So your working definition of an article is a piece of writing that is "good enough" to earn the author money? What if someone *is* good enough for a publication with oversight, but simply chooses to not have his work published there? I've had several requests to write for publications, but I choose not to, as I make ample money elsewhere and I don't want my stuff being copyrighted to someone else.
So sorry, the distinction you attempt to draw exists only in your head. This attempt to be disparaging to anything published on someone's personal blog is nothing more than high horsism, by a people who apparently want to be able to tell themselves that they are above blogging. Just because the majority of blogs are of a low quality does not mean that the medium itself is worthless. There's some good stuff being published in blogs.
Paul Graham? Blogger? Perhaps. But nobody in their right mind should call his work a "bunch of blog entries". That'd be like calling the writings of Dostoevsky a "bunch of stories". True? Technically, yes in both cases. Sensible? No, in both cases.
So your definition of a blog entry is something that is written in a blog, and an article is something published by "someone else"? Not very useful definitions at all.
I don't know how one would define "blog entry" and "article" for the purposes of saying what is and is not one or the other. However, I think it is safe to say that while this is a blog entry, this certainly is not. They are both only published in my blog.
Personally, I think that the difference between "blog entry" and "article" can only be defined relative to each other, in respect of their content and in the context of the vernacular use of the two terms. A blog entry is just an online public diary of events or anecdotes, whereas an article would be an in depth discussion of a particular subject. Of course, that distinction is highly subjective. What one man considers an article could be just a blog entry to another. Nonetheless, I feel that calling all entries in a blog "blog entries" is just as silly as calling all parts of a newspaper "articles". I'm aware of my apparent violation of the strict definitions of the words, but I'm *hoping* you're insightful enough to see the contextual distinction I am making.
I agree. In fact I recently wrote an article about why I think that FF has lost the huge lead it had over IE in terms of technical prowess. That lead has not been lost, but it certainly has been eroded.
The other issue I have is with the inclusion of lguest. It is a highly immature piece of code that is not really usable in anything resembling a production environment.
Why is the Linux kernel being bloated with things that are clearly not going to be used by anyone other than tinkerers and hobbyists? It just gives weight to the Microsoft claims that Linux is for hobbyists. It's one thing for hobby tools to be bundled with distributions like Gentoo, but for there to be code like this directly in the kernel, well, it makes it hard to argue that Linux is a serious kernel for serious applications.
I think that your flippant comment may perhaps be intended to highlight the fact that Linux is not intended to be a microkernel, but nonetheless that does not mean that it should be bloated with everything under the sun. I think that the bloated mess that Firefox has become highlights the fact that just because a program is open source and starts good, does not mean that it can't become a bloated sack of fertilizer through poor technical decision making.
I'm just glad that there are other open source operating systems that have remained purist to their initial goals. While this leads to slower development, it also ensures that they won't one day turn around and realize they've traveled a decade in the wrong direction.
See, I think you missed the bit about me saying that innocent pranks now can cause a lot of harm to a lot of people. The Melissa virus is a good example, which wasn't written by a kid, but could easily have been.
As I said, it's a dilemma between the need to recognize that kids in the modern world have the capacity to cause huge economic harm, and the need to recognize that they need to be dealt with compassionately. How we go about solving this dilemma is something I don't know how to do, but I think that people like you have such a flippant attitude towards the damage don't help.
The difference in the modern world is that while a silly prank could cause a single person minor inconvenience (that's being nice about the harm that sugar in a gas tank can cause), "modern pranks" such as a virus or worm has the ability to affect so many people that the harm actually causes widespread social and economic disruption.
This raises the social difficulty that on one hand you have a culprit, who may be quite innocuous and otherwise innocent of malicious thought, and on the other you have quite a large amount of harm being caused to a large number of people. In other words, a huge amount of harm can be caused by just a kid, and the law struggles with the need to address the gravity of the harm caused while recognizing the need to be compassionate to a kid who really had no malicious thought or any idea that he could cause harm. I am not referring to the hardened malware authors who spam for a living, but the 15 year olds who are just playing with the new computer they got for Christmas, not realizing the harm they could cause by sending that stupid little hack virus to a friend.
The problem I see here is a fundamental failure of society to teach children social awareness from an early age. Social conscience is taught by eastern cultures pretty much from birth, yet it is possible and common for kids in the western world to get through college with only a dim awareness that there is a whole planet that they are a part of and responsible for participating in. Oh wait, I'm talking socialism again. *Waits for the anti-terrorist police to pick him up*
I've many times gotten support from the core devs who pop into the IRC channel to give support. Also, the idea that PG is hard to set up is a 5 year old story, long since obsoleted. PG now comes in RPMs, can be apt-gotten in Debian and has a.msi installer that is far easier than even MySQL's Win32 installer. If you are having trouble installing PostgreSQL, then you're obviously not worth anything as a sysadmin.
I like yours better. The Slashdot editors need to have their balls cut off if they think the post that beat your onto the front page is better. Feel free to mod me down any time for bitching about this, but seriously, this post is SO much better than the one that made it.
While I agree that his comment was completely off topic, but if your idea of sobriety is discarding any hint of social conscience or empathy, then pass me the hard liquor please.
Alexander Hamilton paid off the national debt? Oh goody, so those interest maintenance items on the national budget last year must be for ice cream for the soldiers in Iraq!
Watch the documentary "The Money Masters". It's available on Google video, I think you'd be very interested in it. You can also buy the DVDs here: http://www.themoneymasters.com/
The moment they get the power to lock me up for saying I hate them is the moment that the freedom goes away, not when they put the camera up.
What you and just about everyone else who doesn't see this sort of thing as a threat don't seem to understand is that all these new laws, these draconian security measures and monitoring systems are all part of the process of setting up the infrastructure that will give the governemnt the power to take your freedom of speech away.
All you fools are like lambs at the slaughterhouse, yelling out that you'll only believe there is a danger when you feel the cold steel of a knife at your throat. By the time the government takes away the tattered remains of what passes off as freedom these days, it'll be far too alte to do anything, as the infrastructure of oppression will already be in place. A generation of obediant knuckeldraggers has already been created, we call them "law enforcement" and "the military". Their purpose is no longer to protect and defend, now their function is to control and suppress.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, so all those jokes about Canada being just another state were actually true?
Quite? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
So your working definition of an article is a piece of writing that is "good enough" to earn the author money? What if someone *is* good enough for a publication with oversight, but simply chooses to not have his work published there? I've had several requests to write for publications, but I choose not to, as I make ample money elsewhere and I don't want my stuff being copyrighted to someone else.
So sorry, the distinction you attempt to draw exists only in your head. This attempt to be disparaging to anything published on someone's personal blog is nothing more than high horsism, by a people who apparently want to be able to tell themselves that they are above blogging. Just because the majority of blogs are of a low quality does not mean that the medium itself is worthless. There's some good stuff being published in blogs.
Paul Graham? Blogger? Perhaps. But nobody in their right mind should call his work a "bunch of blog entries". That'd be like calling the writings of Dostoevsky a "bunch of stories". True? Technically, yes in both cases. Sensible? No, in both cases.
So your definition of a blog entry is something that is written in a blog, and an article is something published by "someone else"? Not very useful definitions at all.
I don't know how one would define "blog entry" and "article" for the purposes of saying what is and is not one or the other. However, I think it is safe to say that while this is a blog entry, this certainly is not. They are both only published in my blog.
Personally, I think that the difference between "blog entry" and "article" can only be defined relative to each other, in respect of their content and in the context of the vernacular use of the two terms. A blog entry is just an online public diary of events or anecdotes, whereas an article would be an in depth discussion of a particular subject. Of course, that distinction is highly subjective. What one man considers an article could be just a blog entry to another. Nonetheless, I feel that calling all entries in a blog "blog entries" is just as silly as calling all parts of a newspaper "articles". I'm aware of my apparent violation of the strict definitions of the words, but I'm *hoping* you're insightful enough to see the contextual distinction I am making.
Please define both
I agree. In fact I recently wrote an article about why I think that FF has lost the huge lead it had over IE in terms of technical prowess. That lead has not been lost, but it certainly has been eroded.
Here's my article.
I wouldn't just use a Firefox Lite on old PCs, I'd use it on my dual core 2gb main PC.
Right, because it's a better idea to turn lots of stuff on and have users *recompile* to turn off stuff they want. *cough* Windows *cough*.
The other issue I have is with the inclusion of lguest. It is a highly immature piece of code that is not really usable in anything resembling a production environment.
Why is the Linux kernel being bloated with things that are clearly not going to be used by anyone other than tinkerers and hobbyists? It just gives weight to the Microsoft claims that Linux is for hobbyists. It's one thing for hobby tools to be bundled with distributions like Gentoo, but for there to be code like this directly in the kernel, well, it makes it hard to argue that Linux is a serious kernel for serious applications.
I think that your flippant comment may perhaps be intended to highlight the fact that Linux is not intended to be a microkernel, but nonetheless that does not mean that it should be bloated with everything under the sun. I think that the bloated mess that Firefox has become highlights the fact that just because a program is open source and starts good, does not mean that it can't become a bloated sack of fertilizer through poor technical decision making.
I'm just glad that there are other open source operating systems that have remained purist to their initial goals. While this leads to slower development, it also ensures that they won't one day turn around and realize they've traveled a decade in the wrong direction.
See, I think you missed the bit about me saying that innocent pranks now can cause a lot of harm to a lot of people. The Melissa virus is a good example, which wasn't written by a kid, but could easily have been.
As I said, it's a dilemma between the need to recognize that kids in the modern world have the capacity to cause huge economic harm, and the need to recognize that they need to be dealt with compassionately. How we go about solving this dilemma is something I don't know how to do, but I think that people like you have such a flippant attitude towards the damage don't help.
In other news, the award for the most retarded attempt at invoking a meme has just been won.
The difference in the modern world is that while a silly prank could cause a single person minor inconvenience (that's being nice about the harm that sugar in a gas tank can cause), "modern pranks" such as a virus or worm has the ability to affect so many people that the harm actually causes widespread social and economic disruption.
This raises the social difficulty that on one hand you have a culprit, who may be quite innocuous and otherwise innocent of malicious thought, and on the other you have quite a large amount of harm being caused to a large number of people. In other words, a huge amount of harm can be caused by just a kid, and the law struggles with the need to address the gravity of the harm caused while recognizing the need to be compassionate to a kid who really had no malicious thought or any idea that he could cause harm. I am not referring to the hardened malware authors who spam for a living, but the 15 year olds who are just playing with the new computer they got for Christmas, not realizing the harm they could cause by sending that stupid little hack virus to a friend.
The problem I see here is a fundamental failure of society to teach children social awareness from an early age. Social conscience is taught by eastern cultures pretty much from birth, yet it is possible and common for kids in the western world to get through college with only a dim awareness that there is a whole planet that they are a part of and responsible for participating in. Oh wait, I'm talking socialism again. *Waits for the anti-terrorist police to pick him up*
Dude, this is Slashdot. What the hell do you *think* everyone here wants a robot maid to do?
You're obviously not in management.
I've many times gotten support from the core devs who pop into the IRC channel to give support. Also, the idea that PG is hard to set up is a 5 year old story, long since obsoleted. PG now comes in RPMs, can be apt-gotten in Debian and has a .msi installer that is far easier than even MySQL's Win32 installer. If you are having trouble installing PostgreSQL, then you're obviously not worth anything as a sysadmin.
I like yours better. The Slashdot editors need to have their balls cut off if they think the post that beat your onto the front page is better. Feel free to mod me down any time for bitching about this, but seriously, this post is SO much better than the one that made it.
While I agree that his comment was completely off topic, but if your idea of sobriety is discarding any hint of social conscience or empathy, then pass me the hard liquor please.
I think that if you look around you today, and don't see fascism, then you don't know what it means.
Alexander Hamilton paid off the national debt? Oh goody, so those interest maintenance items on the national budget last year must be for ice cream for the soldiers in Iraq!
Watch the documentary "The Money Masters". It's available on Google video, I think you'd be very interested in it. You can also buy the DVDs here:
http://www.themoneymasters.com/
Of course, an answer about sex would just *have* to come from a guy called "Vulva".
It's also vulnerable to psionic telekinetic mutants who could pull the thing to Earth and then disassemble it with their minds.
What you and just about everyone else who doesn't see this sort of thing as a threat don't seem to understand is that all these new laws, these draconian security measures and monitoring systems are all part of the process of setting up the infrastructure that will give the governemnt the power to take your freedom of speech away.
All you fools are like lambs at the slaughterhouse, yelling out that you'll only believe there is a danger when you feel the cold steel of a knife at your throat. By the time the government takes away the tattered remains of what passes off as freedom these days, it'll be far too alte to do anything, as the infrastructure of oppression will already be in place. A generation of obediant knuckeldraggers has already been created, we call them "law enforcement" and "the military". Their purpose is no longer to protect and defend, now their function is to control and suppress.
If it's valid behavior according to the protocol, and it's faster, and it's not bad nettiquette, then why, pray tell, isn't it on by default?
Whoa Nelly! Someone got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.
I see zis. But maybe you not see zat I make joke, no?