If subscribers will be able to see articles before anyone else, they should be able to pre-emptively mod down habitual trolls and "First Post!!!!!111111one"ers.
Your Karma has gone down 2 level(s) for the future posting of goatse.cx links
Bandwidth-wise, porn takes up a substantial amount of the Internet. But since porn is all pictures and videos, it's not really fair to use bandwidth alone to compare it to the rest of the internet. When you look at things with the time you spend using them in mind versus the raw file size, or look at the amount of actual content, the number doesn't seem so huge. Take, for example, Slashdot {pander++}. HUGE amounts of content, but it's more or less all text.
Judging by bandwidth is fine if you're just going on a factfinding mission, but there are other considerations involved in guaging the pulse of the internet.
Blogging is very overrated by the mass media. Every single (printed) story I've read on it heralds it as a revolution in reporting and acts like it's going to be the dominant way people get information very soon; when you get down to it it's just a million people with agendas bitching about stuff for their friends to read. I don't think that media ignorance of technology alone is enough to explain this, so the question in my mind is, why does the media hype blogging so? What stock could the mass media possibly have in the success or stagnation (as long as there are things to bitch about and people to run the sites it won't die) of blogging?
Slashdot Mirror
Wonderful. Can't wait to see the first rash of complaints about the genetic equivalent of a 404 or a BSOD once they start doing this.
Ni! Ni!
...when the only way to get to anything was by IP adress, doesn't it?
Your Karma has gone down 2 level(s) for the future posting of goatse.cx links
On second thought, worry.
There's only so much of one thing you can look at before it gets annoying. Except for porn. You can never look at too much porn.
"Is MS" and "sold out" in the same sentence is clearly rhetorical.
"Do you want me to talk?" "no mr bond i want u to STFU!111" Damn script kiddies....
Yup, playing games sure teaches students how to do things. "What did you learn today?" "ZERGLING RUSH!!!!"
Bandwidth-wise, porn takes up a substantial amount of the Internet. But since porn is all pictures and videos, it's not really fair to use bandwidth alone to compare it to the rest of the internet. When you look at things with the time you spend using them in mind versus the raw file size, or look at the amount of actual content, the number doesn't seem so huge. Take, for example, Slashdot {pander++}. HUGE amounts of content, but it's more or less all text. Judging by bandwidth is fine if you're just going on a factfinding mission, but there are other considerations involved in guaging the pulse of the internet.
Blogging is very overrated by the mass media. Every single (printed) story I've read on it heralds it as a revolution in reporting and acts like it's going to be the dominant way people get information very soon; when you get down to it it's just a million people with agendas bitching about stuff for their friends to read. I don't think that media ignorance of technology alone is enough to explain this, so the question in my mind is, why does the media hype blogging so? What stock could the mass media possibly have in the success or stagnation (as long as there are things to bitch about and people to run the sites it won't die) of blogging?