I just want it to work- and yes if I had the $$, I'd have that Mac I dream of.
Second hand macs are cheap, ever thought of buying one ? And no people, I'm not trying to sell one to him
The metaphor was quite simple. From what I understood he likes hacking code and also like hacking social code; what lies behind society and what we take for granted.
I actually thought the metaphor was quite appropriate.
I was also taught sexism, I don't think you can avoid it, it doesn't mean you can't change.
To add another remark to this, I think it's mostly our own ignorance in this matter that causes most of our social problems.
P.S. The "our" in the last paragraph refer to the social construct generally known as "male"
There are also millions of (pointless) personal sites
Why are personal sites pointless ? Just because most of them aren't things you wan't to read doesn't make them, IMHO, useless.
In fact it's the empowerment that enables Ordinary Joe to publish his personal page that makes the web what it is and not just a virtual shopping center.
I'd just like all six billion people to be able to participate.
This might be nitpicking, but for me gender is a social construct, therefore behaviour that is generally accepted as male is case enough for me to push forward my point.
By this I'm not stating that violence and agressivity are solely male characteristics, but that the violence of the more litterarily chalenged flameres (ie the "Drop dead" and "You Suck" varieties) is highly linked to the darker side of the male psyche.
Also I'm not saying that all flaming is socially inacceptable. The more elaborate (and thus being either funny or well worded) forms of flaming are a form or wit that should be cherished.
"We are not taught to communicate as children for the most part (children being better seen than heard), most of us feel alienated as adults, which is one of the resons we sought out people on to communicate with over the Internet in the first place."
Very good remark, as children we are thrust in to social structures (like school), that alienate us more than teach us to communicate.
After all these years of "civilisation" we still haven't broke out from the leader-leutenants-followers social structure.
The problem is that on the net most people tend to follow the same patterns, be it to different rules and situations, and most sadly a similar hierachical structure.
Unless we can come to terms with and learn from our alienations both online and offline, we will relive this over and over again.
One thing the comes to mind while discussing the issue of violent remarks and flaming is that most violent and aggressive posters seem to be (although this is quite difficult to determine in alot of cases) male.
Of course this isn't suprising seen in the context of tech/geek culture which has been for sometime male dominated.
The online world ofers the protection and anonymity that you could say promotes anti social behaviour that would be frowned on or even outright dangerous in the real world.
Of course you could say the exact oposite (that anonymity promotes speach and sociability) and it would still be true.
The point here is that the violent outbursts online are mostly tell tale signs of the darker side of the male psyche and that the promotion of the endurance, ability and the highly focused/restricted skills of the geek coder in geek culture only help perpetuate the idea that unrecontructed masculinity is an acceptable social value.
-----
Of course hoping to explain in a few lines what history has spent centuries constructing is of course pure madness, but here I go anyway.
... not the technology in itself that is the defining issue.
Lets face it the world isn't going to become a better/worse place because a new technology is developped. Use of technology refelcts society and over time shapes it. People don't change overnight just because something new is developped.
In a few years time we will know alot more about the genetic makeup of humans, some would call it a "blueprint" of mankind. So ? Does knowledge have to become a dangerous thing every we have more of it.
Most of the people don't know much about genetics, aren't particularly interested in learning but say "We'll have no control over it we shouldn't mess with thing we don't understand"
This sort of argument really makes despair of humanity.
As if most people in the western world wanted control over their lives, to have to make difficult decisions, to have to think, to choose between options.
Of course they don't, the majority of the western world wan't to sit back and let someone drive them through their cosy life and not to have to make a decision more complicated than what sitcom they want to watch on TV.
Of course all technologies have "dark sides" even the wheel. Where would we be now if way back then they decided that the "wheel technology" was way to dangerous to be used and they discarded it.
Even more so what if they decided against farming or domestication of animals because they were scared of the effects of living in one place would have on society.
Of course back then the choice was alot easier to make, but we have alot more time to think about our choices now than they had then all we need is the will.
After the invasion of M$ HQ, we will take all their code (on 2 millioni floppy disks) and melt it once and for all for the good of the OSS community(the world also.)
And then we could start burning all the books we don't like as well...
On a theoretical level I agree with you that trolls should be ignored.
On a more practical level you have to think of a more complicated process of "screening" or "filtering" them.
In the days when human communities we're smaller the power of ostracism was strong enough to deter anti social behaviour (though it also had the distastfull by-product of nomalising behaviour -and this still is more or less still commonplace today).
In today's gobal networked community these community based regulations are a lot less functional expecially on the net we're anonymity is more or less generalized (for good or for bad).
Most of the time I keep a high threshold when I reach comments, but in doing so I also realise that I'm missing out on some good comments, of couse I'm troll and idiot free, but such is life that some times I have a different opinion on what should go up and go down in the ratings dept. and so when I have some time spare I read comments on a low threshold, that is how I read this post.
And so even if I ignore all the posts that I don't want to read I welcome any possibilitly of filtering and more finely screening them, of course if I had a control over the process it would be even better but not have all that much time to do so I'm not complaining (too much:) )
Glad you put a good quote on anarchism in, I restrained earier from doing so not wanting to fill the system with them....
"Anarchy" is in fact liberty but to go deeper into that would be a long and off topic rant. But I suppose if you're interested you can allways email me .
One of my comments on your post is that "keeping immature and stupid people away " is censorship by another name but after all that isn't all that bad. I think there is a big difference between censorship and CENSORSHIP, as it is done by states, big corporation big and old media. And in that difference lies most of the misunderstanding of the issue.
We're on the web here and there is plenty of room for every one, so if someone is denied the right to say something insensitive, offensive or downright stupid (excuse my judgemental tone) they can pretty much say it somewhere else.
But most of the time they won't, it's like the drunken person in a bar most of the time they will only cause a "situation" if there's an audiance.
When you think about it every day you "censor" things, people who try to start unwanted conversations with you, phone call you don't reply to etc...
Though I'm not much in favor of anonymous posting, I can see it's uses. I much favor people to be acoutable for what they say. After all for me it's a lot about what free speech stands for, the right to publicly say what you wan't to say and be held to your words (and hopefully not be killed for it).
And for those sensitive issues a pseudonym is allways usefull.
But also if people were less intimidated in posting maybe more would post "loged on" after all not everyone is a loud mouth, even on the net...
I'm a very strong defender of liberty but life has told me the enhansing my liberty is also enhansing other peoples as well, so to conclude I'm all for keeping immature and stupid people away and yes this is censorship and in a perfect world this wouldn't have to happen but whe all know where we live don't we....
Slashdot Mirror
I just want it to work- and yes if I had the $$, I'd have that Mac I dream of.
Second hand macs are cheap, ever thought of buying one ? And no people, I'm not trying to sell one to him
It's wrong to spend taxpayer money on this
I thought libertarians thought it was wrong to tax people in the first place, so why is it wrong to spend money on this or have I misunderstood you ?
The Diamond age, you know Neal Stephenson's book, oh just follow this link.
How about web based aromatheraphy to relieve the tension.
after vatican.org it says can't locate host (his IP works in mysterious ways)
The metaphor was quite simple. From what I understood he likes hacking code and also like hacking social code; what lies behind society and what we take for granted.
I actually thought the metaphor was quite appropriate.
I was also taught sexism, I don't think you can avoid it, it doesn't mean you can't change.
To add another remark to this, I think it's mostly our own ignorance in this matter that causes most of our social problems.
P.S. The "our" in the last paragraph refer to the social construct generally known as "male"
OTOH, who knows? maybe the geek culture is the ultimate patriarchy
So ironic but probably true.
There are also millions of (pointless) personal sites
Why are personal sites pointless ? Just because most of them aren't things you wan't to read doesn't make them, IMHO, useless.
In fact it's the empowerment that enables Ordinary Joe to publish his personal page that makes the web what it is and not just a virtual shopping center.
I'd just like all six billion people to be able to participate.
This might be nitpicking, but for me gender is a social construct, therefore behaviour that is generally accepted as male is case enough for me to push forward my point.
...
By this I'm not stating that violence and agressivity are solely male characteristics, but that the violence of the more litterarily chalenged flameres (ie the "Drop dead" and "You Suck" varieties) is highly linked to the darker side of the male psyche.
Also I'm not saying that all flaming is socially inacceptable. The more elaborate (and thus being either funny or well worded) forms of flaming are a form or wit that should be cherished.
But I digress
"We are not taught to communicate as children for the most part (children being better seen than heard), most of us feel alienated as adults, which is one of the resons we sought out people on to communicate with over the Internet in the first place."
Very good remark, as children we are thrust in to social structures (like school), that alienate us more than teach us to communicate.
After all these years of "civilisation" we still haven't broke out from the leader-leutenants-followers social structure.
The problem is that on the net most people tend to follow the same patterns, be it to different rules and situations, and most sadly a similar hierachical structure.
Unless we can come to terms with and learn from our alienations both online and offline, we will relive this over and over again.
-- Just some passing thoughts
One thing the comes to mind while discussing the issue of violent remarks and flaming is that most violent and aggressive posters seem to be (although this is quite difficult to determine in alot of cases) male.
Of course this isn't suprising seen in the context of tech/geek culture which has been for sometime male dominated.
The online world ofers the protection and anonymity that you could say promotes anti social behaviour that would be frowned on or even outright dangerous in the real world.
Of course you could say the exact oposite (that anonymity promotes speach and sociability) and it would still be true.
The point here is that the violent outbursts online are mostly tell tale signs of the darker side of the male psyche and that the promotion of the endurance, ability and the highly focused/restricted skills of the geek coder in geek culture only help perpetuate the idea that unrecontructed masculinity is an acceptable social value.
-----
Of course hoping to explain in a few lines what history has spent centuries constructing is of course pure madness, but here I go anyway.
... so I had no idea about all this.
Thanks folks.
I used to like Space 1999 when I was a child as well.
...
But let's face it if there ever was a sci-fi series that should be put out to pasture and never ever rerun it is this one.
How painfull it was to me to see it again after all these years
The last line of the article reads :
Guinness is made by British-based Diageo Plc.
And all along I thought that Guinness was made by Guinness... Shhh...
... not the technology in itself that is the defining issue.
Lets face it the world isn't going to become a better/worse place because a new technology is developped. Use of technology refelcts society and over time shapes it. People don't change overnight just because something new is developped.
In a few years time we will know alot more about the genetic makeup of humans, some would call it a "blueprint" of mankind. So ? Does knowledge have to become a dangerous thing every we have more of it.
Most of the people don't know much about genetics, aren't particularly interested in learning but say "We'll have no control over it we shouldn't mess with thing we don't understand"
This sort of argument really makes despair of humanity.
As if most people in the western world wanted control over their lives, to have to make difficult decisions, to have to think, to choose between options.
Of course they don't, the majority of the western world wan't to sit back and let someone drive them through their cosy life and not to have to make a decision more complicated than what sitcom they want to watch on TV.
Of course all technologies have "dark sides" even the wheel. Where would we be now if way back then they decided that the "wheel technology" was way to dangerous to be used and they discarded it.
Even more so what if they decided against farming or domestication of animals because they were scared of the effects of living in one place would have on society.
Of course back then the choice was alot easier to make, but we have alot more time to think about our choices now than they had then all we need is the will.
After the invasion of M$ HQ, we will take all their code (on 2 millioni floppy disks) and melt it once and for all for the good of the OSS community(the world also.)
...
And then we could start burning all the books we don't like as well
Well I needed an excuse for myself to go out and by some of these Legos, look's like I might have found one ...
How come Legos weren't this good when I was a child ?
On a theoretical level I agree with you that trolls should be ignored.
:) )
....
On a more practical level you have to think of a more complicated process of "screening" or "filtering" them.
In the days when human communities we're smaller the power of ostracism was strong enough to deter anti social behaviour (though it also had the distastfull by-product of nomalising behaviour -and this still is more or less still commonplace today).
In today's gobal networked community these community based regulations are a lot less functional expecially on the net we're anonymity is more or less generalized (for good or for bad).
Most of the time I keep a high threshold when I reach comments, but in doing so I also realise that I'm missing out on some good comments, of couse I'm troll and idiot free, but such is life that some times I have a different opinion on what should go up and go down in the ratings dept. and so when I have some time spare I read comments on a low threshold, that is how I read this post.
And so even if I ignore all the posts that I don't want to read I welcome any possibilitly of filtering and more finely screening them, of course if I had a control over the process it would be even better but not have all that much time to do so I'm not complaining (too much
Glad you put a good quote on anarchism in, I restrained earier from doing so not wanting to fill the system with them
"Anarchy" is in fact liberty but to go deeper into that would be a long and off topic rant.
...
...
....
But I suppose if you're interested you can allways email me .
One of my comments on your post is that "keeping immature and stupid people away " is censorship by another name but after all that isn't all that bad. I think there is a big difference between censorship and CENSORSHIP, as it is done by states, big corporation big and old media. And in that difference lies most of the misunderstanding of the issue.
We're on the web here and there is plenty of room for every one, so if someone is denied the right to say something insensitive, offensive or downright stupid (excuse my judgemental tone) they can pretty much say it somewhere else.
But most of the time they won't, it's like the drunken person in a bar most of the time they will only cause a "situation" if there's an audiance.
When you think about it every day you "censor" things, people who try to start unwanted conversations with you, phone call you don't reply to etc
Though I'm not much in favor of anonymous posting, I can see it's uses. I much favor people to be acoutable for what they say. After all for me it's a lot about what free speech stands for, the right to publicly say what you wan't to say and be held to your words (and hopefully not be killed for it).
And for those sensitive issues a pseudonym is allways usefull.
But also if people were less intimidated in posting maybe more would post "loged on" after all not everyone is a loud mouth, even on the net
I'm a very strong defender of liberty but life has told me the enhansing my liberty is also enhansing other peoples as well, so to conclude I'm all for keeping immature and stupid people away and yes this is censorship and in a perfect world this wouldn't have to happen but whe all know where we live don't we
I wonder if anyone has actually put a webserver in a toaster.
Wouldn't the heat fry the chips very quickly ?