> The fact that your post reached Score: 5, Insightful is a casebook example of the -1 to 5 moderation system not working.
I contend that it worked pretty well - only because the obvious trolls are so obvious that the +5 can be dismissed by most useful slashdot reader/posters/moderators.
Wow, that is a pretty bad bug. Tho design trends tend to be trends inside their industry/culture/community.. I'm not aware of too many sites that window.close() a window that wouldn't be the result of a popup (not advertising popup neccessarily, but things like previews, images, etc.)
Can you provide me with some examples of sites that window.close?
Removing the icons is piddly.. its getting _all_ the filetypes for web content that invokes IE that has eluded my lazy ass (I'm a lazy hacker.) Is there not a simple way (or utility) that ensures you cannot launch IE outside of actually launching the exe or a shortcut pointing to it?
Amen about the congrats. To me, Mozilla is an absolutely HUGE win for proving that open source non commercial groups can develop solid *clientside* software. Software written by individuals are a dime a dozen, but really good client side collaberative OS software that runs on Win32 is pretty are, from my visibility.
Finally, what are you using to indent your reply-quotes? I do the >[i]quote[/i] thing (with the gt and lt symbols of course), but I like your method better. Easier to read.
Do not confuse your knowledge with intuition. What is obvious to you is not obvious to others. This is why you take your car in for repairs. Just because the engine problem is obvious to your mechanic does not mean it should be obvious to you.
Spyware monitors what URLs you're visiting, etc. Unless you can prove (and I dont know, so I'm not baiting you here) that spyware combs my inbox, I'm going to say that spyware is much less of a concern for me than my personal email or personal files being shared.
People like you usually repeat two lines ad-nauseum:
1) Haha! What an idiot! They deserved to get taken advantage of!
2) Mother fucking asshole, he took advantage of my mom/sister/father/brother/friend/etc.. thats not fair.
It's rare to find someone brave enough (or forthright enough) to apply the 'buyer beware' scenario to people he/she cares about. Usually people tend to seperate the kinds of situations their social circle falls into and the kind of situations 'idiots' fall into, into two seperate classes of situations. Really, they are the same, so if you care about anybody enough to not think they are a moron for falling into any given trap, its not really justified to call other people idiots for doing so.
Re:out of the technical journal DUH.
on
Kazaa Usability Study
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Um. What if the question was:
Do you want to share:
1) Your media files. 2) Your personal files. 3) Both.
You contend the answer is 3. I say its 1. There is a big difference between sharing my mp3s and sharing my personal inbox.
Even Open Source will suck hard if you deploy immature software. This sounds more like a case of bad management and premature deployment than any fault of their platform.
Sorry, I'm not sure this can be turned into a pro-Linux thing. Of course, with my luck, you might just be trolling playfully.
The problem is keeping the junta from becoming our current plutocracy.. how do you ensure their goal is always 1), and not 1)s/average person/themselves-at-the-cost-of-others?
Maybe the responsiveness of the widget set is faster in IE, which makes it 'feel' faster... but downloading and rendering seems faster in Gecko than IE on my box.
While there are some rough edges (tho, remember IE 1.0?;), Mozilla is now the king of browsers. Tabs, developer-friendly tools (that dont get in the way of the newbie), skins, the level of customization, speed, cookie management.. and free (and open source!) Whats not to like?
Say goodbye, IE! Man am I glad to see you go.
(BTW, I hear in the next (last?) WinXP patch, you'll be able to strip IE from your system entirely? Where can I find detailed information about this?)
PS. I've been using Mozilla for about a month or two, and despite aforementionned rough edges, this thing absolutely blows IE out of the water in all respects except market share.;)
Oh please. I'm getting tired of this protrayal; we might be selfish in the end, but the means often involve teamwork, co-operation, comprimise to get there. I dont understand why this is so difficult for some to comprehend - to borrow the other reply's terminology, altruism is often required to achieve this 'selfishness'.. when selfishness is achieved through altruism, competition is no longer part of self fulfillment.
People are not driven by greed, they are driven by the desire to co-exist with minimal social friction, which is usually best achieved via altruism, teamwork, etc. Only once minimal social friction is achieved (or at least the illusion), people move onto their greed. We sometimes forget that we wouldn't be so selfish were there not authorities to protect us from social friction that would result from wanton, socially unchecked greed.
The trick is to to dictate what _should_ happen while not dictating _how_ it will happen. Giving underlings the freedom of choice with respect to implimentation leaves enough room for creativity (assuming you have the right dictator and underling army) to ensure that everyone is happy and benifits under said system.
I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I'm imagining most people have a hero/dictator/guide they would listen to sans question, and be all to happy to exercise their creativity and intellegence in implementing the processes required to reach the dictated goal.
If your conspiracy theories are true, then I think your FAQ addenum is dead on. I can't tell if its sarcasm, but I very literally agree with it's content.
Surely if Linux proponants are called hypocrites for running Windows for gaming, etc, then we must be allowed to call them hypocrites for using open source software when their report clearly supports closed source?
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
After reading this, I think I'll generalize what I consider to be evil: big.
> they try to convince congress to legislate in their favor
There is a big difference between me and 1000 other people each sending letters, and a company paying 17 people full time to go around washington and ensure that they are there when the decisions that affect my life get made.
> they employ people overseas for lower wages
No, they threaten to move their contracts to another country unless a country turns a willing eye to their labour laws. This isn't about law wages, this is about working inside military-gaurded compounds 13 hours a day (or 2 days straight during crunch times)... the people are not making the decisions here. The government must decide between exploiting their workers or leaving them no work at all - and yes, thats the fault of the companies. If I had something a family member needed to live, but threatened to take it elsewhere unless you flogged that family member before giving it to them, do you really think I'd have the position to state that it was your family's choice to take the flogging? I think you'd realize that they would not have lived were you not to conceed to my leverage and power (as manifested in the thing I have that they need to live.) It's called manipulation and exploitation. If your argument were to carry any water at all, your government wouldn't have a minimum wage, since, hey, anyone that took a job under minimum wage obviously chose to do so, right?
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
That last post wasnt any kind of argument.:)
Why? I've covered the points in a few other posts in this thread, and you havn't illustrated to me, outside of your lone experience, why size is fully independant from the likelihood that a job is 'good'. I don't think it takes a genius to figure out that the minimum wage McThrowaway job or Call Center Jockey job that I contend nobody has every enjoyed was practically invented by McDonalds and other large companies. Due to their ennormous power in the labour market, they have successfully removed any expectations of a living wage, fair benifits from such jobs.
I mean, the amount of menial job workers out there that have demonstrated either artistic or technical skills as their 'hobby' is a good indication of the balance of the labour market, and why the value of money over happiness has resulted in a veritable shortage of good jobs.
I'm sorry for the personal attack. This is an issue that hits very close to home for me, so I get very very heated. I realize it hurts my credibility, if I have any left.:)
The real answer is this: leverage. Large companies have leverage to reduce worker rights (and thus expectations, which is why most people assume its okay that call center jockeys and mcdonalds workers hate their jobs).. small companies do not and must respond more naturally to the 'demand' side of the market.
>I don't want the government using my tax dollars to achieve that (except in antitrust and other legal manners)
So hold on. You'd rather your taxmoney go (far more inefficiently) to laywers than to investigations as to whether an alternative is better than the current system, in addition to whether that alternative helps break the dependancy on that sole supplier (with the bonus by virtue of your purchasing power potentially helping your economy by stimulating more competition and thus making you weathier down the line?)
> Governments in general, and the US government in particular, can just *barely* do their job as is.
Speak for yourself. My governments website is often easier to navigate and data-mine than msdn.microsoft.com, who, according to the "wealthier equals better" formula so popular these days should have the best site.
I understand the need for a relateivly free market, but to me this is a clear case of two birds with one stone, for half the cost of getting only the first bird through your original methods. The costs might be initially steep, but in the long run, you can only be better off for having more competition and reducing MS's market leverage.
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
> Or don't you thing the use of the human mind counts for anything?
Please dont tell me you're including the majority of management jobs in that count. 'Professionals' would probably be including McDonalds, Starbucks, etc location managers. Does that count as mindfull, fulfulling work?
My stat was based on the sector you worked in, not neccessarily what you did. So, if you were a manager at Starbucks, you're in retail. I havn't met many retail managers that enjoyed their work or used their skills (with the exception of punctuality and an illusion that you'll move onto a good job any day now) to any meaningful degree.
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
Bwuahaha.
I really think its funny how often people try to defend their viewpoints dealing with huge complex macrocosmic systems using their individual experiences.
And dont say, "What else am I supposed to use." Thats what books, objectivity, reasoning and problem solving skills were designed for, although I understand that those were all exported out of the US to China recently, designated as 'toxic waste'.
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
you don't think America has any manufacturing industry left, do you?
Exactly! Nice to meet someone who can actually wake up and smell the foreign contractors.;)
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
Scale. Scale and scope. Capitalism is fine, its just in a state of disrepair and inequality. When companies became more powerful than governments (though the foreign investor settlement dispute clauses in 'free market' trade agreements pushed since the 80s.), things took a downturn. Too heavy a reliance on privatization, the corperatization of culture (brands have more 'real estate' at concerts than the headlining bands, for instance)... I could go on, but unfortunately, it tends to get lost in these board discussions.
Read "No Logo". Search for it at Amazon. Read it with an open mind, and you'll begin to see what I mean. Try out a few books on the left of center regarding the left's view of global trade over the last 30 years.
Re:would you like some cheese with that w(h)ine?
on
Amazon.Heartbreak
·
· Score: 2
> All this huge-corporation stuff is really stifling the quality of living in America.
No, the quality of living is getting better. It's the happiness of living and the quality of living gap that is getting worse. But alas, I can see I'll get nowhere with you.
Slashdot Mirror
> The fact that your post reached Score: 5, Insightful is a casebook example of the -1 to 5 moderation system not working.
I contend that it worked pretty well - only because the obvious trolls are so obvious that the +5 can be dismissed by most useful slashdot reader/posters/moderators.
Wow, that is a pretty bad bug. Tho design trends tend to be trends inside their industry/culture/community .. I'm not aware of too many sites that window.close() a window that wouldn't be the result of a popup (not advertising popup neccessarily, but things like previews, images, etc.)
.. its getting _all_ the filetypes for web content that invokes IE that has eluded my lazy ass (I'm a lazy hacker.) Is there not a simple way (or utility) that ensures you cannot launch IE outside of actually launching the exe or a shortcut pointing to it?
Can you provide me with some examples of sites that window.close?
Removing the icons is piddly
Amen about the congrats. To me, Mozilla is an absolutely HUGE win for proving that open source non commercial groups can develop solid *clientside* software. Software written by individuals are a dime a dozen, but really good client side collaberative OS software that runs on Win32 is pretty are, from my visibility.
Finally, what are you using to indent your reply-quotes? I do the >[i]quote[/i] thing (with the gt and lt symbols of course), but I like your method better. Easier to read.
Do not confuse your knowledge with intuition. What is obvious to you is not obvious to others. This is why you take your car in for repairs. Just because the engine problem is obvious to your mechanic does not mean it should be obvious to you.
Spyware monitors what URLs you're visiting, etc. Unless you can prove (and I dont know, so I'm not baiting you here) that spyware combs my inbox, I'm going to say that spyware is much less of a concern for me than my personal email or personal files being shared.
People like you usually repeat two lines ad-nauseum:
.. thats not fair.
1) Haha! What an idiot! They deserved to get taken advantage of!
2) Mother fucking asshole, he took advantage of my mom/sister/father/brother/friend/etc
It's rare to find someone brave enough (or forthright enough) to apply the 'buyer beware' scenario to people he/she cares about. Usually people tend to seperate the kinds of situations their social circle falls into and the kind of situations 'idiots' fall into, into two seperate classes of situations. Really, they are the same, so if you care about anybody enough to not think they are a moron for falling into any given trap, its not really justified to call other people idiots for doing so.
Um. What if the question was:
Do you want to share:
1) Your media files.
2) Your personal files.
3) Both.
You contend the answer is 3. I say its 1. There is a big difference between sharing my mp3s and sharing my personal inbox.
Even Open Source will suck hard if you deploy immature software. This sounds more like a case of bad management and premature deployment than any fault of their platform.
Sorry, I'm not sure this can be turned into a pro-Linux thing. Of course, with my luck, you might just be trolling playfully.
Better yet, the next time terrorists try, they probably won't be able to do it with this new buggy terrorist-proof software! It's brilliant!
The problem is keeping the junta from becoming our current plutocracy .. how do you ensure their goal is always 1), and not 1)s/average person/themselves-at-the-cost-of-others?
Maybe the responsiveness of the widget set is faster in IE, which makes it 'feel' faster ... but downloading and rendering seems faster in Gecko than IE on my box.
Yeah, but if your post is any indication, your troll.exe is at version 0.02alpha.
While there are some rough edges (tho, remember IE 1.0? ;), Mozilla is now the king of browsers. Tabs, developer-friendly tools (that dont get in the way of the newbie), skins, the level of customization, speed, cookie management .. and free (and open source!) Whats not to like?
;)
Say goodbye, IE! Man am I glad to see you go.
(BTW, I hear in the next (last?) WinXP patch, you'll be able to strip IE from your system entirely? Where can I find detailed information about this?)
PS. I've been using Mozilla for about a month or two, and despite aforementionned rough edges, this thing absolutely blows IE out of the water in all respects except market share.
>So givin that all good replicators are selfish
.. when selfishness is achieved through altruism, competition is no longer part of self fulfillment.
Oh please. I'm getting tired of this protrayal; we might be selfish in the end, but the means often involve teamwork, co-operation, comprimise to get there. I dont understand why this is so difficult for some to comprehend - to borrow the other reply's terminology, altruism is often required to achieve this 'selfishness'
People are not driven by greed, they are driven by the desire to co-exist with minimal social friction, which is usually best achieved via altruism, teamwork, etc. Only once minimal social friction is achieved (or at least the illusion), people move onto their greed. We sometimes forget that we wouldn't be so selfish were there not authorities to protect us from social friction that would result from wanton, socially unchecked greed.
>one ultimate being dictates what should happen
The trick is to to dictate what _should_ happen while not dictating _how_ it will happen. Giving underlings the freedom of choice with respect to implimentation leaves enough room for creativity (assuming you have the right dictator and underling army) to ensure that everyone is happy and benifits under said system.
I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I'm imagining most people have a hero/dictator/guide they would listen to sans question, and be all to happy to exercise their creativity and intellegence in implementing the processes required to reach the dictated goal.
Which is a long winded way of agreeing with you.
The irony of this is that if you were forced to change, you wouldn't have a choice.
So, I'm assuming you'd commit suicide before someone forced you to be more ecofriendly?
If your conspiracy theories are true, then I think your FAQ addenum is dead on. I can't tell if its sarcasm, but I very literally agree with it's content.
Surely if Linux proponants are called hypocrites for running Windows for gaming, etc, then we must be allowed to call them hypocrites for using open source software when their report clearly supports closed source?
After reading this, I think I'll generalize what I consider to be evil: big.
... the people are not making the decisions here. The government must decide between exploiting their workers or leaving them no work at all - and yes, thats the fault of the companies. If I had something a family member needed to live, but threatened to take it elsewhere unless you flogged that family member before giving it to them, do you really think I'd have the position to state that it was your family's choice to take the flogging? I think you'd realize that they would not have lived were you not to conceed to my leverage and power (as manifested in the thing I have that they need to live.) It's called manipulation and exploitation. If your argument were to carry any water at all, your government wouldn't have a minimum wage, since, hey, anyone that took a job under minimum wage obviously chose to do so, right?
> they try to convince congress to legislate in their favor
There is a big difference between me and 1000 other people each sending letters, and a company paying 17 people full time to go around washington and ensure that they are there when the decisions that affect my life get made.
> they employ people overseas for lower wages
No, they threaten to move their contracts to another country unless a country turns a willing eye to their labour laws. This isn't about law wages, this is about working inside military-gaurded compounds 13 hours a day (or 2 days straight during crunch times)
That last post wasnt any kind of argument. :)
:)
.. small companies do not and must respond more naturally to the 'demand' side of the market.
Why? I've covered the points in a few other posts in this thread, and you havn't illustrated to me, outside of your lone experience, why size is fully independant from the likelihood that a job is 'good'. I don't think it takes a genius to figure out that the minimum wage McThrowaway job or Call Center Jockey job that I contend nobody has every enjoyed was practically invented by McDonalds and other large companies. Due to their ennormous power in the labour market, they have successfully removed any expectations of a living wage, fair benifits from such jobs.
I mean, the amount of menial job workers out there that have demonstrated either artistic or technical skills as their 'hobby' is a good indication of the balance of the labour market, and why the value of money over happiness has resulted in a veritable shortage of good jobs.
I'm sorry for the personal attack. This is an issue that hits very close to home for me, so I get very very heated. I realize it hurts my credibility, if I have any left.
The real answer is this: leverage. Large companies have leverage to reduce worker rights (and thus expectations, which is why most people assume its okay that call center jockeys and mcdonalds workers hate their jobs)
>I don't want the government using my tax dollars to achieve that (except in antitrust and other legal manners)
So hold on. You'd rather your taxmoney go (far more inefficiently) to laywers than to investigations as to whether an alternative is better than the current system, in addition to whether that alternative helps break the dependancy on that sole supplier (with the bonus by virtue of your purchasing power potentially helping your economy by stimulating more competition and thus making you weathier down the line?)
> Governments in general, and the US government in particular, can just *barely* do their job as is.
Speak for yourself. My governments website is often easier to navigate and data-mine than msdn.microsoft.com, who, according to the "wealthier equals better" formula so popular these days should have the best site.
I understand the need for a relateivly free market, but to me this is a clear case of two birds with one stone, for half the cost of getting only the first bird through your original methods. The costs might be initially steep, but in the long run, you can only be better off for having more competition and reducing MS's market leverage.
> Or don't you thing the use of the human mind counts for anything?
Please dont tell me you're including the majority of management jobs in that count. 'Professionals' would probably be including McDonalds, Starbucks, etc location managers. Does that count as mindfull, fulfulling work?
My stat was based on the sector you worked in, not neccessarily what you did. So, if you were a manager at Starbucks, you're in retail. I havn't met many retail managers that enjoyed their work or used their skills (with the exception of punctuality and an illusion that you'll move onto a good job any day now) to any meaningful degree.
Bwuahaha.
I really think its funny how often people try to defend their viewpoints dealing with huge complex macrocosmic systems using their individual experiences.
And dont say, "What else am I supposed to use." Thats what books, objectivity, reasoning and problem solving skills were designed for, although I understand that those were all exported out of the US to China recently, designated as 'toxic waste'.
you don't think America has any manufacturing industry left, do you?
;)
Exactly! Nice to meet someone who can actually wake up and smell the foreign contractors.
Scale. Scale and scope. Capitalism is fine, its just in a state of disrepair and inequality. When companies became more powerful than governments (though the foreign investor settlement dispute clauses in 'free market' trade agreements pushed since the 80s.), things took a downturn. Too heavy a reliance on privatization, the corperatization of culture (brands have more 'real estate' at concerts than the headlining bands, for instance) ... I could go on, but unfortunately, it tends to get lost in these board discussions.
Read "No Logo". Search for it at Amazon. Read it with an open mind, and you'll begin to see what I mean. Try out a few books on the left of center regarding the left's view of global trade over the last 30 years.
> All this huge-corporation stuff is really stifling the quality of living in America.
No, the quality of living is getting better. It's the happiness of living and the quality of living gap that is getting worse. But alas, I can see I'll get nowhere with you.