I most typically see "Shill!" directed at people who disagree with the shill-caller, BUT who also make ridiculous, over the top, or off-topic arguments. Ridiculous arguments would include citing issues that have been addressed long ago, for one. Over the top arguments are ones that just go way farther than is necessary (kind of like answering a yes/no question with a full page essay). Off-topic arguments are ones like the OP here, who claimed that this would be an "M$ SUX, LINUX ROX!" shouting fest, rather than (as indicated in the summary) dealing with more specific issues such as DRM.
Personally, in these cases, I don't think that "Shill!" is an indicator of narrow-mindedness. It may not be an appropriate designation, but it most typically (in my experience) is a reaction to a poor argument rather than to an opposing argument. "Fanboy!" or "Troll!" would in most cases probably be the more appropriate designation, but when talking about Microsoft, "Shill!" is a popular alternative.
OTOH, poster's "rules" and snippy "you must abide by my rules or I won't even really acknowledge your response" kind of makes him an ass, as far as I can see.
Actions like this scream for the congressional oversight which has been sorely lacking over the last 6 years.
I agree. Oversight (of everyone over everyone else) is the basis of the system of checks and balances, which has managed to fail us lately.
One might make the argument that we should think of Bush as we think of Chris Soghoian. Perhaps Bush (plus Rove and company) are altruists who realized that the government had these holes where a president (and not even a particularly charismatic one) could come in and snatch a lot of power. They then set about to fix it, but maybe nobody listened, so they had to demonstrate it. The more ridiculous things in the White House get, the more likely it is that things will get fixed so it won't happen again. If they only get a little bit more ridiculous than they are now, there is a good chance that we will have just set things up for the next president to be even worse. So, I say, go for it Bushie! Take our government past the edge, so that our people will wake up and get things changed!
Well, if the sources in the kit were packages like standard exempt sources today (little round brightly colored plastic discs with a hole in the middle), they practically invite consumption. They look like lifesavers! One of my friends in junior physics lab (mostly jokingly) kept saying she wanted to eat them. Now give that to a not so bright kid... OTOH, the only parents who are likely to get such a thing for their kids are also the same parents who are likely to be smart enough to watch out for their kids, too.
It is unfair, but if they do it to everyone else, I think it's just deserves that they get it in return.
Ok, make up your mind. Do you think it is unfair or not? If you think it is unfair, then you must think it is not just that they "get it in return". That is the meaning of something being unfair. If you think that they deserve it, then you think that it is fair that it happens to them. Which do you think?
If censorship is bad, then it is bad. A little bit is just as bad as a lot, and one shouldn't be cheering it on just because one doesn't like the group being censored. If we're going to oppose censorship on CDs (by claiming that censorship is a Bad Thing), then we'd better oppose it on this too. Of course, if our real reason for opposing censorship on CDs is that we hate Christians, or that we just like those CDs, then we aren't inconsistent, except in that we said we were opposing because censorship is Bad.
Amazing how the/. groupthink is almost violent in its opposition to censorship.... Unless it is censoring fundie Christians. Then it's all ok. Good job guys. Way to be consistent.
I'm curious why you were so sensitive to the term?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Oh I don't know. Let's see....
Texas' fascination with firearms on the other hand has more to do with shooting other humans than shooting animals. As in, "I shot them thar dude who wuz tryin' to make off with ma pickup truck."
Perhaps it's because I see way too much of this stereotype (even in jest). It is insulting to find my people constantly described as stupid, uneducated, poor, and obsessed. It is even more insulting when I know that they are not really any more so than people anywhere else. Try a year having your people be the butt of every third joke. Of course, to pick an analogy, no African American in the 1960s would feel insulted when the rest of the country thought of him or her in similar terms (the stupidity, poor command of the language, disregard for human life, etc). Walk around the streets of Boston, or San Fran, talk to people that you pass on the street, and then come back and tell me that Texans appear in a negative light but the people there do not. I've been to NYC, to San Fran, to Chicago, to Colorado Springs, and I've been to Dallas, to Austin, to Waco, to Moline, to West, to Mexia, to Bonham, to Lubbock. I can tell you that except for the people here being a bit friendlier and more open to strangers, there really isn't much difference.
I'm so glad that you can completely dismiss anyone who doesn't agree with you (apparently "conservative Republicans") as assholes. That definitely shows real wisdom and not a bit of prejudice. Isn't it nice when the world is so cleanly divided by a bright line into the good guys and the bad guys? It's almost like a comic book! Oh, and one anecdote. Gosh, that just floored me. I don't even know how to begin to respond to that.
Perhaps since you live in such an "island", you simply haven't gotten out much, and therefore haven't realized that most of the state is not in fact like that. However, I know people from all over the state, and very few of them are "enamored of hunting, guns, pick-up trucks, country music, Republicans, etc." Many of them are Republican (as if that is some sort of deadly insult); most of them drive small economy cars (gas is expensive, and trucks use a lot of gas); most of them don't own a gun, have never owned a gun, and are not planning on purchasing a gun; a significant number of them (although less than half I would estimate) do prefer country music (is that so bad either?); most of them have never been hunting in their life, and wouldn't want to go even if someone invited them. So yes, many of them do fit one or maybe two aspects of your misguided stereotype, but nearly noone fits the entire profile. Perhaps it's time you got off your "Keep Austin weird, and to hell with everyone else" high horse. I always thought that the Democratic party was supposed to be populist, all for the common man, etc. Unless I'm completely wrong about that, maybe you'd better check your political stance and make sure you aren't rooting for the wrong team.
I am a Texan, and I seriously do object to the characterization of my state as "hunting-besotted". Note: this post is not intended to be humorous. I am aware that most (at least I hope) people will recognize this characterization as hyperbole, but from many other things that I have read and heard, there remain a significant number of people who will not. Therefore, while I am certainly not demanding that nobody ever say this about Texas, I do wish to speak up and be heard when I assert that this is, in fact, hyperbole. Hyperbole has its place in satire and parody (and other forms of mockery), but it should be countered (as opposed to censored or removed) unless it is known that everyone recognizes it as satire and parody. Texas is not "hunting-besotted".
No, it doesn't so much hurt like hell. It just kills you. IIRC, it paralyzes you, including your diaphragm. I suppose it hurts as much as any other form of suffocation.
I am a physicist, and I have been to cosmology conferences (for instance PASCOS 2006 at Ohio State University) (although my field is High Energy Physics, which incidentally not only depends on special relativity, but has provided a lot of the compelling evidence in favor of SR), and I do attest that the parent is in fact a troll, or at best, someone who has been really taken for a ride.
I'm afraid I don't know much more than I have said already... Not my field (which is HEP). If you like, email me at Jon und_erscore Wilson2 (yes that's a '2', the numeral) a@t DONTbaylorSPAMME do.t eduCATIONAL, and I'll give you the emails of a couple of profs in our department who do plasma physics, specifically space plasma physics. They aren't the leaders of the field, that's for sure, and space plasma physics isn't the only thing they do, but they know more than I do.
I agree, the N-S equations are fun. At least, they make fun things happen.
I'm afraid that you missed my point about Computer Science being a different beast than programming. They are related, but they are not the same thing. Computer Science as a discipline, a field of study, a science, involves computer programming only incidentally. Computer Science is really a branch of mathematics more than it is anything else. Read up on Turing, Church, Chaitin, Von Neumann, and friends, who (except Chaitin) studied computer science before programming even existed! Programming is more a branch of either art or engineering, depending on how you view it. If your computer science degree includes a lot of programming-heavy courses, even if in just the last two years, then your university probably needs to change the name of the degree, because what you have learned is more computer engineering than computer science. Like I said, it is very much like the difference between engineering and physics. If I had had to take a bunch of engineering-heavy courses my last two years of my physics degree, I'd be pissed. There is far too much physics to be learned, and I mean physics that I will need in order to do real physics research, to waste time on engineering. Similarly, if I wanted to do real research in computer science, and I found that my undergraduate degree was all about how to program, I'd be pissed. There is far too much computer science to be learned to waste time with programming.
Now, I do recognize that the number of people who want to learn how to program is much much greater than the number of people who want to do computer science research. Again, the physics/engineering analogy works. At most schools that offer both, the engineering program is immensely larger than the physics program. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have a physics program, and nearly all schools recognize that, and offer both. Most schools also offer a Mathematics and an Applied Mathematics degree. So why don't most schools offer a computer science and a computer programming/applied compsci/computer engineering degree? Then perhaps this confusion between the two would cease.
Plasmas, even very rarefied ones like the solar atmosphere, are very complex and chaotic systems. The atmosphere (of Earth) is subject to the laws of hydrodynamics. The solar atmosphere (the domain of space weather) (and yes, the solar atmosphere does extend out quite far, way past Earth's orbit) is subject to the laws of Magnetohyrdodynamics. I would say that space weather ought to be immensely more difficult to predict. You have essentially one source of heat, but sources of magnetic fields are plentiful, and affect the motion of plasmas in much more complex ways than heat does, because the plasma itself is a major source of magnetic fields.
Be fair. The submitter said it was a rootkit that removes other rootkits, which would be a really really really terrible idea. Sure, nobody RTFA, but that's normal, whether the article is about MS or otherwise.
doing C / C++ actually teaches you how to code a bit
Except it teaches really terrible programming practice in general... Only partly because it doesn't enforce good practice the way java tries to (gag!), but more because even with all of its horrendously overblown (I'm talking about C++ now) set of features, it still doesn't provide the kind of features that you really need to organize everything in a nice intuitive easy to understand (and therefore maintain) manner. When I spend more of my time fighting the language than actually getting anything good done (and yes I do this in Java as well), there is a problem. The language should be powerful and flexible enough to allow me to organize things in the best way for the problem at hand, rather than the really quite rigid few ways the language designers came up with.
And I'd much rather do heavy coding in java or.net (or a few other languages...), simply for the automatic memory management. Manual new/delete is the cause of more impossible to find bugs..... And garbage collection is really quite efficient. Except in some very few niche cases, or unless you really are the rock star, automatic memory management is going to be more efficient than manual.
You DO realize that he got a Computer Science degree, right? Not a programming degree. I realize that the name CS is usually used today to tart up a programming degree and make it sound special, but a Real CS degree is much closer to a degree in Mathematics (and not applied math...) than it is to a degree in programming. It does sound like maybe what he was looking for was a programming degree, but it was his responsibility to figure out before he started whether his school offered CS or programming under the CS name. Asking for a refund would definitely not be appropriate here. Actually, if I went to a school that offered CS, and found I had a programming degree when all was said and done, I might ask for a refund then. But not when they say its CS and it turns out to actually be (gasp!) CS. That's like going for a Physics degree, and complaining when they don't teach you engineering. If my Physics profs tried to teach me engineering all the time, I'd be looking to transfer somewhere with a REAL Physics program. Not that there's anything wrong with engineering, but a) it isn't what I want to do, and b) it isn't Physics.
I agree. I had mod points, and replied to you instead of modding you down. I think the redundant mod shouldn't lower karma, because it would be nice to get the second of duplicate posts out of the way, just for clarity of discussion, but there is no reason why the second person should be hurt by it. Perhaps it already doesn't reduce karma. I dunno.
Also, the hardware on a TV doesn't change. It just doesn't. So you don't really need any of the BIOS' going "Wtf? Who am I? Do I have arms and legs? no. Do I have a cd drive? yes. What time is it? Will there be cake?" If you go entirely to an instant on through complete saving of the boot configuration, you lose all of the plug and play goodness that everyone oohs and aahs about (that is, suddenly things won't Just Work (TM) anymore). If you swap out a hard drive, or add a new DVD+RW drive, your BIOS doesn't freak out because it asks at every bootup what its got. The OS doesn't freak out because it has hardware detection routines too. Anything that can change from one bootup to the next which makes any difference at all to the things that start running during boot must be detected. Try putting your computer into hibernate (suspend to disk), and then changing the amount of ram. Will it come back up out of hibernate nicely? I doubt it.
Don't all of the new and hip websites work the same on Windows 2000 (or a Mac)?
No. Not until IE and Safari and Firefox and Opera and everyone else all reach some sort of standards compliance. Until then, the only way that all of the new and hip websites will work the same on different platforms is if the web developers spend ages and ages making hacks and workarounds.
Slashdot Mirror
I most typically see "Shill!" directed at people who disagree with the shill-caller, BUT who also make ridiculous, over the top, or off-topic arguments. Ridiculous arguments would include citing issues that have been addressed long ago, for one. Over the top arguments are ones that just go way farther than is necessary (kind of like answering a yes/no question with a full page essay). Off-topic arguments are ones like the OP here, who claimed that this would be an "M$ SUX, LINUX ROX!" shouting fest, rather than (as indicated in the summary) dealing with more specific issues such as DRM.
Personally, in these cases, I don't think that "Shill!" is an indicator of narrow-mindedness. It may not be an appropriate designation, but it most typically (in my experience) is a reaction to a poor argument rather than to an opposing argument. "Fanboy!" or "Troll!" would in most cases probably be the more appropriate designation, but when talking about Microsoft, "Shill!" is a popular alternative.
OTOH, poster's "rules" and snippy "you must abide by my rules or I won't even really acknowledge your response" kind of makes him an ass, as far as I can see.
One might make the argument that we should think of Bush as we think of Chris Soghoian. Perhaps Bush (plus Rove and company) are altruists who realized that the government had these holes where a president (and not even a particularly charismatic one) could come in and snatch a lot of power. They then set about to fix it, but maybe nobody listened, so they had to demonstrate it. The more ridiculous things in the White House get, the more likely it is that things will get fixed so it won't happen again. If they only get a little bit more ridiculous than they are now, there is a good chance that we will have just set things up for the next president to be even worse. So, I say, go for it Bushie! Take our government past the edge, so that our people will wake up and get things changed!
Well, if the sources in the kit were packages like standard exempt sources today (little round brightly colored plastic discs with a hole in the middle), they practically invite consumption. They look like lifesavers! One of my friends in junior physics lab (mostly jokingly) kept saying she wanted to eat them. Now give that to a not so bright kid... OTOH, the only parents who are likely to get such a thing for their kids are also the same parents who are likely to be smart enough to watch out for their kids, too.
Right. And that makes it ok. Got it.
If censorship is bad, then it is bad. A little bit is just as bad as a lot, and one shouldn't be cheering it on just because one doesn't like the group being censored. If we're going to oppose censorship on CDs (by claiming that censorship is a Bad Thing), then we'd better oppose it on this too. Of course, if our real reason for opposing censorship on CDs is that we hate Christians, or that we just like those CDs, then we aren't inconsistent, except in that we said we were opposing because censorship is Bad.
Amazing how the /. groupthink is almost violent in its opposition to censorship.... Unless it is censoring fundie Christians. Then it's all ok. Good job guys. Way to be consistent.
Huzzah! Someone who gets it! If you weren't an AC, I'd make you my friend.
Perhaps it's because I see way too much of this stereotype (even in jest). It is insulting to find my people constantly described as stupid, uneducated, poor, and obsessed. It is even more insulting when I know that they are not really any more so than people anywhere else. Try a year having your people be the butt of every third joke. Of course, to pick an analogy, no African American in the 1960s would feel insulted when the rest of the country thought of him or her in similar terms (the stupidity, poor command of the language, disregard for human life, etc). Walk around the streets of Boston, or San Fran, talk to people that you pass on the street, and then come back and tell me that Texans appear in a negative light but the people there do not. I've been to NYC, to San Fran, to Chicago, to Colorado Springs, and I've been to Dallas, to Austin, to Waco, to Moline, to West, to Mexia, to Bonham, to Lubbock. I can tell you that except for the people here being a bit friendlier and more open to strangers, there really isn't much difference.
I'm so glad that you can completely dismiss anyone who doesn't agree with you (apparently "conservative Republicans") as assholes. That definitely shows real wisdom and not a bit of prejudice. Isn't it nice when the world is so cleanly divided by a bright line into the good guys and the bad guys? It's almost like a comic book! Oh, and one anecdote. Gosh, that just floored me. I don't even know how to begin to respond to that.
Perhaps since you live in such an "island", you simply haven't gotten out much, and therefore haven't realized that most of the state is not in fact like that. However, I know people from all over the state, and very few of them are "enamored of hunting, guns, pick-up trucks, country music, Republicans, etc." Many of them are Republican (as if that is some sort of deadly insult); most of them drive small economy cars (gas is expensive, and trucks use a lot of gas); most of them don't own a gun, have never owned a gun, and are not planning on purchasing a gun; a significant number of them (although less than half I would estimate) do prefer country music (is that so bad either?); most of them have never been hunting in their life, and wouldn't want to go even if someone invited them. So yes, many of them do fit one or maybe two aspects of your misguided stereotype, but nearly noone fits the entire profile. Perhaps it's time you got off your "Keep Austin weird, and to hell with everyone else" high horse. I always thought that the Democratic party was supposed to be populist, all for the common man, etc. Unless I'm completely wrong about that, maybe you'd better check your political stance and make sure you aren't rooting for the wrong team.
I am a Texan, and I seriously do object to the characterization of my state as "hunting-besotted". Note: this post is not intended to be humorous. I am aware that most (at least I hope) people will recognize this characterization as hyperbole, but from many other things that I have read and heard, there remain a significant number of people who will not. Therefore, while I am certainly not demanding that nobody ever say this about Texas, I do wish to speak up and be heard when I assert that this is, in fact, hyperbole. Hyperbole has its place in satire and parody (and other forms of mockery), but it should be countered (as opposed to censored or removed) unless it is known that everyone recognizes it as satire and parody. Texas is not "hunting-besotted".
No, it doesn't so much hurt like hell. It just kills you. IIRC, it paralyzes you, including your diaphragm. I suppose it hurts as much as any other form of suffocation.
I am a physicist, and I have been to cosmology conferences (for instance PASCOS 2006 at Ohio State University) (although my field is High Energy Physics, which incidentally not only depends on special relativity, but has provided a lot of the compelling evidence in favor of SR), and I do attest that the parent is in fact a troll, or at best, someone who has been really taken for a ride.
It looks like pasta!
I'm afraid I don't know much more than I have said already... Not my field (which is HEP). If you like, email me at Jon und_erscore Wilson2 (yes that's a '2', the numeral) a@t DONTbaylorSPAMME do.t eduCATIONAL, and I'll give you the emails of a couple of profs in our department who do plasma physics, specifically space plasma physics. They aren't the leaders of the field, that's for sure, and space plasma physics isn't the only thing they do, but they know more than I do.
I agree, the N-S equations are fun. At least, they make fun things happen.
I'm afraid that you missed my point about Computer Science being a different beast than programming. They are related, but they are not the same thing. Computer Science as a discipline, a field of study, a science, involves computer programming only incidentally. Computer Science is really a branch of mathematics more than it is anything else. Read up on Turing, Church, Chaitin, Von Neumann, and friends, who (except Chaitin) studied computer science before programming even existed! Programming is more a branch of either art or engineering, depending on how you view it. If your computer science degree includes a lot of programming-heavy courses, even if in just the last two years, then your university probably needs to change the name of the degree, because what you have learned is more computer engineering than computer science. Like I said, it is very much like the difference between engineering and physics. If I had had to take a bunch of engineering-heavy courses my last two years of my physics degree, I'd be pissed. There is far too much physics to be learned, and I mean physics that I will need in order to do real physics research, to waste time on engineering. Similarly, if I wanted to do real research in computer science, and I found that my undergraduate degree was all about how to program, I'd be pissed. There is far too much computer science to be learned to waste time with programming.
Now, I do recognize that the number of people who want to learn how to program is much much greater than the number of people who want to do computer science research. Again, the physics/engineering analogy works. At most schools that offer both, the engineering program is immensely larger than the physics program. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have a physics program, and nearly all schools recognize that, and offer both. Most schools also offer a Mathematics and an Applied Mathematics degree. So why don't most schools offer a computer science and a computer programming/applied compsci/computer engineering degree? Then perhaps this confusion between the two would cease.
Plasmas, even very rarefied ones like the solar atmosphere, are very complex and chaotic systems. The atmosphere (of Earth) is subject to the laws of hydrodynamics. The solar atmosphere (the domain of space weather) (and yes, the solar atmosphere does extend out quite far, way past Earth's orbit) is subject to the laws of Magnetohyrdodynamics. I would say that space weather ought to be immensely more difficult to predict. You have essentially one source of heat, but sources of magnetic fields are plentiful, and affect the motion of plasmas in much more complex ways than heat does, because the plasma itself is a major source of magnetic fields.
Be fair. The submitter said it was a rootkit that removes other rootkits, which would be a really really really terrible idea. Sure, nobody RTFA, but that's normal, whether the article is about MS or otherwise.
And I'd much rather do heavy coding in java or
You DO realize that he got a Computer Science degree, right? Not a programming degree. I realize that the name CS is usually used today to tart up a programming degree and make it sound special, but a Real CS degree is much closer to a degree in Mathematics (and not applied math...) than it is to a degree in programming. It does sound like maybe what he was looking for was a programming degree, but it was his responsibility to figure out before he started whether his school offered CS or programming under the CS name. Asking for a refund would definitely not be appropriate here. Actually, if I went to a school that offered CS, and found I had a programming degree when all was said and done, I might ask for a refund then. But not when they say its CS and it turns out to actually be (gasp!) CS. That's like going for a Physics degree, and complaining when they don't teach you engineering. If my Physics profs tried to teach me engineering all the time, I'd be looking to transfer somewhere with a REAL Physics program. Not that there's anything wrong with engineering, but a) it isn't what I want to do, and b) it isn't Physics.
I agree. I had mod points, and replied to you instead of modding you down. I think the redundant mod shouldn't lower karma, because it would be nice to get the second of duplicate posts out of the way, just for clarity of discussion, but there is no reason why the second person should be hurt by it. Perhaps it already doesn't reduce karma. I dunno.
I'd rather have a well organized tree structure than a single flat menu with everything in it any day.
See this post, which answered another post asking nearly the exact same question as you.
Also, the hardware on a TV doesn't change. It just doesn't. So you don't really need any of the BIOS' going "Wtf? Who am I? Do I have arms and legs? no. Do I have a cd drive? yes. What time is it? Will there be cake?" If you go entirely to an instant on through complete saving of the boot configuration, you lose all of the plug and play goodness that everyone oohs and aahs about (that is, suddenly things won't Just Work (TM) anymore). If you swap out a hard drive, or add a new DVD+RW drive, your BIOS doesn't freak out because it asks at every bootup what its got. The OS doesn't freak out because it has hardware detection routines too. Anything that can change from one bootup to the next which makes any difference at all to the things that start running during boot must be detected. Try putting your computer into hibernate (suspend to disk), and then changing the amount of ram. Will it come back up out of hibernate nicely? I doubt it.