international committee on human rights abuses can only be attended by republicans? Foreign embassies only staffed by republicans? Want a job in the federal government... I sure hope you're a republican! After all, we don't want any rivals working for Uncle Sam, right?
hope your happy.
For the last time, hope is *not* my happy.
Since we're talking about profit, I consider increased sales in terms of dollar figures. You're referring to unit volume. Good game. :)
Using OO sucks in C++
At least in C your bugs are all yours.
So when using libraries in C++, all your bugs are belong to us?