This is Katz..Great question. But what amazes me bout the Net is its ability to form and re-form around these gatekeepers..Open Source, for example, is a direct response to the companies you mention, right?
As I said in the column, censorship and choice are very different. But people are going to see argument disappear across websites when obnoxious posters can be vaporized with the click of a button. There's something neat about being censored by Disney. And I have to say, I completely marvel at the innate exclusivity of people on an open source site. This is for anthropologists to ponder, I think.
Everybody has the right to deal with information overload in their own way. We all make choices. But I would not respond to your characterization of my writing style -- surly and cynical -- by using my preferences to block you. And I appreciate your not blocking me. As to reading critiques, I wonder how you could possibly read this column and think that I wouldn't (I can't read all of them, as a lot of people e-mail me, and blessedly, have a more benign view of my writing style.) But this point is, you have the right to criticize my writing style --er..thisis sort of my point..and I have the obligation to try and read and consider it. Past the hostility towards me, I'm struggling to figure out where we disagree here.
Yes, definitely a choice. But it should be a considered choice. It's not about me. I get enuf e-mail, believe me. It's about how we respond to disagreement. Do we ever want to hear any or not?
I've been mail-bombed, attacked by virus-writers and spammed repeatedly in my time writing on the Web. People have the absolute right to defend themselves using filtering or blocking software or any other means. But what's happening on sites all over the Web is that flamers, obnoxious posters or what some people would consider "jerks" -- of whom there are platoons here on/. -- are being blocked out of existence. I don't argue that people shouldn't use software to protect or defend themselves. I just argue that the nature of the Web is about to change as people wipe out obnoxious voices with the click of a buttom. I think that will be a loss.
This is well said, I think. But the issue isn't whether or not we have to listen to every single thing sent out way. The issue isn't me, either.I get plenty of e-mail. The issue is really whether the web will be sanitized by new software that we may not have thought about. We all have to make our own choices, and mine is to skip over what I don't want to read. I choose not to block people because they flame, disagree with or don't like me. It's just my choice.
Actually, I'm in a pretty good mood..
on
ShutUp Software
·
· Score: 1
I'm actually having a great week, MG. But try, for a second, to get past me and your feelings about me...I would not block you because you wrote this post. All over the Web, that's precisely what's happening. I'd rather you be free to poke at me all you want. That doesn't make me bitter. It makes me want to support your right to do this, and my obligation to listen to you.
Having trouble getting this post to go thru..I'm confused. Are we talking about the same column? I'm defending the right of people to flame, not dismissing it? If this software continues to spread, there won't be any flames. As to the self-promotion issue, that criticism wasn't flaming. It was criticism. Flaming is "Katz Sucks." My book excerpt was one of my finer hours, as far as I'm concerned. This is a small book..it will never make money for me or the publisher. I wanted to show that the Web could be used to by pass the big-publisher marketing structures. It did..but don't confuse that with making money. I was very proud of that and very grateful to Slashdot for helping me. Many writers are now using the Web to reach their audiences and get their ideas out because of that excerpt. I'd do it again in a second. If that came across as self-promotion, I'm sorry. I don't self-promote. I won't even take money for speeches or go on TV. But I do believe writers who are being extinguished by greedy publishers ought to know the Net gives them an alternative. I'm sorry you see that so cynically, but I con't consider you to be flaming me at all. The point of this column is that preference software is threatening to eliminate flaming completely. Hope that's clearer.
Brian, I think I do get the point..
on
ShutUp Software
·
· Score: 1
As a much-flamed writer, I think I do get the point, Brian. I'd love it if flamers went away, but I fear the sanitizing of public discussions on the Net. When you can make somebody go away by the simple click of a button, then I can envisage a culture in which you end up only hearing what you like. That does unnerve me. Flamers don't carry any weight with me. I do listen to criticism. But that doesn't mean that flamers have no value, or shouldn't be seen or heard.
Thanks for the amazing amount of e-mail. Between/. and RS readers, it might take me longer than usual, but I will answer it. This is the best response to anything I've ever written, and I'm proud it's up here. I doubt I could ever really convey how much I admire Jesse and Eric, or even convey enough what they went through to get from there to here. They're heroes of mine. Thanks for the great messages. Thanks also to those of you who write and said you think my writing here is improving. I have a ways to go, but I like to think that's true. If it is improving, it's because of all the educating you're giving me. I'm listening too -- shorter, clearer, smarter. Easier said than done, but I'm trying and will keep trying. I wish I could write more pieces like this. Rolling Stone is one of the few places where you can..and this one took six months, and a number of trips to Idaho and the Midwest. But I'm eager to finish this book, and grateful for all the nice words. Even I couldn't screw up writing about these guys too much. P.S. Jesse and Eric are doing Quake 3.
Thanks for the amazing amount of e-mail. Between/. and RS readers, it might take me longer than usual, but I will answer it. This is the best response to anything I've ever written, and I'm proud it's up here. I doubt I could ever really convey how much I admire Jesse and Eric, or even convey enough what they went through to get from there to here. They're heroes of mine. Thanks for the great messages. Thanks also to those of you who write and said you think my writing here is improving. I have a ways to go, but I like to think that's true. If it is improving, it's because of all the educating you're giving me. I'm listening too -- shorter, clearer, smarter. Easier said than done, but I'm trying and will keep trying. I wish I could write more pieces like this. Rolling Stone is one of the few places where you can..and this one took six months, and a number of trips to Idaho and the Midwest. But I'm eager to finish this book, and grateful for all the nice words. Even I couldn't screw up writing about these guys too much.
I agree with Patrick (this is Katz). The technology is logical, but what if the person on the receiving end isn't. This perhaps is the big flaw of the techno-war?
I disagree, RedGuard. Bill Gates is one of the most powerful men on the planet. His company is a very crucial crossroads. I don't want his sex life splayed out, but I do think he is obliged to talk about how he feels about his position, and the company before he presumes to lecture us on what the digital nervous system is. I don't see anything bizarre in that. I find it disturbing, reading the book, that there was no candor or reality of any sort. I'm sorry you find that bizarre, but it's just my opinion. Course, maybe that is bizarre.
Well, now I can add Slashdot to the places where I'm banned..including Go.com, Cyberpatrol and Cybenanny. The Bennett reference is both dumb and false. I wrote a book that included a chapter that was sharply critical ofWilliam Bennett. I would be very interested to see any single reference in which I compared myself to him. For somebody so interested in the truth, this message is pretty loose about it. As to blocking, I hope I never in this life block somebody because I disagree with their opinions. Hey, I know some great legislation you'd love. It's called the CDA.
This is well within the free and fair use clause that regulates how much you can quote from a book, and the courts give a lot of latitude to quotes in reviews.
Hey Matt, I'll try to help. I don't think Gates needs to reveal details of his personal live, but I think he needs to at least refer to the fact that the company is at a major crossroads,and that running it is a complex, perhaps even personal challenge. As I read it, Icouldn't help but wonder if he was angry about the trial, frightened about the future, or oblivious. To me, part of writing, book or column, is putting yourself out there in front of people. There are always those who will push a button and ban you because they don't like or agree with something you say or do, rather than simply disagree or, as you are doing, ask for clarification. You learn to live with that.But I was struck by the disembodied and disconnected nature of Gates book..the fact that his company is going through such turmoil and he doesn't even refer to it. Does that help? If not, e-mail me at jonkatz@Slashdot.org
I'm happy to report that since this excerpt was posting, the sales ranking on Amazon.com of my book went from 9,000 to about 200. That's a phenomenal jump in two hours, and a testament to the punch of/. and the people who hang out here. I'm very happy the excerpt was printed here -- I really fought for that to happen -- and that a percentage of all these sales are going back to Jeff and Rob and the site. When we talk about empowerment and OSS, this is writer's version of that in action...skipping the machinery of hype to take a book directly to the people who might want to buy it. Very kewl. Many thanks to those of you e-mailing me and buying it. And thanks to to the flamers (I always think of those German fighters in WWII) who give all work a bit of spice. But this is really quite amazing.
This is a great site, filled with tons of smart people who have serious, non-hostile conversations, although sometimes not out in the open. Youdon't need to go elsewhere, though. E-mail me (jonkatz@slashdot.org) But don't go.
Katz-Bashers could be a whole new sub-species. My daugher thinks it's a very cool idea... Do go see Rushmore..it's a very good idea..and I posted this up above, but those who want a very different view on this shud check out Roger Ebert's take on "geek cinema" which ran on the Chi Sun-Times website.. He describes geeks as very decadent and repulsive. I'll try and find the URL, which I stores somewhere.
It is true, some of these posts do keep reinforcing my argument about alienation. The tip off is that isn't a matter of agreement or disagreement, but hostility to different ideas. But another reminder for the umpteenth time -- my e-mail is quite the opposite. Lots of it, rarely hostile or angry. I keep making that point because the public posts create the distorted impression that everyone here is alienated. That isn't so at all.
I though this a great post. Some of you have e-mailed me that the Medieval Artisans were the first real geeks -- a neat idea --and among the first to feel alienated by technology, in their case their craft tools. I'd love thoughts on this idea.
Good point about War Games. Hey look, I may be an idiot, but I do NOT have too much time on my hands, for sure. Also check out Rober Ebert's piece on Geek Cinema for a very different take (I'll try and get the URL).
Slashdot Mirror
This is Katz..Great question. But what amazes me bout the Net is its ability to form and re-form around these gatekeepers..Open Source, for example, is a direct response to the companies you mention, right?
As I said in the column, censorship and choice are very different. But people are going to see argument disappear across websites when obnoxious posters can be vaporized with the click of a button.
There's something neat about being censored by Disney. And I have to say, I completely marvel at the innate exclusivity of people on an open source site. This is for anthropologists to ponder, I think.
Hey Pinhead...not in this world..Now which part of open source do you like the best?
Everybody has the right to deal with information overload in their own way. We all make choices. But I would not respond to your characterization of my writing style -- surly and cynical -- by using my preferences to block you. And I appreciate your not blocking me.
As to reading critiques, I wonder how you could possibly read this column and think that I wouldn't (I can't read all of them, as a lot of people e-mail me, and blessedly, have a more benign view of my writing style.) But this point is, you have the right to criticize my writing style --er..thisis sort of my point..and I have the obligation to try and read and consider it. Past the hostility towards me, I'm struggling to figure out where we disagree here.
Yes, definitely a choice. But it should be a considered choice. It's not about me. I get enuf e-mail, believe me. It's about how we respond to disagreement. Do we ever want to hear any or not?
I've been mail-bombed, attacked by virus-writers and spammed repeatedly in my time writing on the Web. People have the absolute right to defend themselves using filtering or blocking software or any other means. /. -- are being blocked out of existence.
But what's happening on sites all over the Web is that flamers, obnoxious posters or what some people would consider "jerks" -- of whom there are platoons here on
I don't argue that people shouldn't use software to protect or defend themselves. I just argue that the nature of the Web is about to change as people wipe out obnoxious voices with the click of a buttom. I think that will be a loss.
This is well said, I think. But the issue isn't whether or not we have to listen to every single thing sent out way. The issue isn't me, either.I get plenty of e-mail.
The issue is really whether the web will be sanitized by new software that we may not have thought about. We all have to make our own choices, and mine is to skip over what I don't want to read. I choose not to block people because they flame, disagree with or don't like me. It's just my choice.
I'm actually having a great week, MG. But try, for a second, to get past me and your feelings about me...I would not block you because you wrote this post. All over the Web, that's precisely what's happening. I'd rather you be free to poke at me all you want. That doesn't make me bitter. It makes me want to support your right to do this, and my obligation to listen to you.
This is very true, Per. But I would never block you because you disagreed with me or posted something I didn't like.
Having trouble getting this post to go thru..I'm confused. Are we talking about the same column? I'm defending the right of people to flame, not dismissing it? If this software continues to spread, there won't be any flames.
As to the self-promotion issue, that criticism wasn't flaming. It was criticism. Flaming is "Katz Sucks." My book excerpt was one of my finer hours, as far as I'm concerned. This is a small book..it will never make money for me or the publisher. I wanted to show that the Web could be used to by pass the big-publisher marketing structures. It did..but don't confuse that with making money.
I was very proud of that and very grateful to Slashdot for helping me. Many writers are now using the Web to reach their audiences and get their ideas out because of that excerpt. I'd do it again in a second. If that came across as self-promotion, I'm sorry. I don't self-promote. I won't even take money for speeches or go on TV.
But I do believe writers who are being extinguished by greedy publishers ought to know the Net gives them an alternative. I'm sorry you see that so cynically, but I con't consider you to be flaming me at all.
The point of this column is that preference software is threatening to eliminate flaming completely. Hope that's clearer.
As a much-flamed writer, I think I do get the point, Brian. I'd love it if flamers went away, but I fear the sanitizing of public discussions on the Net. When you can make somebody go away by the simple click of a button, then I can envisage a culture in which you end up only hearing what you like. That does unnerve me. Flamers don't carry any weight with me. I do listen to criticism. But that doesn't mean that flamers have no value, or shouldn't be seen or heard.
Thanks for the amazing amount of e-mail. Between /. and RS readers, it might take me longer than usual, but I will answer it. This is the best response to anything I've ever written, and I'm proud it's up here.
I doubt I could ever really convey how much I admire Jesse and Eric, or even convey enough what they went through to get from there to here. They're heroes of mine.
Thanks for the great messages. Thanks also to those of you who write and said you think my writing here is improving. I have a ways to go, but I like to think that's true. If it is improving, it's because of all the educating you're giving me. I'm listening too -- shorter, clearer, smarter. Easier said than done, but I'm trying and will keep trying. I wish I could write more pieces like this.
Rolling Stone is one of the few places where you can..and this one took six months, and a number of trips to Idaho and the Midwest. But I'm eager to finish this book, and grateful for all the nice words. Even I couldn't screw up writing about these guys too much.
P.S. Jesse and Eric are doing Quake 3.
Thanks for the amazing amount of e-mail. Between /. and RS readers, it might take me longer than usual, but I will answer it. This is the best response to anything I've ever written, and I'm proud it's up here.
I doubt I could ever really convey how much I admire Jesse and Eric, or even convey enough what they went through to get from there to here. They're heroes of mine.
Thanks for the great messages. Thanks also to those of you who write and said you think my writing here is improving. I have a ways to go, but I like to think that's true. If it is improving, it's because of all the educating you're giving me. I'm listening too -- shorter, clearer, smarter. Easier said than done, but I'm trying and will keep trying. I wish I could write more pieces like this.
Rolling Stone is one of the few places where you can..and this one took six months, and a number of trips to Idaho and the Midwest. But I'm eager to finish this book, and grateful for all the nice words. Even I couldn't screw up writing about these guys too much.
What about technology and the common soldier? It's a great question..isn't the infantry hi-tech as well?
I agree with Patrick (this is Katz). The technology is logical, but what if the person on the receiving end isn't. This perhaps is the big flaw of the techno-war?
I disagree, RedGuard. Bill Gates is one of the most powerful men on the planet. His company is a very crucial crossroads. I don't want his sex life splayed out, but I do think he is obliged to talk about how he feels about his position, and the company before he presumes to lecture us on what the digital nervous system is. I don't see anything bizarre in that.
I find it disturbing, reading the book, that there was no candor or reality of any sort. I'm sorry you find that bizarre, but it's just my opinion. Course, maybe that is bizarre.
Well, now I can add Slashdot to the places where I'm banned..including Go.com, Cyberpatrol and Cybenanny. The Bennett reference is both dumb and false. I wrote a book that included a chapter that was sharply critical ofWilliam Bennett. I would be very interested to see any single reference in which I compared myself to him. For somebody so interested in the truth, this message is pretty loose about it. As to blocking, I hope I never in this life block somebody because I disagree with their opinions. Hey, I know some great legislation you'd love. It's called the CDA.
This is well within the free and fair use clause that regulates how much you can quote from a book, and the courts give a lot of latitude to quotes in reviews.
Hey Matt, I'll try to help. I don't think Gates needs to reveal details of his personal live, but I think he needs to at least refer to the fact that the company is at a major crossroads,and that running it is a complex, perhaps even personal challenge. As I read it, Icouldn't help but wonder if he was angry about the trial, frightened about the future, or oblivious. To me, part of writing, book or column, is putting yourself out there in front of people. There are always those who will push a button and ban you because they don't like or agree with something you say or do, rather than simply disagree or, as you are doing, ask for clarification. You learn to live with that.But I was struck by the disembodied and disconnected nature of Gates book..the fact that his company is going through such turmoil and he doesn't even refer to it. Does that help? If not, e-mail me at jonkatz@Slashdot.org
I'm happy to report that since this excerpt was posting, the sales ranking on Amazon.com of my book went from 9,000 to about 200. That's a phenomenal jump in two hours, and a testament to the punch of /. and the people who hang out here.
I'm very happy the excerpt was printed here -- I really fought for that to happen -- and that a percentage of all these sales are going back to Jeff and Rob and the site.
When we talk about empowerment and OSS, this is writer's version of that in action...skipping the machinery of hype to take a book directly to the people who might want to buy it. Very kewl. Many thanks to those of you e-mailing me and buying it. And thanks to to the flamers (I always think of those German fighters in WWII) who give all work a bit of spice. But this is really quite amazing.
This is a great site, filled with tons of smart people who have serious, non-hostile conversations, although sometimes not out in the open. Youdon't need to go elsewhere, though. E-mail me (jonkatz@slashdot.org) But don't go.
Katz-Bashers could be a whole new sub-species. My daugher thinks it's a very cool idea... Do go see Rushmore..it's a very good idea..and I posted this up above, but those who want a very different view on this shud check out Roger Ebert's take on "geek cinema" which ran on the Chi Sun-Times website.. He describes geeks as very decadent and repulsive. I'll try and find the URL, which I stores somewhere.
It is true, some of these posts do keep reinforcing my argument about alienation. The tip off is that isn't a matter of agreement or disagreement, but hostility to different ideas.
But another reminder for the umpteenth time -- my e-mail is quite the opposite. Lots of it, rarely hostile or angry. I keep making that point because the public posts create the distorted impression that everyone here is alienated. That isn't so at all.
I though this a great post. Some of you have e-mailed me that the Medieval Artisans were the first real geeks -- a neat idea --and among the first to feel alienated by technology, in their case their craft tools. I'd love thoughts on this idea.
Good point about War Games. Hey look, I may be an idiot, but I do NOT have too much time on my hands, for sure. Also check out Rober Ebert's piece on Geek Cinema for a very different take (I'll try and get the URL).