We all know the PC story and how IBM and apple and others pioneered it. Same with Wordprocessing and office software. And what about Programming IDEs?.
Now look at what is happening in the field of PDAs and telephones. And of course there's the Xbox which came lat to the party as well.
MSN is another good example
Gates deserves blame for missing the wave of Web-based software that has propelled Google and Yahoo.
I really don't think Google and Yahoo are microsofts problem. If you ask Joe Shmoe CEO who is starting a business what kind of software he needs, he's still going to say "Outlook, Word, Excel".
The real problem with microsoft is they can't innovate with new versions of their old products..net isn't that hot, Vista is taking forever, nothing special is going on with office, MSN doesn't stand out in any way, SQL server doesn't seem like anything special compared to oracle or even MySQL. The only thing it seems they are making progress with is the X-Box 360 and Live Arcade.
Also from the article:
Losing both Gates and Ballmer will spell a big change for Microsoft. But it's likely to be a positive one. At this point, Ballmer's associated more with the hard-charging business tactics that led to Microsoft's antitrust woes and a low stock price that's sapping employee morale.
The drive of Gates and Ballmer may have led to antitrust woes, but they also drove Microsoft to be the #1 software company in the world. Give the devil its due.
Unless your definition of "Christian" has no relation to the teachings of Christ, Javalord, you're just another droning conservative apologist too lazy to even read about the things you defend.
You must be on the low end of the democrat spectrum. Let me guess, you dropped out of high school? Try looking up the word hyperbole. Thanks for playing.
She contradicts every single thing that comes out of her mouth.
Really? Name some stuff. She's more consistant than most conservative politicians. You may not agree with her, but she does not contradict anything that I've ever heard.
It is widely known that not only do liberals hate her, but most republicans too because she routinely is used as a example of what is wrong with the right wing
Most republicans actually like her, as do independant conservatives. Most mature people don't have to share a point of view with someone to read what they have to say, and maybe get a laugh out of it.
because she is so fascist and out of touch from even the extreme right in her ideals.
lol, welcome to dreamland, population you.
Dvorak is just a idiot,
Yes, anyone you don't like is an idiot. That is why he's been writing for the tech industry since for the past 20-30 years, and you are posting on slashdot.
she on the otherhand exibits the type of evil one sided view that helped the Nazi party come to power
I think you have a poor sense of history if you think advocating the screening of muslims at American airports is the same as putting Jews into ovens.
Yeah, he's been doing this for a long time. And the tech world is full of enough fanatics that you can't help but piss people off. Write an inflammatory article on Apple, Open Source, Linux, Nintendo, or any number of other technosacredcows, and bang! instant traffic. Much easier than saying something intelligent.
The funny part is, he writes 'inflammatory' articles about every tech company. Hell he wrote one about microsoft a few weeks ago. Some mac users just get pissed off because they define their life by what OS they use.
Any time a writer will go after a 'sacred cow' as you put it, they encounter people trying to censor them. It's really too bad.
Yes, much like Dvorak she voices unpopular opinions, and people look to censor both of them, because god forbid someone held an opinion, or wrote a story they didn't like.
Don't you think it's possible the product would be better if they brought in some people who drank coffee in a different way? Someone who maybe cared about how user friendly, or attractive, or easy to learn the coffee maker might be? Maybe a woman or two? Or a guy from some other continent where they might use a different type of bean?
Who puts together a coffee maker and leaves it just to engineers? Your hypothetical situation would never happen, unless you somehow created a company full of 'mostly white, middle class, under-socialized males' which would be a neat trick. I'm not sure why you relate being a white male with being under-socialized either. I don't know of any company that doesn't test a product with different groups of people to see what they like and don't like.
My point is a simple one, diversity for the sake of diversity is a waste. The only obligation any company should have is to hire whoever is the most qualified for a job. Hiring someone to get a different point of view isn't a bad thing, but staffing your company so it's perfectly diverse at the expense of talent is both unfair and stupid.
Yeah, let us know when you decide to join the rest of us in the 21st century. Hell, you even might get a "I for one welcome our Old Reactionnary Patriearchal Overlord" =P
Let us know when you have evolved to the point where you can give an unpopular opinion a fair hearing.
More women in the IT-field would increase the diversity generally a Good Thing (c)
There is nothing special or magical about diversity. I know that might break your heart, or go against everything you've been taught/programmed to think, but I'd take talent over diversity any day. I could care less about gender or race. I'd take 100 albino eunichs that were awesome web developers over a group of 100 average but perfectly racially/sexually diverse developers.
What evidence do you have for this? And, no, the fact that there are now more women working is not proof that they are being forced into working. You make it sound like slavery.
I'm not sure if you are American or not, but do you know what it's like trying to raise children on one salary nowadays? Middle class mothers, and especially lower middle class mothers have to work.
Again, some evidence might be amusing. The normal feminist argument would be that the proportion of men and women doing the "traditional housewife role" should be about the same.
There are feminists that look down upon women who decide to be housewives.
Researchers at City University of NY are working on an NSF-funded project to infuse technology into Liberal Arts courses taken by students who are in primary tech-producer or tech-consumer majors.
Why don't they work on infusing more real world type projects into their comp sci majors instead?
Although, we're there at the invitation / permission of the local countries. Bin Laden should direct his anger about this point toward the host nations instead of the U.S., but won't for obvious political and ego/ethno-centric reasons.
This is very true. He is not right minded, but it doesn't change the underlying fact. If we were not there, they would not be here.
Also, I suspect that many other middle easterners hold the same feelings Bin Laden did. If you are American, do you enjoy it when Europeans tell us how we should run our country? How would you feel about a French military base in your hometown? How about a Russian one? Chinese?
Funny how it's always someone else's fault.
I don't want to come off as blaming the victim, I mearly wanted to point out the reasons for terrorism and why they lead to where we are today in America. 9/11 was not justified, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the reasons it happened.
Typically I don't respond to flamebait, however...
Still Think the US isn't Headed for Fascism?
The US isn't heading anywhere twards Fascism. The neocons are interventionalists, and imperialists via proxy. Really, this isn't anything new, because America has been fighting interventionist wars since Bush 1 was in office. Why do we continue to stick our nose in everyones business around the world against the advice of our founding fathers? While Hitler was a scourge to all of humanity, his legacy continues to haunt America, as America thinks they have some moral obligation to police the world, since when they didn't Hitler came to power. There is a collective guilt trip about not getting into WW2 earlier, and this leads to poor foreign policy.
Then you need to pull your head out slowly and cleanly and WAKE THE FUCK UP! George W. Bush is a criminal and needs to be impeached. NOW.
I'd hate to break it to you, but he's not a criminal. A weak president perhaps, but not a criminal.
Real Americans realize this. Idiot Americans don't.
Because anyone who disagrees with your personal beliefs must be an idiot. Isn't that the start of facist thinking? Perhaps you are heading twards facism, while the US is heading twards foriegn policy bankrupcy.
The only time an attack by a foreign power was ever carried out on U.S. soil was Pearl Harbour. 9/11 was done by the U.S. government. WAKE UP NOW!
I think you need to wake up now personally. I've watched loose change, and read the various internet theories about how 9/11 was done by our government. None of them lead to logical conclusions. Most are leftist propaganda. I can tell you why 9/11 happened with ease, they (the terrorists) were here, because we were over there. Bin Laden was unhappy with our continued support of israel, our military bases in the middle east, our propping up of corrupt regimes, and with our 1991 war in Iraq. He's said so in his statements. 9/11 happened for the same reason other terrorist events happen, an occupying force was in a foriegn land, the native people could not resist via standard military means so they resort to the weapon of the weak...Terrorism.
Instead of buying into these partisan theories, and coming up with arguements like "BUSH IS A WAR CRIMINAL!!!!@#! He is behind 9/11" go read the words of our founding fathers. Both Washington and Adams warned against our current foreign policy, and what it would lead to. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike the policies of Bush without coming up with fabricated stories based on hollywood logic.
Also, you might come to the conclusion that this isn't just a George W. Bush problem. It's a consistant policy from Bush 1, to Clinton, to Bush 2. They all thought America should policy the world, and Hillary will be the same way if she gets into office.
You may think most of this post has nothing to do with the original article, but in truth it has everything to do with it. If we weren't being the keystone cops of the world, we wouldn't have to deal with domestic terrorism from foreign fighters.
Guantanamo bay has nothing to do with it. Also, it IS ok for the American government to do what they want to foreign fighters in a time of war. Especially ones that don't fight by the geneva convention. Use your common sense here, would you fight by the rules of boxing if you were in a street fight and the other guy were choking you?
As for chipping innocent illegals, or anyone for that matter, it's a no go. Chipping enemies in a time of war might not be a bad idea, but chipping people in anticipation that they will commit a crime is silly.
The guest worker program is a cave in to big business, as is amnesty. The American people don't want it, yet it's being forced down their throats by the politicians on both sides and the media. The arguement that we can't deport 12 million lawbreakers because it would be 'too hard' is silly. We can't catch all the murders out there either, but we sure as hell try. If 12 million people didn't pay their taxes, do you think the IRS would just say "Aww fuck it, it's too many of them to enforce the law!"
America needs to streamline the legalimmigration process and allow these people in as long as they pass reasonable background checks.
It's the usual "Blame the Victim/The Criminal must be innocent!" mentality that goes on here. It's pretty sad actually. It's also nice to see someone get some 'real' justice without having to involve the government/authorities.
what? You have never heard of CFNM before? What happened to your sex ed? or does your sex ed come from america?
Yes, because the primary goal of taxpayer funded education should be to educate teens on every fetish imaginable. I'm not suprised at how "educated" you are about this particular fetish though, considering some of your posting history.
American Idol loves to say "That's more votes than the last election" or some other bullshit. What they conveniently leave out is that you're allowed to vote more than once for American Idol.
There are other dynamics at work as well:
1. You can vote from your phone for American Idol, you have to trudge out to the polls to vote for the next president, on a work day on top of it.
2. Politics are more difficult to follow then American Idol. Almost everyone can watch American Idol and decide if someone can sing well or not. How many Americans do you think understand or care about foreign policy? How many care about fiscal policy? How many care about Social Security other then it 'being there' for them?
3. American Idol tends to be more 'tribal'. What I mean by that is it often puts people of different ethnic backgrounds or gender against one another, and the media plays upon those differences to encourage more votes. For president, you typically end up with rich WASP male #1 vs rich WASP male #2.
How many women do you think will turn out to vote for Hillary just because she's a women in 2008? Don't discount that type of motivation from a previously disenfranchised group, it's a strong one.
That would be what, a SiN skinned HL2 multiplayer mod at best?
That would be pretty cool actually. The original sin, and the expansion pack were a great deal of fun if you played multiplayer. There was a good varity of guns that made for some unique gameplay. I still haven't found any other fps with something as cool as the original SiN's spider mines for laying traps that other players could fall into.
So far as I can tell, all multiplayer FPS mods are merely visual themes ontop of the engine with the same old punks, whiny brats and hard cases one has to deal with in them all.
Pretty much every multiplayer game is like this, it's not unique at all to FPS games. Hell, my subway rides home are like this, so I guess I'm a bit immune to it.
At least with a story line, even if it is 'light', it's an actual story and not just someone else yelling through the voice line about how they're gonna blah blah...
True, but if you really want a challenge you have to play against other human players.
I'm sorry, but masquerading hate speech as news does not make it news. Calling 'Mein Kampf' a semi-factual analysis of the growing inequities in post WW1 Germany does not make it news.
Mein Kampf isn't current so it isn't 'news'. It is history however, and making it illegal is stupid. It's a link to how one of the worst regimes ever in history came to power, and ignoring it, censoring it, and making it unavailable as they do in many european countries is downright stupid.
Free speech is important, especially when dealing with radical opinions. I'd rather have the racist yelling in my town square so people can argue against him, rather than having private meetings where his garbage goes unchallenged.
The internet is the same way, I'd rather have access to both the far left and far right news websites via google, then just the mainstream media. The beauty of the net is that you get to hear different opinions, and if they are nutty you have the forum to say so.
The difference between calling illegal immigrants "illegal immigrants" and just plain old "immigrants" is negligible,
Bullshit. The whole debate is about illegal immigration, not immigration. Many want to streamline the process of legal immigration. Very few people want to end immigration in the US, but the majority of people want to end illegal immigration. Thus, calling illegal immigrants just immigrants makes a huge difference. Especially to the uninformed shmuck who turns on the evening news once a week and hears 'immigrants come out to protest!'. It frames the debate in a dishonest way.
especially because there were more than just illegals in the protests, and it was more than just the rights of the illegals that were at stake.
Really? Who else had their 'rights' at stake. Please inform us.
Hehe.. this is interesting, we say the same thing about conservatives. "If it wasn't for the tobacco-chewing, cousin-marrying, religous red states...
You realize, you are implying that 'religious' people (ie Christians) in those red states marry their cousins. That is as bad as the stuff google is censoring.
we wouldn't be in this mess." Is the kind of thing that's said in liberal circles. Of course, it's BS too. It's all about perspective ^_^
I don't think it is BS. If you subtracted certain interest groups from either party and they wouldn't win any national elections.
Of course, they would find new groups to pander to, since that is the nature of a two party beast.
Liberals much like conservatives in America are a mix of both those educated and those not educated. If you didn't allow anyone to vote without having a high school diploma, do you think the democrats would win any more national elections?
Majority of Slashdot users = smart
Maybe.
and educated
Perhaps.
The crossover there means that yeah, of course a lot of slashdot readers will be liberals.
Have you ever heard the saying:
If you are under 30 and a conservative you have no heart, if you are over 30 and a liberal you have no brain.
While I realize that might offend you, it makes an important point...many liberals are young people much like the slashdot crowd is.
I may not agree with your politics, but you are correct. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Much like the left whines about freedom of speech anytime something doesn't go their way, the right has the same type of people.
The proper conservative response is to inform people, and use a different search engine. Google's bias is clear, they've donated hand over foot to democratic candidates and submit to the whims of communist China. In the end, it's obvious their employees lean twards socalist viewpoints. That is fine, just use another search engine.
1) They're still saying it.
yep.
2) Google search engine is still linking to them.
Yep, just not through the 'news' section.
3) They've been kicked from a news site because they're not news sites, but hate sites.
Well, the front page of their website looks like a news website to me. Are they biased? Sure. So is the New York Times. The articles Google complained about were opinion articles.
So Google won't link to the newmediajournal.us as a news website, but they will link to socialist worker.org?
I think the slashdot editors are to some extent forced to post issues to the front page when they get big enough on the internet. I mean, there's been plenty of slashdot readers, like this dimwit who are talking about this (his sig is "Liberal Slashdot Bias.")
If you don't think the majority of slashdot readers are liberal, you are the dimwitted one.
Slashdot Mirror
We all know the PC story and how IBM and apple and others pioneered it. Same with Wordprocessing and office software. And what about Programming IDEs?. Now look at what is happening in the field of PDAs and telephones. And of course there's the Xbox which came lat to the party as well.
.net isn't that hot, Vista is taking forever, nothing special is going on with office, MSN doesn't stand out in any way, SQL server doesn't seem like anything special compared to oracle or even MySQL. The only thing it seems they are making progress with is the X-Box 360 and Live Arcade.
MSN is another good example
Gates deserves blame for missing the wave of Web-based software that has propelled Google and Yahoo.
I really don't think Google and Yahoo are microsofts problem. If you ask Joe Shmoe CEO who is starting a business what kind of software he needs, he's still going to say "Outlook, Word, Excel".
The real problem with microsoft is they can't innovate with new versions of their old products.
Also from the article:
Losing both Gates and Ballmer will spell a big change for Microsoft. But it's likely to be a positive one. At this point, Ballmer's associated more with the hard-charging business tactics that led to Microsoft's antitrust woes and a low stock price that's sapping employee morale.
The drive of Gates and Ballmer may have led to antitrust woes, but they also drove Microsoft to be the #1 software company in the world. Give the devil its due.
Unless your definition of "Christian" has no relation to the teachings of Christ, Javalord, you're just another droning conservative apologist too lazy to even read about the things you defend.
You must be on the low end of the democrat spectrum. Let me guess, you dropped out of high school? Try looking up the word hyperbole. Thanks for playing.
Hey soft guy,
Take an english class, I never said she was a politician, I merely said she was more consistant than politicians. Go kill yourself now.
to censor a opinion you have to have one.
Uhh ok? What does that mean comrade falcon?
She contradicts every single thing that comes out of her mouth.
Really? Name some stuff. She's more consistant than most conservative politicians. You may not agree with her, but she does not contradict anything that I've ever heard.
It is widely known that not only do liberals hate her, but most republicans too because she routinely is used as a example of what is wrong with the right wing
Most republicans actually like her, as do independant conservatives. Most mature people don't have to share a point of view with someone to read what they have to say, and maybe get a laugh out of it.
because she is so fascist and out of touch from even the extreme right in her ideals.
lol, welcome to dreamland, population you.
Dvorak is just a idiot,
Yes, anyone you don't like is an idiot. That is why he's been writing for the tech industry since for the past 20-30 years, and you are posting on slashdot.
she on the otherhand exibits the type of evil one sided view that helped the Nazi party come to power
I think you have a poor sense of history if you think advocating the screening of muslims at American airports is the same as putting Jews into ovens.
Yeah, he's been doing this for a long time. And the tech world is full of enough fanatics that you can't help but piss people off. Write an inflammatory article on Apple, Open Source, Linux, Nintendo, or any number of other technosacredcows, and bang! instant traffic. Much easier than saying something intelligent.
The funny part is, he writes 'inflammatory' articles about every tech company. Hell he wrote one about microsoft a few weeks ago. Some mac users just get pissed off because they define their life by what OS they use.
Any time a writer will go after a 'sacred cow' as you put it, they encounter people trying to censor them. It's really too bad.
Two words: Ann Coulter.
Yes, much like Dvorak she voices unpopular opinions, and people look to censor both of them, because god forbid someone held an opinion, or wrote a story they didn't like.
Don't you think it's possible the product would be better if they brought in some people who drank coffee in a different way? Someone who maybe cared about how user friendly, or attractive, or easy to learn the coffee maker might be? Maybe a woman or two? Or a guy from some other continent where they might use a different type of bean?
Who puts together a coffee maker and leaves it just to engineers? Your hypothetical situation would never happen, unless you somehow created a company full of 'mostly white, middle class, under-socialized males' which would be a neat trick. I'm not sure why you relate being a white male with being under-socialized either. I don't know of any company that doesn't test a product with different groups of people to see what they like and don't like.
My point is a simple one, diversity for the sake of diversity is a waste. The only obligation any company should have is to hire whoever is the most qualified for a job. Hiring someone to get a different point of view isn't a bad thing, but staffing your company so it's perfectly diverse at the expense of talent is both unfair and stupid.
Yeah, let us know when you decide to join the rest of us in the 21st century. Hell, you even might get a "I for one welcome our Old Reactionnary Patriearchal Overlord" =P
Let us know when you have evolved to the point where you can give an unpopular opinion a fair hearing.
More women in the IT-field would increase the diversity generally a Good Thing (c)
There is nothing special or magical about diversity. I know that might break your heart, or go against everything you've been taught/programmed to think, but I'd take talent over diversity any day. I could care less about gender or race. I'd take 100 albino eunichs that were awesome web developers over a group of 100 average but perfectly racially/sexually diverse developers.
What evidence do you have for this? And, no, the fact that there are now more women working is not proof that they are being forced into working. You make it sound like slavery.
I'm not sure if you are American or not, but do you know what it's like trying to raise children on one salary nowadays? Middle class mothers, and especially lower middle class mothers have to work.
Again, some evidence might be amusing. The normal feminist argument would be that the proportion of men and women doing the "traditional housewife role" should be about the same.
There are feminists that look down upon women who decide to be housewives.
Researchers at City University of NY are working on an NSF-funded project to infuse technology into Liberal Arts courses taken by students who are in primary tech-producer or tech-consumer majors.
Why don't they work on infusing more real world type projects into their comp sci majors instead?
Although, we're there at the invitation / permission of the local countries. Bin Laden should direct his anger about this point toward the host nations instead of the U.S., but won't for obvious political and ego/ethno-centric reasons.
This is very true. He is not right minded, but it doesn't change the underlying fact. If we were not there, they would not be here.
Also, I suspect that many other middle easterners hold the same feelings Bin Laden did. If you are American, do you enjoy it when Europeans tell us how we should run our country? How would you feel about a French military base in your hometown? How about a Russian one? Chinese?
Funny how it's always someone else's fault.
I don't want to come off as blaming the victim, I mearly wanted to point out the reasons for terrorism and why they lead to where we are today in America. 9/11 was not justified, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the reasons it happened.
Typically I don't respond to flamebait, however...
Still Think the US isn't Headed for Fascism?
The US isn't heading anywhere twards Fascism. The neocons are interventionalists, and imperialists via proxy. Really, this isn't anything new, because America has been fighting interventionist wars since Bush 1 was in office. Why do we continue to stick our nose in everyones business around the world against the advice of our founding fathers? While Hitler was a scourge to all of humanity, his legacy continues to haunt America, as America thinks they have some moral obligation to police the world, since when they didn't Hitler came to power. There is a collective guilt trip about not getting into WW2 earlier, and this leads to poor foreign policy.
Then you need to pull your head out slowly and cleanly and WAKE THE FUCK UP! George W. Bush is a criminal and needs to be impeached. NOW.
I'd hate to break it to you, but he's not a criminal. A weak president perhaps, but not a criminal.
Real Americans realize this. Idiot Americans don't.
Because anyone who disagrees with your personal beliefs must be an idiot. Isn't that the start of facist thinking? Perhaps you are heading twards facism, while the US is heading twards foriegn policy bankrupcy.
The only time an attack by a foreign power was ever carried out on U.S. soil was Pearl Harbour. 9/11 was done by the U.S. government. WAKE UP NOW!
I think you need to wake up now personally. I've watched loose change, and read the various internet theories about how 9/11 was done by our government. None of them lead to logical conclusions. Most are leftist propaganda. I can tell you why 9/11 happened with ease, they (the terrorists) were here, because we were over there. Bin Laden was unhappy with our continued support of israel, our military bases in the middle east, our propping up of corrupt regimes, and with our 1991 war in Iraq. He's said so in his statements. 9/11 happened for the same reason other terrorist events happen, an occupying force was in a foriegn land, the native people could not resist via standard military means so they resort to the weapon of the weak...Terrorism.
Instead of buying into these partisan theories, and coming up with arguements like "BUSH IS A WAR CRIMINAL!!!!@#! He is behind 9/11" go read the words of our founding fathers. Both Washington and Adams warned against our current foreign policy, and what it would lead to. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike the policies of Bush without coming up with fabricated stories based on hollywood logic.
Also, you might come to the conclusion that this isn't just a George W. Bush problem. It's a consistant policy from Bush 1, to Clinton, to Bush 2. They all thought America should policy the world, and Hillary will be the same way if she gets into office.
You may think most of this post has nothing to do with the original article, but in truth it has everything to do with it. If we weren't being the keystone cops of the world, we wouldn't have to deal with domestic terrorism from foreign fighters.
Didn't they learn apples from oranges!
Guantanamo bay has nothing to do with it. Also, it IS ok for the American government to do what they want to foreign fighters in a time of war. Especially ones that don't fight by the geneva convention. Use your common sense here, would you fight by the rules of boxing if you were in a street fight and the other guy were choking you?
As for chipping innocent illegals, or anyone for that matter, it's a no go. Chipping enemies in a time of war might not be a bad idea, but chipping people in anticipation that they will commit a crime is silly.
The guest worker program is a cave in to big business, as is amnesty. The American people don't want it, yet it's being forced down their throats by the politicians on both sides and the media. The arguement that we can't deport 12 million lawbreakers because it would be 'too hard' is silly. We can't catch all the murders out there either, but we sure as hell try. If 12 million people didn't pay their taxes, do you think the IRS would just say "Aww fuck it, it's too many of them to enforce the law!"
America needs to streamline the legalimmigration process and allow these people in as long as they pass reasonable background checks.
It's the usual "Blame the Victim/The Criminal must be innocent!" mentality that goes on here. It's pretty sad actually. It's also nice to see someone get some 'real' justice without having to involve the government/authorities.
what? You have never heard of CFNM before? What happened to your sex ed? or does your sex ed come from america?
Yes, because the primary goal of taxpayer funded education should be to educate teens on every fetish imaginable. I'm not suprised at how "educated" you are about this particular fetish though, considering some of your posting history.
American Idol loves to say "That's more votes than the last election" or some other bullshit. What they conveniently leave out is that you're allowed to vote more than once for American Idol.
There are other dynamics at work as well:
1. You can vote from your phone for American Idol, you have to trudge out to the polls to vote for the next president, on a work day on top of it.
2. Politics are more difficult to follow then American Idol. Almost everyone can watch American Idol and decide if someone can sing well or not. How many Americans do you think understand or care about foreign policy? How many care about fiscal policy? How many care about Social Security other then it 'being there' for them?
3. American Idol tends to be more 'tribal'. What I mean by that is it often puts people of different ethnic backgrounds or gender against one another, and the media plays upon those differences to encourage more votes. For president, you typically end up with rich WASP male #1 vs rich WASP male #2.
How many women do you think will turn out to vote for Hillary just because she's a women in 2008? Don't discount that type of motivation from a previously disenfranchised group, it's a strong one.
That would be what, a SiN skinned HL2 multiplayer mod at best?
That would be pretty cool actually. The original sin, and the expansion pack were a great deal of fun if you played multiplayer. There was a good varity of guns that made for some unique gameplay. I still haven't found any other fps with something as cool as the original SiN's spider mines for laying traps that other players could fall into.
So far as I can tell, all multiplayer FPS mods are merely visual themes ontop of the engine with the same old punks, whiny brats and hard cases one has to deal with in them all.
Pretty much every multiplayer game is like this, it's not unique at all to FPS games. Hell, my subway rides home are like this, so I guess I'm a bit immune to it.
At least with a story line, even if it is 'light', it's an actual story and not just someone else yelling through the voice line about how they're gonna blah blah...
True, but if you really want a challenge you have to play against other human players.
I was a huge fan of the original SiN, but I won't even think about picking up SiN episodes until the Multiplayer is up.
Perhaps because we value our embassies.
This is probably the most insightful post in this thread.
I'm sorry, but masquerading hate speech as news does not make it news. Calling 'Mein Kampf' a semi-factual analysis of the growing inequities in post WW1 Germany does not make it news.
Mein Kampf isn't current so it isn't 'news'. It is history however, and making it illegal is stupid. It's a link to how one of the worst regimes ever in history came to power, and ignoring it, censoring it, and making it unavailable as they do in many european countries is downright stupid.
Free speech is important, especially when dealing with radical opinions. I'd rather have the racist yelling in my town square so people can argue against him, rather than having private meetings where his garbage goes unchallenged.
The internet is the same way, I'd rather have access to both the far left and far right news websites via google, then just the mainstream media. The beauty of the net is that you get to hear different opinions, and if they are nutty you have the forum to say so.
The difference between calling illegal immigrants "illegal immigrants" and just plain old "immigrants" is negligible,
Bullshit. The whole debate is about illegal immigration, not immigration. Many want to streamline the process of legal immigration. Very few people want to end immigration in the US, but the majority of people want to end illegal immigration. Thus, calling illegal immigrants just immigrants makes a huge difference. Especially to the uninformed shmuck who turns on the evening news once a week and hears 'immigrants come out to protest!'. It frames the debate in a dishonest way.
especially because there were more than just illegals in the protests, and it was more than just the rights of the illegals that were at stake.
Really? Who else had their 'rights' at stake. Please inform us.
The political compass is full of loaded questions. Everyone comes out a leftist because of how the questions are worded.
Here is a fun one
If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.
and this one
Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races
It basically dresses up humanist, leftist positions and makes any positions to the right look like dictatorship.
Hehe.. this is interesting, we say the same thing about conservatives. "If it wasn't for the tobacco-chewing, cousin-marrying, religous red states...
You realize, you are implying that 'religious' people (ie Christians) in those red states marry their cousins. That is as bad as the stuff google is censoring.
we wouldn't be in this mess." Is the kind of thing that's said in liberal circles. Of course, it's BS too. It's all about perspective ^_^
I don't think it is BS. If you subtracted certain interest groups from either party and they wouldn't win any national elections.
Of course, they would find new groups to pander to, since that is the nature of a two party beast.
Majority of Liberals = smart and educated
Liberals much like conservatives in America are a mix of both those educated and those not educated. If you didn't allow anyone to vote without having a high school diploma, do you think the democrats would win any more national elections?
Majority of Slashdot users = smart
Maybe.
and educated Perhaps.
The crossover there means that yeah, of course a lot of slashdot readers will be liberals.
Have you ever heard the saying:
If you are under 30 and a conservative you have no heart, if you are over 30 and a liberal you have no brain.
While I realize that might offend you, it makes an important point...many liberals are young people much like the slashdot crowd is.
Not a Freedom of Speech issue.
I may not agree with your politics, but you are correct. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Much like the left whines about freedom of speech anytime something doesn't go their way, the right has the same type of people.
The proper conservative response is to inform people, and use a different search engine. Google's bias is clear, they've donated hand over foot to democratic candidates and submit to the whims of communist China. In the end, it's obvious their employees lean twards socalist viewpoints. That is fine, just use another search engine.
1) They're still saying it.
yep.
2) Google search engine is still linking to them.
Yep, just not through the 'news' section.
3) They've been kicked from a news site because they're not news sites, but hate sites.
Well, the front page of their website looks like a news website to me. Are they biased? Sure. So is the New York Times. The articles Google complained about were opinion articles.
So Google won't link to the newmediajournal.us as a news website, but they will link to socialist worker.org?
I think the slashdot editors are to some extent forced to post issues to the front page when they get big enough on the internet. I mean, there's been plenty of slashdot readers, like this dimwit who are talking about this (his sig is "Liberal Slashdot Bias.")
If you don't think the majority of slashdot readers are liberal, you are the dimwitted one.