Now, it seems to be at the whims of a few submitters (MrSeb, Hugh Pickens) with the editors asleep at the switch and posting stuff that's not even remotely tech news, typically biased political propaganda.
Slashdot has always been at the whim of a few submitters. Now lately I noticed they've been trying to change that, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still like that. Years ago I tried to participate in the submission system and a few of the stories I submitted were not added, but only a day or two later they were added, word for word, with a different submitter.
A lot of those other places have discussion systems in place. The point they were trying to make is that after two days, the topic has been known and discussed elsewhere in depth.
I was going to write a long winded rant trying to explain this to you, but then I realized you just wanted to get yourself upset. There's no point in trying to explain this further. Have fun sticking your head in the sand in crying.
Perfect example of Slashdot group think in terms of moderation.
Dialect includes many improper usages. For example, a lot of people in the city or people who live in poorer neighborhoods might use the word "axe" instead of ask. As in, "Can I axe you a question?" When they mean to say, "Can I ask you a question." This is certainly not rocket science to figure out. This applies to dragged vs drug. In man regions, no matter how educated someone may be, they will still use "drug" when typing something out quickly or in normal speech.
But please, waste your mod points on me by modding me down. I have an expansive amount of Karma to burn. And honestly, it's not hard to create another account.
Really? You're going to flame me for that? Have you ever talked to any of these people before? They all claim that it's a hobby. I know it's an addiction, which is why I put "hobby" in quotation marks. It's about context, something which you clearly didn't understand.
I'm going to second this notion. No matter how poor someone makes themselves out to be, I have always seen them spend money on things that aren't necessary every day. Did you really need that new tattoo? Did you have to visit the club this weekend? You bought your lunch every single day this week. I see you have a brand new pack of smokes. I imagine there are poor people out there who do everything they can to reasonably save a dollar and do not do these things, but they are also probably far fewer than a lot of people realize.
I admit, I very well could be wrong. I grew up poor. I've had poor friends. I work with poor people. I can reflect back on these situations and evaluate where people's priorities were. My family didn't have to live as poorly as we did if my parents didn't do drugs, smoke, and drink. My friends families were the same. The people I work with are the same. I have yet to run into a person who claims to be poor who doesn't do at least one of these things. Those "hobbies" aren't cheap either.
Stalking is defined by intent alone, regardless of the time frame. However the time-frame does make it more clear and cut on whether not it's stalking. The laws for stalking vary by each state though.
See how easy it is? What's absurd about my claim? Zimmerman followed the kid for an extended period of time. He has no acting official capacity in that community. He self-proclaims he does, but self proclamation really amounts to nothing here.
If he did have official capacity, he would have approached the kid sooner and talked to him. He did the exact opposite. He stalked him. When someone stalks you, it creates intimidation and fear. Generally speaking, when you have unwanted people in your gated community, you want them out as soon as possible. With all of the reports so far, I see no sense of urgency on his part.
Well yes, you can do those things, but there are limits on how long you can follow someone. You can't just knowingly follow someone for an extended period of time, which is what the guy did here. Stalking is all about intent. If he really cared what the kid was doing there, he would have simply talked to him sooner, not prolonged it until the kid was afraid for his safety.
A thousand times this. You can't claim self defense when you purposely stalk someone and then confront them out in public. You are purposely potentially putting yourself in harms way. I wish more people would understand this.
Even in right to work states you can take someone to court for wrong dismissal. Unfortunately you can come up with any bullshit story. This has happened to my current employer a few times. We'll bend over backwards to try and get you to be a good fit for the company, and the malcontent people will just get a lawyer and make stuff up. I believe the most anyone has got out of us is about 10,000 in a settlement.
One of the people was claiming discrimination. Because he was Hispanic we apparently told him to clean the bathrooms, on his own time, because that's the only thing mexicans are good for. Because we didn't have documentation saying we didn't do these things, the judge was siding with him more than us. It's ridiculous. Now, I'm not saying that we don't discriminate against minorities, because I'm sure we do as far as wages are concerned (though I think a lot of people are underpaid there regardless of their race). I've also noticed that the minorities don't do business politics to well, which can only hurt their efforts for earning higher wages (let's face it, you have to place business politics to some degree), but I digress. I would frequently come in early, or stay late, never saw the man there early or late cleaning the bathrooms. I would come in on the weekends sometimes, never saw him there cleaning the bathrooms.
This individual was an ill tempered human being who tried to start fights with quite a few different people and still somehow kept his job for a decent time period. We even had former employees write in saying that he was one of the primary reasons they left. Yet, the judges didn't care because we didn't document not doing these things. Essentially, right to work doesn't always mean a lot for an employer. I realize my example is anecdotal, but it appears courts would rather err on the side of the caution and believe the person complaining instead of actually considering all evidence at hand when it comes to these matters.
I use oil vehicles because I currently have no other choice for commuting to my job. A half and hour drive one way suddenly turns into an hour or more bike ride - this is not a realistic alternative for most people. You have a choice to use Sony products or not.
It's not Sony's fault that they got hacked, but it is their fault for storing their data in a really insecure manner - which is what people are primarily pissed off about. Their little rebate didn't make many people happy, either. Perhaps you're just cheap.
I'm not sure how any person in the right frame of mind could claim to be a fan of Sony after all the shit they've pulled over the years. I guess you enjoy rootkits and shitty security with your personal data.
You were probably down modded for not knowing the full story. Or perhaps you had a pretentious tone. In any case you can always appeal it if you feel there was abuse.
In regards to your other points, this information was leaked. What did you expect them to do once a can of worms is opened?
Point taken. However, my point still stands too. It's not like they didn't try to do everything they could before they officially went public with this information.
The release of the preliminary Opera results last September was made after the news had leaked from the experiment to a few scientists not belonging to the collaboration.
First sentence of the last paragraph. This means they tried to keep it a secret as long as possible.
All OPERA did was saying, "Hey, we saw a result that made no sense. This is what we did. Can anyone verify that we did something wrong?" And so his peers want him ousted for doing science as it is intended?
I believe that the majority of the people you seem to be raging against in your post don't like the record labels for quite a few reasons. The biggest being is that the contracts are largely on the record label's side, and any damages they'd win in any copyright infringement case wouldn't go to the creator, but to the copyright holder.
I could be going out on a limb here, but I suspect they like rewarding people for their creations, not for their ability to sue anyone and everyone because they can. I'm fairly certain we all have discussed this topic to the point where I don't need to cite relevant articles for this... i.e. suing dead people, grandmother's who don't know how to use a computer, etc...
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the word you were looking for is "thermistor".
Now, it seems to be at the whims of a few submitters (MrSeb, Hugh Pickens) with the editors asleep at the switch and posting stuff that's not even remotely tech news, typically biased political propaganda.
Slashdot has always been at the whim of a few submitters. Now lately I noticed they've been trying to change that, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still like that. Years ago I tried to participate in the submission system and a few of the stories I submitted were not added, but only a day or two later they were added, word for word, with a different submitter.
A lot of those other places have discussion systems in place. The point they were trying to make is that after two days, the topic has been known and discussed elsewhere in depth.
I was going to write a long winded rant trying to explain this to you, but then I realized you just wanted to get yourself upset. There's no point in trying to explain this further. Have fun sticking your head in the sand in crying.
Perfect example of Slashdot group think in terms of moderation.
Dialect includes many improper usages. For example, a lot of people in the city or people who live in poorer neighborhoods might use the word "axe" instead of ask. As in, "Can I axe you a question?" When they mean to say, "Can I ask you a question." This is certainly not rocket science to figure out. This applies to dragged vs drug. In man regions, no matter how educated someone may be, they will still use "drug" when typing something out quickly or in normal speech.
But please, waste your mod points on me by modding me down. I have an expansive amount of Karma to burn. And honestly, it's not hard to create another account.
It's about context in reference to the article. I'm not sure why people don't understand such things.
Really? You're going to flame me for that? Have you ever talked to any of these people before? They all claim that it's a hobby. I know it's an addiction, which is why I put "hobby" in quotation marks. It's about context, something which you clearly didn't understand.
I'm going to second this notion. No matter how poor someone makes themselves out to be, I have always seen them spend money on things that aren't necessary every day. Did you really need that new tattoo? Did you have to visit the club this weekend? You bought your lunch every single day this week. I see you have a brand new pack of smokes. I imagine there are poor people out there who do everything they can to reasonably save a dollar and do not do these things, but they are also probably far fewer than a lot of people realize.
I admit, I very well could be wrong. I grew up poor. I've had poor friends. I work with poor people. I can reflect back on these situations and evaluate where people's priorities were. My family didn't have to live as poorly as we did if my parents didn't do drugs, smoke, and drink. My friends families were the same. The people I work with are the same. I have yet to run into a person who claims to be poor who doesn't do at least one of these things. Those "hobbies" aren't cheap either.
Apparently you don't understand dialects. There's probably no hope for you or your offspring either. I'm probably boned too somehow!
Stalking is defined by intent alone, regardless of the time frame. However the time-frame does make it more clear and cut on whether not it's stalking. The laws for stalking vary by each state though.
No, your claim is absurd.
See how easy it is? What's absurd about my claim? Zimmerman followed the kid for an extended period of time. He has no acting official capacity in that community. He self-proclaims he does, but self proclamation really amounts to nothing here.
If he did have official capacity, he would have approached the kid sooner and talked to him. He did the exact opposite. He stalked him. When someone stalks you, it creates intimidation and fear. Generally speaking, when you have unwanted people in your gated community, you want them out as soon as possible. With all of the reports so far, I see no sense of urgency on his part.
Well yes, you can do those things, but there are limits on how long you can follow someone. You can't just knowingly follow someone for an extended period of time, which is what the guy did here. Stalking is all about intent. If he really cared what the kid was doing there, he would have simply talked to him sooner, not prolonged it until the kid was afraid for his safety.
A thousand times this. You can't claim self defense when you purposely stalk someone and then confront them out in public. You are purposely potentially putting yourself in harms way. I wish more people would understand this.
Even in right to work states you can take someone to court for wrong dismissal. Unfortunately you can come up with any bullshit story. This has happened to my current employer a few times. We'll bend over backwards to try and get you to be a good fit for the company, and the malcontent people will just get a lawyer and make stuff up. I believe the most anyone has got out of us is about 10,000 in a settlement.
One of the people was claiming discrimination. Because he was Hispanic we apparently told him to clean the bathrooms, on his own time, because that's the only thing mexicans are good for. Because we didn't have documentation saying we didn't do these things, the judge was siding with him more than us. It's ridiculous. Now, I'm not saying that we don't discriminate against minorities, because I'm sure we do as far as wages are concerned (though I think a lot of people are underpaid there regardless of their race). I've also noticed that the minorities don't do business politics to well, which can only hurt their efforts for earning higher wages (let's face it, you have to place business politics to some degree), but I digress. I would frequently come in early, or stay late, never saw the man there early or late cleaning the bathrooms. I would come in on the weekends sometimes, never saw him there cleaning the bathrooms.
This individual was an ill tempered human being who tried to start fights with quite a few different people and still somehow kept his job for a decent time period. We even had former employees write in saying that he was one of the primary reasons they left. Yet, the judges didn't care because we didn't document not doing these things. Essentially, right to work doesn't always mean a lot for an employer. I realize my example is anecdotal, but it appears courts would rather err on the side of the caution and believe the person complaining instead of actually considering all evidence at hand when it comes to these matters.
I back up by putting my car in reverse. Or by walking backwards. Duh.
I use oil vehicles because I currently have no other choice for commuting to my job. A half and hour drive one way suddenly turns into an hour or more bike ride - this is not a realistic alternative for most people. You have a choice to use Sony products or not.
It's not Sony's fault that they got hacked, but it is their fault for storing their data in a really insecure manner - which is what people are primarily pissed off about. Their little rebate didn't make many people happy, either. Perhaps you're just cheap.
I'm not sure how any person in the right frame of mind could claim to be a fan of Sony after all the shit they've pulled over the years. I guess you enjoy rootkits and shitty security with your personal data.
You were probably down modded for not knowing the full story. Or perhaps you had a pretentious tone. In any case you can always appeal it if you feel there was abuse.
In regards to your other points, this information was leaked. What did you expect them to do once a can of worms is opened?
Point taken. However, my point still stands too. It's not like they didn't try to do everything they could before they officially went public with this information.
The release of the preliminary Opera results last September was made after the news had leaked from the experiment to a few scientists not belonging to the collaboration.
First sentence of the last paragraph. This means they tried to keep it a secret as long as possible.
All OPERA did was saying, "Hey, we saw a result that made no sense. This is what we did. Can anyone verify that we did something wrong?" And so his peers want him ousted for doing science as it is intended?
I believe that the majority of the people you seem to be raging against in your post don't like the record labels for quite a few reasons. The biggest being is that the contracts are largely on the record label's side, and any damages they'd win in any copyright infringement case wouldn't go to the creator, but to the copyright holder.
I could be going out on a limb here, but I suspect they like rewarding people for their creations, not for their ability to sue anyone and everyone because they can. I'm fairly certain we all have discussed this topic to the point where I don't need to cite relevant articles for this... i.e. suing dead people, grandmother's who don't know how to use a computer, etc...
What sections of the book did you find the most useful in the book? Why were they the most useful for you?
No matter what type of stick you use to dangle those carrots, it's still control even if it is passive.
Better than being a Never Nude, I suppose.