Summary is stupid. The reading of this resolution just looks like it "condemns" Dawkins, it's not going to "silence" him or boot him out of the state or any other such nonsense.
Or that firing US Attorneys is something that only Bush did and it is unprecedented.
Nice try, Karl Rove. The way that Bush did it is unprecedented, because only certain Attorneys were fired. Clinton, for example, fired ALL 90-something of them. There's a fine line between sweeping out everyone, and sweeping out just the ones that aren't "loyal Bushies". That phrase in quotes alone ought to make you throw up in your mouth a little bit, if you have any respect for what these people are supposed to do.
Glad you're excited. Bad news for the Republicans, that they can count among their number such a person that thinks a VP pick is going to seal an election that's two months in the future (forever, in politics). I'm curious what your excuse/justification will be in November, should your favored candidate lose. My money is on you forgetting that you even made this rant.
Since you didn't post the text for the benefit of us ignorant Americans, I googled it:
Article 10 Â- Freedom of expression 1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. 2 The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. Article 11 Â- Freedom of assembly and association 1 Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests. 2 No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.
From the damned website:
But if a computer can't read such a CAPTCHA, how does the system know the correct answer to the puzzle? Here's how: Each new word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is given to a user in conjunction with another word for which the answer is already known. The user is then asked to read both words. If they solve the one for which the answer is known, the system assumes their answer is correct for the new one. The system then gives the new image to a number of other people to determine, with higher confidence, whether the original answer was correct.
Now the patch for this is to start blurring the kittens. So welcome back to square one my friend. Is it all that bad? Transforms on pictures -- even simple rotates -- don't really make it harder to distinguish where a kitten is, not like weird strings of malformed text.
How can you "lose" $100? Does Steve Jobs mug you on the street? You paid $599 for a working product, end of story. Early adopters pay out the nose for bragging rights, film at 11.
Yep. Uncensored is a misnomer, but the salient point is that it's unlikely this place will have any more child porn problems than other image-hosting sites do, because they will still presumably be enforcing legality.
bayimg.com is a place where you can host all your images. We do not censor them. We believe in freedom of speech, it's of utter importance to us. As long as your pictures are legal they will be hosted here, but we reserve the right to remove images due to technical reasons though.
Did I miss the memo where child porn became legal in Sweden?
How can bank of america know the phishing site from the user?
I hate to defend SiteKey, because it's a piece of shit, but BoA knows the user from the phishing site because any time a new IP address tries to access the image, the authentication does not include the SiteKey picture and instead asks the usual security questions.
Of course, BoA may have screwed the pooch on this one as well, so you never know.
How many of us have time for 60 hour plus games anymore? I sure as hell don't. I'd be perfectly happy spending $30 for a 20 hour game that I'll actually at least somewhat finish than $60 for a 60 hour game, for which I'll never explore 50-70% of the content.
Sounds like you have an attention span problem, not a time problem. One sixty-hour game should theoretically take just as long to complete as two thirty-hour games. Who cares if takes you twice as long to complete a single game? Consider it getting your money's worth.
I'm not entirely convinced that Thoreau would share your view that protesting copyright law by obtaining cheap entertainment for yourself is somehow civil disobedience.
I think he would support the breaking of the DMCA and the like, though. Just IMHO. I think your justification is hollow because you profit personally from it, and your actions are the same as plain-jane music pirates.
Walmart doesn't pretend that it's a nice place to work.
You've never worked for Wal-mart, I take it. They spin as much or more than Microsoft, to the extent that they have posters in the employee break room that attempt to justify the crummy wage they pay you by scraping up every tiny benefit they give you and assigning an arbitrary money value to it.
Wal-mart is just like Microsoft and every other large corporation in that they are professionals when it comes to making a shit sandwich seem like free candy. In some ways Wal-mart is even worse, since they bone their employees on top of all of the other underhanded things they do to customers, distributors, etc.
I'm not sure which is more absurd, the projection of your distorted world-view onto others (the intentions of people you don't even know), or the fact that you've decided that information that's not in your face by default is being "censored".
The community here decides which posts to *highlight* through the moderation system, and M2 helps keep people honest. When moderators are given the ability to delete posts, call me. Until then, you are wrong.
Slashdot does not show you every by default. It has a default threshold that most people find acceptable, and gives a great deal of options for you to customize your own/. experience. This is completely appropriate, and not censorship. My cable modem does not beam the contents of the Interbutt directly into my brain every morning, this doesn't mean that Comcast is censoring it, however it does mean that I have to work to find what I want. The moderation system exists for the convenience of people who want to use it, it is not mandatory to use.
How are people here silenced or supressed? There posts are right there in plain sight. There has been REAL censorship on this site, aka removal of posts, moderation is neither censorship nor a "form" of it (I see what you did there). If anything, the moderation system promotes posts worth reading, it doesn't obliterate posts not worth reading. It's a subtle but EXTREMELY IMPORTANT distinction.
You need to work on your reading comprehension, sir. My issue with the grandparent is the mis-use of the word "censorship". I'm not denying that unpopular opinions get moderated down, I'm saying that moderation is not censorship. Additionally, the tools exist for users to read whatever unpopular posts that they like. You don't have to browse at the default threshold.
Slashdot's moderation system is a form of censorship
I don't think that word means what you think it means, sir. With two clicks I can see every -1 post in this whole discussion. You're a long-time user that ought to know this, you should be ashamed of yourself for calling the moderation system something that it is not.
Also, if you don't see any Microsoft apologists on this website, even browsing at +4, you are not paying attention at all. In general there is an anti-MS bias around here, but if you open your eyes you'll find the dissenting opinions.
On behalf of slashdotters with a clue, thank you for contributing to the dilution of a perfectly good word. Henceforth, let's associate "censorship" to mean "viewing threshold" on a stupid interbutts forum. That way, when REAL censorship happens, nobody will care.
There are posters in that thread making legitimate complaints about the search system (like "kde 3.4 compile error" will only search for "kde" because numbers aren't indexed and compile/error are both stop words), but it appears that the system stands.
Slashdot Mirror
The Times bought five thirty eight, and I can't detect any significant downgrade in the site.
FiveThiryEight is an ESPN site now... has been for over two years.
I wish I knew who it was so I could thank them personally.
The person who runs that Twitter account is a guy named Jake Beckman.
I guess I saved you a Google search.
Summary is stupid. The reading of this resolution just looks like it "condemns" Dawkins, it's not going to "silence" him or boot him out of the state or any other such nonsense.
Or that firing US Attorneys is something that only Bush did and it is unprecedented.
Nice try, Karl Rove. The way that Bush did it is unprecedented, because only certain Attorneys were fired. Clinton, for example, fired ALL 90-something of them. There's a fine line between sweeping out everyone, and sweeping out just the ones that aren't "loyal Bushies". That phrase in quotes alone ought to make you throw up in your mouth a little bit, if you have any respect for what these people are supposed to do.
Glad you're excited. Bad news for the Republicans, that they can count among their number such a person that thinks a VP pick is going to seal an election that's two months in the future (forever, in politics). I'm curious what your excuse/justification will be in November, should your favored candidate lose. My money is on you forgetting that you even made this rant.
1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include
freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and
ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of
broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2 The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and
responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions,
restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a
democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial
integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the
protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or
rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in
confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the
judiciary.
Article 11 Â- Freedom of assembly and association
1 Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom
of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade
unions for the protection of his interests.
2 No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than
such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic
society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the
prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or
for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This article shall
not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these
rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the
administration of the State.
Text at the bottom of the page:
Hilarious.
Tag it !irony, I know I did. :P
How can you "lose" $100? Does Steve Jobs mug you on the street? You paid $599 for a working product, end of story. Early adopters pay out the nose for bragging rights, film at 11.
Yep. Uncensored is a misnomer, but the salient point is that it's unlikely this place will have any more child porn problems than other image-hosting sites do, because they will still presumably be enforcing legality.
Err, haven't read much fanfic, have you?
How can bank of america know the phishing site from the user?
I hate to defend SiteKey, because it's a piece of shit, but BoA knows the user from the phishing site because any time a new IP address tries to access the image, the authentication does not include the SiteKey picture and instead asks the usual security questions.
Of course, BoA may have screwed the pooch on this one as well, so you never know.
I'm not entirely convinced that Thoreau would share your view that protesting copyright law by obtaining cheap entertainment for yourself is somehow civil disobedience.
I think he would support the breaking of the DMCA and the like, though. Just IMHO. I think your justification is hollow because you profit personally from it, and your actions are the same as plain-jane music pirates.
Wal-mart is just like Microsoft and every other large corporation in that they are professionals when it comes to making a shit sandwich seem like free candy. In some ways Wal-mart is even worse, since they bone their employees on top of all of the other underhanded things they do to customers, distributors, etc.
I saw that, too. Maybe both have us have been fooled, and this isn't really an article: it's actually a application for the job of /. editor.
I'm not sure which is more absurd, the projection of your distorted world-view onto others (the intentions of people you don't even know), or the fact that you've decided that information that's not in your face by default is being "censored".
/. experience. This is completely appropriate, and not censorship. My cable modem does not beam the contents of the Interbutt directly into my brain every morning, this doesn't mean that Comcast is censoring it, however it does mean that I have to work to find what I want. The moderation system exists for the convenience of people who want to use it, it is not mandatory to use.
The community here decides which posts to *highlight* through the moderation system, and M2 helps keep people honest. When moderators are given the ability to delete posts, call me. Until then, you are wrong.
Slashdot does not show you every by default. It has a default threshold that most people find acceptable, and gives a great deal of options for you to customize your own
This is my final post on this subject.
How are people here silenced or supressed? There posts are right there in plain sight. There has been REAL censorship on this site, aka removal of posts, moderation is neither censorship nor a "form" of it (I see what you did there). If anything, the moderation system promotes posts worth reading, it doesn't obliterate posts not worth reading. It's a subtle but EXTREMELY IMPORTANT distinction.
You need to work on your reading comprehension, sir. My issue with the grandparent is the mis-use of the word "censorship". I'm not denying that unpopular opinions get moderated down, I'm saying that moderation is not censorship. Additionally, the tools exist for users to read whatever unpopular posts that they like. You don't have to browse at the default threshold.
Also, if you don't see any Microsoft apologists on this website, even browsing at +4, you are not paying attention at all. In general there is an anti-MS bias around here, but if you open your eyes you'll find the dissenting opinions.
On behalf of slashdotters with a clue, thank you for contributing to the dilution of a perfectly good word. Henceforth, let's associate "censorship" to mean "viewing threshold" on a stupid interbutts forum. That way, when REAL censorship happens, nobody will care.
Like this thread here: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-223530-postda ys-0-postorder-asc-start-0.html
There are posters in that thread making legitimate complaints about the search system (like "kde 3.4 compile error" will only search for "kde" because numbers aren't indexed and compile/error are both stop words), but it appears that the system stands.
Wait, I thought only subscribers could see tags? I've been seeing them since they debuted, and I let my subscription lapse quite some time ago.