I love that you assume I simply MUST be listening to top 40 radio to hold the opinion I do.
If you simply must know, I listen to everything from Foo Fighters to Godspeed You Black Emperor to Dillinger Escape Plan to Tool to Opeth to Rush.
Is that "homogenous drivel?" Do I not "actually appreciate music and the talent behind it?" I don't wear my music interests on a sleeve like you in order to look down on other who might listen to top 40 (if someone wants to listen to top 40, who the hell are you to tell them they're wrong?).
You didn't address my points and instead attacked my musical interests. That is very interesting.
Don't worry, it's just michael being knee-jerk about absolutely anything and posting whatever gobbledygook gets submitted.
Pennsylvania could be banning child porn sites and michael would still be up in arms! Oh...damn. I have a question. Why would you trust policeman and the government to normally enforce the illegality of child porn and child abuse, yet not trust them to block child porn websites? In either case, you're trusting them to make the judgement call about what makes up child porn.
But because its websites, we get nice and knee-jerk about it. "How dare they decide what is child porn and block websites without telling me! Oh--so they've been busting child porn rings and arresting offenders for years, and I've trusted them with doing that. But that's okay, because it doesn't involve some idealistic Slashdot movement to make absolutely everything available on the internet! How dare they block child porn websites, and even worse, not tell me what they are! Down with all child porn laws because I don't trust them to make the judgement call! Viva child porn!"
Kind of disgusting in my view. But, hey. I'll probably get modded into oblivion, or some wannabe free speech lawyer will reply and start lecturing me about how "this sets a dangerous precedent" that "allows the government to decide what we can and cannot view." I'm sorry, but I don't want to view child porn! If you don't trust the government to decide what is child porn, why do you let them when it comes to standard child porn and abuse laws? Should civilians be enforcing all laws now because they don't trust whether or not the government can correctly judge what is illegal? Better not have faith in any policemen, detectives, or anyone else.
But what do I know? I'm going against the mentality of michael and his minions here. I guess I'll head over to michael's RIAA piracy article and attempt to inject a little sanity over there now instead of "OMG!!1 RIAA IS SUING OVER ILLEGAL PIRACY! HOW DARE THEY!!1"
From crackhead moderators who mod you down when they disagree with you, to vindictive editors who hound you into oblivion, it can be hard having a dissenting opinion on Slashdot!
How dare the RIAA sue for illegal piracy! Good thing micheal posted this under "Your Rights Online," because it is surely our right online to illegally download whatever the hell we want because it is there, it is convenient, and it has been so prevalent for so long, we have magically decided it is a-okay--despite the law!
Because people here don't know how to go about things the legal way. It's all about convenience to them, not legality or morality. Mp3s have become so incredibly convenient for them and been around long enough that the concept has solidified in their minds as "okay." It never was. The artists making the music didn't ask to have their albums ripped and leaked. But nobody pities them. They just criticize the labels and the RIAA. The beloved artists people are so desperate to get music from in any way possible are conveniently left out of the mental equation. Instead, it's all about how evil the companies are and how easy the technology is.
You're right; the desire for you to listen to non-mainstream music in order to feel more counterculture gives you the right to illegally download music that cost money and effort for someone to make available for sale.
No matter how people try to justify it, downloading mp3s is illegal. "Oh, I'm sampling before I buy." "Oh, I'll delete it later." "Oh, the RIAA is evil anyway." "They're just trying to hold back technology." The typical excuses from the flock don't matter.
I imagine I'll get the typical left-wing college students who will reply with their anecdotal stories of "legitimate" music piracy. It doesn't matter because it is still illegal.
You made the clever and original joke that there would be "OBEY," "CONSUME," and "REPRODUCE" subliminal messages because it is Microsoft. The moderaters will be pleased.
Your post began with "dunno about you, but..." and I knew immediately it would gleam no insight whatsoever.
Obviously, you would demand your money back if the movie you watched "crashed," whether it was a computer system or an actual projector breaking down. Congratulations for being obvious.
Your DVD idea is laughable since the resolutions of DVDs are not high enough for a massive screen. Though the originator of the thread deems it big enough for blue screens of death, which is sure to garner the positive reactions of many a crackhead moderator.
The simple fact is that you just don't like that it is Windows Media 9. From Microsoft. If it were MPEG4, Quicktime, DivX, or any other non-Microsoft format, this entire thread wouldn't exist.
Using the $ for some reason really seems to piss off M$ astro turfers.
In reality, it just annoys any free-thinking, reasonably intelligent person who sees how juvenile and silly it is. Ooh, you called them "M$." With a dollar sign. You do so much for your cause. Astro-turfers and anyone else are right to bust people's balls for such a goofy jab. What is it supposed to prove or insult? Wow, a company that makes money! It intends to make more of it too! That means we put a dollar sign in its name!
You can say the vilest thing about Bill Gates or M$ and the astro turfer will instantly zero in on the $ and start whining about it. I guess it does not bother them that their company is evil but it bothers them when somebody types M$.
I guess it's because they know Microsoft isn't evil and that "M$" is just childish and annoying and aids in revealing the total lack of any real argument the poster might have.
People do it because it's funny to read the replies of the astro turfers.
Wrong, they do it because their idiot 12-year old IRC friends who just installed Mandrake for the first time call it "Micro$haft Winbloze" as if it is insulting and inherently proves some sort of point.
The premise was not idiotic but the specifics may have been silly.
No, the premise was idiotic.
M$ (does that give you goosebumps?)
Wow, you sure have crushed me with your cohesive argument. You asked if I got goosebumps. That suddenly renders "M$" a mature and intelligent word because you're mocking the fact that I point out how dumb it is.
could simply not allow people using IE to visit google or make IE crash everytime people visit google for example. IE could throw an ominous warning when you visit google something like "Warning! google may return links or images of adult nature. Google may also expose you or your kids to web sites of communists, white supremacists and people who hate america, would you like to block google from your browser?".
You are right; your attempt to troll is 100% true.
M$ could rig the competition any way it wants and there is nothing anybody can do about it. Remember this is the corporation that bitchslapped the US justice dept and took a shit in it's mouth. Nothing can touch them except maybe some 16 year old crackers.
Microsoft can't rig any competition and there is plenty one can do about it. Linux is just as succeptible to your 16 year old hacker friends (yes, "hacker") as Windows, if not more so because it is not as widely implemented and therefore not as tested in the real world.
What insight does this runny stream of crap gleam whatsoever, aside from the glint of sunlight upon each soft ripple? "Everyone is missing the point here." I knew right when I hit these words that your post would be drivel.
Negatives: 1.) You use the word "Micro$oft." Wow. A dollar sign. Not only is that original and creative after all these years, but it is also nicely hypocritical considering $lackware sells CDs, as do the B$D's and other companie$ who, gasp, attempt to make money. Sorry, "ca$h."
2.) Your premise is idiotic. Bundling a search engine into the OS? The most they could do is integrate it into the Start Menu's search option, but people aren't forced to use it to search the web and won't ever be, no matter how much you hate that fact since it goes against your wild-eyed conspiracy scenarios toward Microsoft. Nobody will "be afraid; be very afraid" but you. I don't fear a search engine being integrated into Windows. People will continue to use Google if it is better. Internet Explorer won because Netscape began to suck.
3.) You suggest writing a Windows worm/virus. And despite this, you still got modded +5! This not only reveals the intentions of the trigger-happy crackheads who mod up anything remotely anti-Microsoft, but it reveals your stupidity like a giant gaping sphincter slowly expanding to unleash its defecation upon the world; in this case the Slashdot discussion following the article in which you chose to splatter this crap upon my screen.
Of course, I will likely be modded down by someone who disagrees with me, even though moderations should not be performed based on simple disagreement. But as your post and its subsequent moderations reveal, moderators are not concerned anymore with not being blatantly biased. Anything's game now when it's an article mentioning the M-word.
You posted a comment about the very submission I see at the top of this page. However, a crackhead moderator has decided you are "offtopic." Offtopic, for describing the submission itself.
I guess to be on topic, you have to bash Microsoft and promote Linux. Even if the moderator disagreed with you, your post is most decidedly not "offtopic." In fact, my post is not offtopic either; it is a continuation of the discussion you started that pertains to the submission that is the basis of this article. And yet, I will not be surprised if my post is modded "offtopic" as well, or "flamebait" or "troll."
But they don't need a better search engine to beat Google. They just need to neatly integrate their SE into Windows XP2 or whatever, really push it on sites such as Hotmail and MSN and other high-visibility sites, things like that. They are Microsoft, they don't need to have the better product to beat the competition.
You are right. Doing such will telekinetically force users to use their service instead of Google. It's easy to see why your post is "+4"...for various reasons.
It was a good joke. Star Trek sucks and has for decades. In every episode, they reroute power from something through something to something else. It is non-stop, scientific, gobbledygook. When you finally understand the joke, get back to me. Just because you're mad I criticized yours or someone else's "+5 Funny" post, don't get idiotic.
1. Find obvious article to whore in. 2. Skim the summary. 3. Reply and title your post "In other news..." 4. Take premise of article and twist it into something obviously absurd. Make sure it is not clever, original, or funny in any way. 5. Wait for dull, crackhead moderators with itchy mouse fingers to click it up into the various realms of Funny That Is Not.
I will either be modded down, someone will post another "step" to my list that references responses like mine, or some Anonymous Coward will copy my style as they usually do.
Re:/. to the rescue!!!
on
BSA IDC FUD
·
· Score: 1
Didn't you know? You deserve to be able to download absolutely anything, because there is a "possibility" you may buy it after trying it out.
It makes complete and utter sense! Utter sense, yes! Actual law doesn't matter; it's all about convenience in having the latest album leak before release date or the cracked WarCraft III ISO. It is completely okay for you to download something that you normally pay for in a store, and the fact that you have been doing it for years has solidified this flawed concept in your mind.
Pretty soon, some mouthpiece will come along spewing the general mindset toward you and me and will get +5 Insightful, and we will all call it a day.
Yeah! Real cool! This deserved to be +5 Funny, and I am rolling on the floor laughing as I type this! Please continue this kind of humor in the future! It pleases me much!
(Took me a minute to figure this out... Minotaur? Thunderbird? What?)
And so you decided to share this revelation of your idiocy with the rest of us? Or were you just summing up the article so that crackhead moderators who didn't even read the article would mod you up? I sincerely hope it doesn't take you a minute to figure it out...
Do you NEED to install it? They make this magical thing called an "option box" which allows you to "select" something called "Browser Only" when you install. It's really neat; you should check it out sometime.
Slashdot Mirror
I love that you assume I simply MUST be listening to top 40 radio to hold the opinion I do.
If you simply must know, I listen to everything from Foo Fighters to Godspeed You Black Emperor to Dillinger Escape Plan to Tool to Opeth to Rush.
Is that "homogenous drivel?" Do I not "actually appreciate music and the talent behind it?" I don't wear my music interests on a sleeve like you in order to look down on other who might listen to top 40 (if someone wants to listen to top 40, who the hell are you to tell them they're wrong?).
You didn't address my points and instead attacked my musical interests. That is very interesting.
You, sir, are a scholar and a gentleman, and I salute you. Thank you for being different from the rest.
Don't worry, it's just michael being knee-jerk about absolutely anything and posting whatever gobbledygook gets submitted.
Pennsylvania could be banning child porn sites and michael would still be up in arms! Oh...damn. I have a question. Why would you trust policeman and the government to normally enforce the illegality of child porn and child abuse, yet not trust them to block child porn websites? In either case, you're trusting them to make the judgement call about what makes up child porn.
But because its websites, we get nice and knee-jerk about it. "How dare they decide what is child porn and block websites without telling me! Oh--so they've been busting child porn rings and arresting offenders for years, and I've trusted them with doing that. But that's okay, because it doesn't involve some idealistic Slashdot movement to make absolutely everything available on the internet! How dare they block child porn websites, and even worse, not tell me what they are! Down with all child porn laws because I don't trust them to make the judgement call! Viva child porn!"
Kind of disgusting in my view. But, hey. I'll probably get modded into oblivion, or some wannabe free speech lawyer will reply and start lecturing me about how "this sets a dangerous precedent" that "allows the government to decide what we can and cannot view." I'm sorry, but I don't want to view child porn! If you don't trust the government to decide what is child porn, why do you let them when it comes to standard child porn and abuse laws? Should civilians be enforcing all laws now because they don't trust whether or not the government can correctly judge what is illegal? Better not have faith in any policemen, detectives, or anyone else.
But what do I know? I'm going against the mentality of michael and his minions here. I guess I'll head over to michael's RIAA piracy article and attempt to inject a little sanity over there now instead of "OMG!!1 RIAA IS SUING OVER ILLEGAL PIRACY! HOW DARE THEY!!1"
From crackhead moderators who mod you down when they disagree with you, to vindictive editors who hound you into oblivion, it can be hard having a dissenting opinion on Slashdot!
How dare the RIAA sue for illegal piracy! Good thing micheal posted this under "Your Rights Online," because it is surely our right online to illegally download whatever the hell we want because it is there, it is convenient, and it has been so prevalent for so long, we have magically decided it is a-okay--despite the law!
Revel in the logic!
Because people here don't know how to go about things the legal way. It's all about convenience to them, not legality or morality. Mp3s have become so incredibly convenient for them and been around long enough that the concept has solidified in their minds as "okay." It never was. The artists making the music didn't ask to have their albums ripped and leaked. But nobody pities them. They just criticize the labels and the RIAA. The beloved artists people are so desperate to get music from in any way possible are conveniently left out of the mental equation. Instead, it's all about how evil the companies are and how easy the technology is.
You're right; the desire for you to listen to non-mainstream music in order to feel more counterculture gives you the right to illegally download music that cost money and effort for someone to make available for sale.
No matter how people try to justify it, downloading mp3s is illegal. "Oh, I'm sampling before I buy." "Oh, I'll delete it later." "Oh, the RIAA is evil anyway." "They're just trying to hold back technology." The typical excuses from the flock don't matter.
I imagine I'll get the typical left-wing college students who will reply with their anecdotal stories of "legitimate" music piracy. It doesn't matter because it is still illegal.
You made the clever and original joke that there would be "OBEY," "CONSUME," and "REPRODUCE" subliminal messages because it is Microsoft. The moderaters will be pleased.
How "funny." You mentioned DRM and said Microsoft would gouge your eyes. That is witty and clever.
Your post began with "dunno about you, but..." and I knew immediately it would gleam no insight whatsoever.
Obviously, you would demand your money back if the movie you watched "crashed," whether it was a computer system or an actual projector breaking down. Congratulations for being obvious.
Your DVD idea is laughable since the resolutions of DVDs are not high enough for a massive screen. Though the originator of the thread deems it big enough for blue screens of death, which is sure to garner the positive reactions of many a crackhead moderator.
The simple fact is that you just don't like that it is Windows Media 9. From Microsoft. If it were MPEG4, Quicktime, DivX, or any other non-Microsoft format, this entire thread wouldn't exist.
Using the $ for some reason really seems to piss off M$ astro turfers.
In reality, it just annoys any free-thinking, reasonably intelligent person who sees how juvenile and silly it is. Ooh, you called them "M$." With a dollar sign. You do so much for your cause. Astro-turfers and anyone else are right to bust people's balls for such a goofy jab. What is it supposed to prove or insult? Wow, a company that makes money! It intends to make more of it too! That means we put a dollar sign in its name!
You can say the vilest thing about Bill Gates or M$ and the astro turfer will instantly zero in on the $ and start whining about it. I guess it does not bother them that their company is evil but it bothers them when somebody types M$.
I guess it's because they know Microsoft isn't evil and that "M$" is just childish and annoying and aids in revealing the total lack of any real argument the poster might have.
People do it because it's funny to read the replies of the astro turfers.
Wrong, they do it because their idiot 12-year old IRC friends who just installed Mandrake for the first time call it "Micro$haft Winbloze" as if it is insulting and inherently proves some sort of point.
The premise was not idiotic but the specifics may have been silly.
No, the premise was idiotic.
M$ (does that give you goosebumps?)
Wow, you sure have crushed me with your cohesive argument. You asked if I got goosebumps. That suddenly renders "M$" a mature and intelligent word because you're mocking the fact that I point out how dumb it is.
could simply not allow people using IE to visit google or make IE crash everytime people visit google for example. IE could throw an ominous warning when you visit google something like "Warning! google may return links or images of adult nature. Google may also expose you or your kids to web sites of communists, white supremacists and people who hate america, would you like to block google from your browser?".
You are right; your attempt to troll is 100% true.
M$ could rig the competition any way it wants and there is nothing anybody can do about it. Remember this is the corporation that bitchslapped the US justice dept and took a shit in it's mouth. Nothing can touch them except maybe some 16 year old crackers.
Microsoft can't rig any competition and there is plenty one can do about it. Linux is just as succeptible to your 16 year old hacker friends (yes, "hacker") as Windows, if not more so because it is not as widely implemented and therefore not as tested in the real world.
I admit it, that was somewhat clever.
What insight does this runny stream of crap gleam whatsoever, aside from the glint of sunlight upon each soft ripple? "Everyone is missing the point here." I knew right when I hit these words that your post would be drivel.
Negatives:
1.) You use the word "Micro$oft." Wow. A dollar sign. Not only is that original and creative after all these years, but it is also nicely hypocritical considering $lackware sells CDs, as do the B$D's and other companie$ who, gasp, attempt to make money. Sorry, "ca$h."
2.) Your premise is idiotic. Bundling a search engine into the OS? The most they could do is integrate it into the Start Menu's search option, but people aren't forced to use it to search the web and won't ever be, no matter how much you hate that fact since it goes against your wild-eyed conspiracy scenarios toward Microsoft. Nobody will "be afraid; be very afraid" but you. I don't fear a search engine being integrated into Windows. People will continue to use Google if it is better. Internet Explorer won because Netscape began to suck.
3.) You suggest writing a Windows worm/virus. And despite this, you still got modded +5! This not only reveals the intentions of the trigger-happy crackheads who mod up anything remotely anti-Microsoft, but it reveals your stupidity like a giant gaping sphincter slowly expanding to unleash its defecation upon the world; in this case the Slashdot discussion following the article in which you chose to splatter this crap upon my screen.
Of course, I will likely be modded down by someone who disagrees with me, even though moderations should not be performed based on simple disagreement. But as your post and its subsequent moderations reveal, moderators are not concerned anymore with not being blatantly biased. Anything's game now when it's an article mentioning the M-word.
Next.
Now this is finally something funny.
You posted a comment about the very submission I see at the top of this page. However, a crackhead moderator has decided you are "offtopic." Offtopic, for describing the submission itself.
I guess to be on topic, you have to bash Microsoft and promote Linux. Even if the moderator disagreed with you, your post is most decidedly not "offtopic." In fact, my post is not offtopic either; it is a continuation of the discussion you started that pertains to the submission that is the basis of this article. And yet, I will not be surprised if my post is modded "offtopic" as well, or "flamebait" or "troll."
I'm rolling on the floor.
How hilarious. Your humor is a model that should be followed. The standard by which all others are judged.
Microsoft buying Google; I'm rolling on the floor as I type this.
But they don't need a better search engine to beat Google. They just need to neatly integrate their SE into Windows XP2 or whatever, really push it on sites such as Hotmail and MSN and other high-visibility sites, things like that. They are Microsoft, they don't need to have the better product to beat the competition.
You are right. Doing such will telekinetically force users to use their service instead of Google. It's easy to see why your post is "+4"...for various reasons.
It was a good joke. Star Trek sucks and has for decades. In every episode, they reroute power from something through something to something else. It is non-stop, scientific, gobbledygook. When you finally understand the joke, get back to me. Just because you're mad I criticized yours or someone else's "+5 Funny" post, don't get idiotic.
Wow. You modified my nick by replaced "Critical" with "Whiny." That is clever. And you used your karma boost modifier to post it.
I look forward to your future writings.
I prefer to combat the evils of poor humor. Stupidity is a much more worthy battle than ignoring it.
Wow, you said I had panties in a knot. How insulting.
Captain! Reroute power to something! Repeat for decades!
1. Find obvious article to whore in.
2. Skim the summary.
3. Reply and title your post "In other news..."
4. Take premise of article and twist it into something obviously absurd. Make sure it is not clever, original, or funny in any way.
5. Wait for dull, crackhead moderators with itchy mouse fingers to click it up into the various realms of Funny That Is Not.
I will either be modded down, someone will post another "step" to my list that references responses like mine, or some Anonymous Coward will copy my style as they usually do.
Didn't you know? You deserve to be able to download absolutely anything, because there is a "possibility" you may buy it after trying it out.
It makes complete and utter sense! Utter sense, yes! Actual law doesn't matter; it's all about convenience in having the latest album leak before release date or the cracked WarCraft III ISO. It is completely okay for you to download something that you normally pay for in a store, and the fact that you have been doing it for years has solidified this flawed concept in your mind.
Pretty soon, some mouthpiece will come along spewing the general mindset toward you and me and will get +5 Insightful, and we will all call it a day.
Yeah! Real cool! This deserved to be +5 Funny, and I am rolling on the floor laughing as I type this! Please continue this kind of humor in the future! It pleases me much!
(Took me a minute to figure this out... Minotaur? Thunderbird? What?)
And so you decided to share this revelation of your idiocy with the rest of us? Or were you just summing up the article so that crackhead moderators who didn't even read the article would mod you up? I sincerely hope it doesn't take you a minute to figure it out...
Of course there is competition between open source projects. Just not financially.
Do you NEED to install it? They make this magical thing called an "option box" which allows you to "select" something called "Browser Only" when you install. It's really neat; you should check it out sometime.