Sure, you can configure things so that Katz's articles are invisible to you. But that's not the point. I think the bigger issue is that the mere presence of someone like Katz diminishes slashdot. Not because he lacks technical knowledge---but because he is essentially a parasite.
This is clearly just my oppinion, but Katz seems to be in the business of self-promotion only. he adds no value to any of the discussions, he states only the most obvious, much of what he writes is just wrong, and he clearly wants to be the center of all of his pieces
Sure, I don't have to read it. But I when things are over-hyped by popular media (a la "information super-highway," "cyber-space," etc.) it takes a lot of fun out of the topics for people who have a legitimate and deep interest. And having Katz around makes slashdot a little less enjoyable for me.
While I really liked this feature, I think that the basic premise is flawed, i.e., that software development is analogous to graphics design.
The analogy falls apart because graphic art serves no purpose other than to be art. This is not to say that art for art's sake is a bad thing, but just that art does not strictly serve any pragmatic purpose other than to please the eye.
I think a better analogy is found in architecture, which (for my money) more accurately captures the dichotomy of art and science.
Of course, exploring this analogy would be the stuff of yet another feature, so I leave that to someone else. However, some of you may get a kick out of Ayn Rand's ``The Fountainhead'' which explores what it means for architecture to be great.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, you can configure things so that Katz's articles are invisible to you. But that's not the point. I think the bigger issue is that the mere presence of someone like Katz diminishes slashdot. Not because he lacks technical knowledge---but because he is essentially a parasite.
This is clearly just my oppinion, but Katz seems to be in the business of self-promotion only. he adds no value to any of the discussions, he states only the most obvious, much of what he writes is just wrong, and he clearly wants to be the center of all of his pieces
Sure, I don't have to read it. But I when things are over-hyped by popular media (a la "information super-highway," "cyber-space," etc.) it takes a lot of fun out of the topics for people who have a legitimate and deep interest. And having Katz around makes slashdot a little less enjoyable for me.
Ah, yes, I stand corrected.
I had intended to say that about pure art (and definately not ``applied art,'' i.e., graphic art).
Sorry for the mistake, and thanks for the catch.
While I really liked this feature, I think that the basic premise is flawed, i.e., that software development is analogous to graphics design.
The analogy falls apart because graphic art serves no purpose other than to be art. This is not to say that art for art's sake is a bad thing, but just that art does not strictly serve any pragmatic purpose other than to please the eye.
I think a better analogy is found in architecture, which (for my money) more accurately captures the dichotomy of art and science.
Of course, exploring this analogy would be the stuff of yet another feature, so I leave that to someone else. However, some of you may get a kick out of Ayn Rand's ``The Fountainhead'' which explores what it means for architecture to be great.