Re:To tap, or not to tap
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
Survey says...
***BZZZZZZZTTTTTT***
Small mangling of the law is not acceptible. Ever.
EVER!
Look at it this way: If I say that breaking this law in this way is ok, the logical next step is to say that breaking this other law is ok too, but only sometimes. Eventually, no one law is absolute, the courts are full of people who would have been innocent on a Monday, but they were booked on a Tuesday, the jails are overflowing, and Congress passes hundreds of band-aid laws to try to fix things.
Oh, wait. That's how it is now.
--'Pardon me, Mr. Ford' --Nixon, after bumping into Gerald Ford on the steps of the White House
Ok, ok. It's not a true quote. But you get the picture...
Re:What a waste of $500b
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 2
"Carriers can now begin taking steps to correct technological impediments"
I didn't realize that a lack of monitoring and Big Brother control was an 'impediment' that needed to be 'corrected'.
What are these people smoking?
I am really frightened.
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
I guess there's nothing we can do about this, huh?
Makes a helluva case for strong encryption, though.
I thought about logging out before this post, then decided against it. I feel a need for protection, but I don't want to be cowardly about it.
Anyway...
<RANT> The more that stuff like this is posted on/., the more I think that the world is just full of greedy malcontents who want our money. However, I soon realize that I am the one to blame for what's occuring. I come to these conclusions:
I am responsible for my freedom. No one else.
By not educating myself, I contribute to this oppression (see: 'Evil triumphs when good men do nothing').
Unless I educate and mobilize myself, I cannot contribute to what's going on in a positive way.
For me, as an individual, to effect change in the government (state, local, or world) I have to be responsible for my actions and my thoughts. I choose how I will be treated. It's like the Rush song says, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice".
</RANT>
I know. What does this have to do with anything, you ask?
Everything.
The way I see things, we are deluding ourselves by thinking that firing off a letter to our Legally Authorized Representative(tm) will solve the problem. We, as a community, need to do more than that. The problem here is one of focus.
Let's use a programming example. I'll use Java because It's what I (sort of) know.
Let's say that you have one window who is in charge of several other windows. When the controlling window does something, it notifies the other wondows through the observable interface. These other windows are then free to act however they see fit (within the constraints of the program, of course). These windoes then can return focus to the parent window and forget what's going on - IOW, there is a contract between all of the windows to Do The Right Thing. Since that contract is there, one can be reasonably sure that no harm will befall the system (crosses fingers)
Politics is similar. Kind of.
Let's replace the parent window with the Politician of Your Choice(POYC). Replace the child windows with you, the POYC's constituancy. Now, it should hold true that the POYC takes a stance on an issue or drafts a bill or whatever, then notifies you via the media interface. You then take whatever actions are necessary (in this case firing off a letter of signing a petition) and return focus to the POYC. One would hope that the POYC would, with whatever checks and balances are in place(replace contract in the previous example with this) Do The Right Thing. Sadly, this is not the case.
When we put the ball in the POYC's court, the correct thing for him[1] to do would be to act on your behalf; after all that's why he is there in the first place. Problem is, he can choose to act on behalf of whoever has the most money.
This is most assuredly a Bad Thing(tm).
We, as a community, can no longer rely on the POYC, or our own Special Interest Group(SIG) to get the job done. Time and again, they have prooven that they respond to whichever entity has the most hard currency to throw into a debate. Therefore, I say that we should act in a manner consistent with our hackish nature. IOW, ignore the politicos.
Huh? Am i mad? Maybe. Read on.
Why does Slashdot exist? "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."(tm) We read news, we read about funny things, we read about articles that now fall into the Your Rights Online catagory.
But that's not where the power is.
We read about the NSAkey fiasco. We read about the CDA. We read about UCITA. We get mad, we get fired up, we're gonna Do Something(tm)! We fire of letters, we send mail, we flame.
But that's not where the real power is.
A story is published. Let's say it's the Window's 2000 test site. We check out the link. Thousands of us over the course of a few minutes. Hundreds of thousands of us in a day. The site dies. Repeatedly.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is where the real power of the internet is. That is where our power as a community lay.
If we are going to effect a change in this Brave New World (tired tm), then we have to do just that. Just do it. Forget the POYC, forget the SIGs, forget the government. Just do it. Play by their rules. If they want to take you freedom, then take it back. Start the fscking revolution, already! There will be millions supporting you. I am one of them. I am very afraid of any government, but I also know that the beat way to defeat ones fear is to face it, challenge it head on, and crush it.
Just my $1.50.
This post is rated as 'safe for all ages and mindsets'
Something I just thought about along those lines...
"the way it's distributed can add value"
Also, the way it's supported and maintained can add value. Look at it this way. Let's say that a communist state builds a road. The workers receive an incentive of some sort to build this road to their own houses so that this one road can lead anywhere in the state(effectively adding value to the road). Now, what happens when that road starts to deteriorate and needs repairs? In the communist state, the road would effectively die, because there is no incentive to maintain the road or to try to make it better. With OS, maintaining, improving, and repairing software is another way to add value to said software.
Not a rant or a contradiction. Just an addition. I have (hopefully) added value to this thread.:-)
Hmmm...I can't decide if you contadict yourself or not. In the first paragraph, you say that an NC-17 rating kills movies dead, and that that's a Bad Thing(tm). In the third paragraph, you talk about a "serious threat to free speech". But in the second...
"In America it's not illegal to sell tapes of a KKK rally or even to participate in one"
That's a thin distinction at best. IANAL, but I do see laws on the books that define 'Hate Crimes', and I think that content (i.e., the content of the tapes) can, in some circumstances, fall under these laws. Ergo, it CAN be illegal to sell tapes to a KKK rally. (Can someone provide more info here?)
"I dont worry to much for us in the states."
I do. I would go so far as to say that most US/.-ers do as well.
"There will always be a way to be heard here. The 1st ammendment will do a good job of protecting the backbone from knee-jerk fundamentalists who are afraid of the net."
God, I hope so. Problem is, I cant get that line out of my head that starts: "When thay came for the Jews, I said nothing because I'm not Jewish."
I don't want to have to trust a law that is interpreted by a government that may (probably does) not have my best interests at heart.
I have to take issue with some of what you said. While I agree that all of your options are vastly better than what is currently in place, I think that you've missed a fundamantal point:
People/Government/Corporations DO NOT WANT to make it better.
Look at it like this:
Information is power
Those who control the information have power over those who receive the information
If those in control of the information censor the information's content, then they have total power over the information consumers
If those who control the information make it avaliable to all, then they have given away most of their power
If we, as the on-line community, prevent those who want control of the information from having control over it, then we, as a community, have the power
And how do you think we would make this information avaliable?
Probably by using one or more of the methods you describe here.
We have really needed soething like this for a long time. Being rather uneducated in these subjects, I really dig all of the freedom (beer, speech, what-have-you) articles and discussions that appear from time to time. This will be a great tool to educate people like me.
I mean, the army needs the net to display certain types if data. IMHO, 95% of that data will be static(i.e. not generated on the fly from a db like/.)[Note 1]. So, why would the army need all of the fancy chmancy stuff?? Just makes things easier to break.
[Note 1] Now, let's say that there's a conflict going on that the army is involved in. --Would it make more sense to be trying to display troop movements online, or to use their radios instead? --What would be the point of telnet access durring an armed conflict? --Do tank repair schedules really need to be dynamically generated? [/Note 1]
Therefore, switching to a single-user OS on really fast hardware with a small server running a limited amount of processes seems to be that way for them to go.
But to me, the most important part was the last paragraph:
"I think that we might end up in an era where, just as people today have their own e-mail addresses, people will have their own Web sites," he said. "But eventually it will taper off. Eventually it has to be self-limiting."
That last sentance makes me think he isn't too sure of the Web's self-limiting qualities. I personally don't think it will ever taper off. Just about the time it starts to get stale, the Netizins will get a new toy (ala JS rolovers, Java applets, Flash, Shockwave, whatever). There will always be too much excitement and new technology.
And, just as it seems weve run out of things to do, we might actually have a moon base with a couple hundred-thousand miles of 100BaseT. Voila, brand new web to play with.:-)
"What other factors can/should contribute to your karma?"
Nothing else can, AFAIK. I think that submitting good stories that are published ahould contribute to karma. I also think that generally being active in discussions (subjective at best) should contribute.
"can your karma dwindle (i.e. expire)? "
I do not think so. I really hope not. However, that FAQ and the Moderator Guidelines are less than illuminating.
Sounds like a little, tiny Beowulf cluster:-) (sorry, someone had to...)
Seriously, would this be like a distributed computing approach? I read the paper you site, yet missed any information on how to implement the 'hive mind' scenario. Would you have different groups that reacted to different stimulus (control stimulus)? Would there be some sort of hard-coded control system (instinct, if you will)? Or would these little buggers communicate?
IMHO, if one does not like the franchise element of something, that's no reason to take it out on your throng of adoring fans. Yes, Lucas is taking all of this too far(I think:-). However, I just fail to see the wisdom or benifit of tearing kids heads off because you are afraid of their "obsessive"-ness.
We especially need coverage in mainstream press. How many PHBs look at/go to/read excite? How many other sites get their summary news bites from excite?
Doesn't pretty much every word processor support HTML? I don't see why one couldn't be working in StarOffice or Emacs or whatever, save as HTML, and reopen in M$ Word as a regular.DOC file. Am I missing something?
OTOH, some rumormongering can be a good thing. Rumors get people to thinking. Thinking is generally a creative process, therefore, rumors can propogate creative thinking.
As an example, check this post earlier in the story. If Bwah is in a position to learn about writing Apple boot ROMS, then this might be the impetous that is needed.
If we have a handheld that plays all of our massive library of games, allows you to play over the phone, goes forever on one change of batteries, and has several other things that our competetors' units don't, then we can sell it at $125.00 to $150.00. What's more, with the Pokemon craze, we could probably sell for as high as $175.00 and still make a profit.
When you market to the 5-15 year old segment, initial investment is usually not a concern, IMHO.
"BTW I am still doubtful about the utility of a computer larger than a palmtop without a keyboard."
Here's an idea.
I used to work for a Honda dealership in Dallas. In the shop were three bookcases of enormous size (10'H x 25'L x 18"D). Three. And all three were full to overflowing with Honda service manuals.
Imagine if all of those books were on a server somewhere in the shop. All you would have to do is stick one of these devices on every bench. Add a stylus (NOT a screwdriver) and voila, instant access without ever having to leave your bench.
Advantages: Never loose another book. Never have another book thrown away because it's worn out. Never worry about losing the one service manual you could find for a '78 Accord (those things are almost priceless, y'know). Doesn't take up nearly as much space as a terminal. Or a desktop. Or even a laptop. Cheap in bulk. And I'm not even mentioning the possibility of integrating it with email and the main shop servers...
Even at $400.00, this is still a reasonable investment. Figure 20 techs x $400.00 = $8,000, less with the discount. If I were the service manager, I would look long and hard at this kind of solution that would, in the long run, save money, time, and hassle.
"I don't see why the trolls still can't create a bunch accounts so they can negatively affect the meta-moderation."
I think that with the massive amount of/. readership (80,000+), a troll would have to be very persistant and very patient. To be sure it could be done, except for the fact that M^2 status comes from the same middle-of-the-road, average/. demographic. IOW, to M^2, one still has to post regularly.
I do see that as a possible attack strategy, however.
"Every post offers a way to classify it. Every registered reader is allowed to select one of the categories...People will read the articles and comments, classify some of the posts, then click submit before leaving and go on."
Good idea. One little snag, though. This story was posted awhile back. I think all/.ers probably remember this one; heck, I think we all posted to it. It contained 1505 comments. To put the responsibility of moderation on everybody is, IMHO, unfair. I know I posted quite a few times and got caught up in the raging debate. It would have sucked for me to try to track down all of the comments to try to moderate them, while still participation in the discussion.
This is part of the reason why we have moderators in the first point, and also why Rob doesn't let them post. The moderators take out the garbage and find the gems while the rest of the readership dives in headfirst. Without the moderators, again IMHO, the readership would be too busy trying to moderate and post to produce much worthwhile content. (I know, I know, Rob didn't have moderators when/. started. 'Course he didn't have 80,000+ users and who knows how many lurkers, either.)
"- 15 minute of fame - one random (or semi-random) post per thread to be given score of 5. This is like random breath testing, if you know that your post could be eyeballed by a sizeable fragment of/. readers, would you be encouraged to be more careful in your average writing? Debateable..."
The only problem I can see with this will be the troll who tries to post 10e6 comments per thread in the hopes of having one moderated way up. I don't think that/. readership would like to see posts that consist of MAE LING MAK, NAKED AND PETRIFIED because this person managed to get his post moderated up on a fluke. While I think it's a good idea (Moddo, like the Lotto, but different:-), good implementation would be difficult at best.
"- karma seekers - the problem with mass communications is that mediocracy tends to dominate, e.g. newsgroups find inital experts are driven out by the noise. It would be nice if I could permanently donate my karma to the rare gurus that do wander past so that they could be encouraged to post more enlightening information rather than fighting through the history ranks"
Great Idea(tm). I just don't want to have to permanantly donate my karma. But the idea that you could give your karma to a rotating group is excellent. (Let's see, RMS gets my karma Monday and Tuesday, Bruce Perens gets it Thursday and Friday, and ERS gets it Saturday and Sunday. Wednesdays will be either for me or for Alan Cox.)
Good point about voting for posts. However, I would be afraid that voting for posts would possibly cause the system to degenerate into a popularity contest ("Oh, Mr. X has posted again. I have to vote positive for him, because he is cool") as opposed to a unbiased system of moderation. Might be workable, but make it to where the readership cannot see the votes, only the user. Or something.
Slashdot Mirror
Survey says...
***BZZZZZZZTTTTTT***
Small mangling of the law is not acceptible. Ever.
EVER!
Look at it this way: If I say that breaking this law in this way is ok, the logical next step is to say that breaking this other law is ok too, but only sometimes. Eventually, no one law is absolute, the courts are full of people who would have been innocent on a Monday, but they were booked on a Tuesday, the jails are overflowing, and Congress passes hundreds of band-aid laws to try to fix things.
Oh, wait. That's how it is now.
--'Pardon me, Mr. Ford'
--Nixon, after bumping into Gerald Ford on the steps of the White House
Ok, ok. It's not a true quote. But you get the picture...
"Carriers can now begin taking steps to correct technological impediments"
I didn't realize that a lack of monitoring and Big Brother control was an 'impediment' that needed to be 'corrected'.
What are these people smoking?
I guess there's nothing we can do about this, huh?
Makes a helluva case for strong encryption, though.
I just wish the government would go away...
Hrmmm...didn't work.
Now what?
Anyway...
<RANT>
The more that stuff like this is posted on
For me, as an individual, to effect change in the government (state, local, or world) I have to be responsible for my actions and my thoughts. I choose how I will be treated. It's like the Rush song says, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice".
</RANT>
I know. What does this have to do with anything, you ask?
Everything.
The way I see things, we are deluding ourselves by thinking that firing off a letter to our Legally Authorized Representative(tm) will solve the problem. We, as a community, need to do more than that. The problem here is one of focus.
Let's use a programming example. I'll use Java because It's what I (sort of) know.
Let's say that you have one window who is in charge of several other windows. When the controlling window does something, it notifies the other wondows through the observable interface. These other windows are then free to act however they see fit (within the constraints of the program, of course). These windoes then can return focus to the parent window and forget what's going on - IOW, there is a contract between all of the windows to Do The Right Thing. Since that contract is there, one can be reasonably sure that no harm will befall the system (crosses fingers)
Politics is similar. Kind of.
Let's replace the parent window with the Politician of Your Choice(POYC). Replace the child windows with you, the POYC's constituancy. Now, it should hold true that the POYC takes a stance on an issue or drafts a bill or whatever, then notifies you via the media interface. You then take whatever actions are necessary (in this case firing off a letter of signing a petition) and return focus to the POYC. One would hope that the POYC would, with whatever checks and balances are in place(replace contract in the previous example with this) Do The Right Thing. Sadly, this is not the case.
When we put the ball in the POYC's court, the correct thing for him[1] to do would be to act on your behalf; after all that's why he is there in the first place. Problem is, he can choose to act on behalf of whoever has the most money.
This is most assuredly a Bad Thing(tm).
We, as a community, can no longer rely on the POYC, or our own Special Interest Group(SIG) to get the job done. Time and again, they have prooven that they respond to whichever entity has the most hard currency to throw into a debate. Therefore, I say that we should act in a manner consistent with our hackish nature. IOW, ignore the politicos.
Huh? Am i mad? Maybe. Read on.
Why does Slashdot exist? "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."(tm) We read news, we read about funny things, we read about articles that now fall into the Your Rights Online catagory.
But that's not where the power is.
We read about the NSAkey fiasco. We read about the CDA. We read about UCITA. We get mad, we get fired up, we're gonna Do Something(tm)! We fire of letters, we send mail, we flame.
But that's not where the real power is.
A story is published. Let's say it's the Window's 2000 test site. We check out the link. Thousands of us over the course of a few minutes. Hundreds of thousands of us in a day. The site dies. Repeatedly.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is where the real power of the internet is. That is where our power as a community lay.
If we are going to effect a change in this Brave New World (tired tm), then we have to do just that. Just do it. Forget the POYC, forget the SIGs, forget the government. Just do it. Play by their rules. If they want to take you freedom, then take it back. Start the fscking revolution, already! There will be millions supporting you. I am one of them. I am very afraid of any government, but I also know that the beat way to defeat ones fear is to face it, challenge it head on, and crush it.
Just my $1.50.
This post is rated as 'safe for all ages and mindsets'
Apologies for being so long.
[1]he or she in theory, he in practice
Something I just thought about along those lines...
:-)
"the way it's distributed can add value"
Also, the way it's supported and maintained can add value. Look at it this way. Let's say that a communist state builds a road. The workers receive an incentive of some sort to build this road to their own houses so that this one road can lead anywhere in the state(effectively adding value to the road). Now, what happens when that road starts to deteriorate and needs repairs? In the communist state, the road would effectively die, because there is no incentive to maintain the road or to try to make it better. With OS, maintaining, improving, and repairing software is another way to add value to said software.
Not a rant or a contradiction. Just an addition. I have (hopefully) added value to this thread.
Hmmm...I can't decide if you contadict yourself or not. In the first paragraph, you say that an NC-17 rating kills movies dead, and that that's a Bad Thing(tm). In the third paragraph, you talk about a "serious threat to free speech". But in the second...
/.-ers do as well.
"In America it's not illegal to sell tapes of a KKK rally or even to participate in one"
That's a thin distinction at best. IANAL, but I do see laws on the books that define 'Hate Crimes', and I think that content (i.e., the content of the tapes) can, in some circumstances, fall under these laws. Ergo, it CAN be illegal to sell tapes to a KKK rally. (Can someone provide more info here?)
"I dont worry to much for us in the states."
I do. I would go so far as to say that most US
"There will always be a way to be heard here. The 1st ammendment will do a good job of protecting the backbone from knee-jerk fundamentalists who are afraid of the net."
God, I hope so. Problem is, I cant get that line out of my head that starts: "When thay came for the Jews, I said nothing because I'm not Jewish."
I don't want to have to trust a law that is interpreted by a government that may (probably does) not have my best interests at heart.
People/Government/Corporations DO NOT WANT to make it better.
Look at it like this:
And how do you think we would make this information avaliable?
Probably by using one or more of the methods you describe here.
We have really needed soething like this for a long time. Being rather uneducated in these subjects, I really dig all of the freedom (beer, speech, what-have-you) articles and discussions that appear from time to time. This will be a great tool to educate people like me.
:-)
P.S. CowboyNeal!...SlashBox, please!!!!
...why not use some of that radar-absorbing materiel that that air force uses on their stealth aircraft?
A stealth Mac.
Tres-cool, IMHO.
I think I would have to agree with you here.
/.)[Note 1]. So, why would the army need all of the fancy chmancy stuff?? Just makes things easier to break.
I mean, the army needs the net to display certain types if data. IMHO, 95% of that data will be static(i.e. not generated on the fly from a db like
[Note 1]
Now, let's say that there's a conflict going on that the army is involved in.
--Would it make more sense to be trying to display troop movements online, or to use their radios instead?
--What would be the point of telnet access durring an armed conflict?
--Do tank repair schedules really need to be dynamically generated?
[/Note 1]
Therefore, switching to a single-user OS on really fast hardware with a small server running a limited amount of processes seems to be that way for them to go.
Just my $0.02...
No doubt. My SO signed up through a friend. To get fully registered, you have to provide the names and addresses of two other people.
I killed the browser window at that point.
Once my SO twigged to the fact that you *have to* spam people in order to join, she felt as bad as I did. Needless to say, she hasn't been back.
But to me, the most important part was the last paragraph:
:-)
"I think that we might end up in an era where, just as
people today have their own e-mail addresses, people will
have their own Web sites," he said. "But eventually it will
taper off. Eventually it has to be self-limiting."
That last sentance makes me think he isn't too sure of the Web's self-limiting qualities. I personally don't think it will ever taper off. Just about the time it starts to get stale, the Netizins will get a new toy (ala JS rolovers, Java applets, Flash, Shockwave, whatever). There will always be too much excitement and new technology.
And, just as it seems weve run out of things to do, we might actually have a moon base with a couple hundred-thousand miles of 100BaseT. Voila, brand new web to play with.
"Do you receive karma for using moderator points (when you're given them)"
I don't think so. As I understand karma, it is affected by moderation and M2.
"or when you meta-moderate?"
From the FAQ:
and meta moderation done to your moderations.
"What other factors can/should contribute to your karma?"
Nothing else can, AFAIK. I think that submitting good stories that are published ahould contribute to karma. I also think that generally being active in discussions (subjective at best) should contribute.
"can your karma dwindle (i.e. expire)? "
I do not think so. I really hope not. However, that FAQ and the Moderator Guidelines are less than illuminating.
Sounds like a little, tiny Beowulf cluster :-)
(sorry, someone had to...)
Seriously, would this be like a distributed computing approach? I read the paper you site, yet missed any information on how to implement the 'hive mind' scenario. Would you have different groups that reacted to different stimulus (control stimulus)? Would there be some sort of hard-coded control system (instinct, if you will)? Or would these little buggers communicate?
"and he throws all fan letters into the trash."
:\
:-). However, I just fail to see the wisdom or benifit of tearing kids heads off because you are afraid of their "obsessive"-ness.
That's a good sport.
IMHO, if one does not like the franchise element of something, that's no reason to take it out on your throng of adoring fans. Yes, Lucas is taking all of this too far(I think
phtphtpht
We especially need coverage in mainstream press. How many PHBs look at/go to /read excite? How many other sites get their summary news bites from excite?
Things are on the up and up indeed.
Doesn't pretty much every word processor support HTML? I don't see why one couldn't be working in StarOffice or Emacs or whatever, save as HTML, and reopen in M$ Word as a regular .DOC file. Am I missing something?
On one hand, I agree with you.
OTOH, some rumormongering can be a good thing. Rumors get people to thinking. Thinking is generally a creative process, therefore, rumors can propogate creative thinking.
As an example, check this post earlier in the story. If Bwah is in a position to learn about writing Apple boot ROMS, then this might be the impetous that is needed.
Just my 0.02...
Not necessarily.
Pretend we work for Nintendo for a minute.
If we have a handheld that plays all of our massive library of games, allows you to play over the phone, goes forever on one change of batteries, and has several other things that our competetors' units don't, then we can sell it at $125.00 to $150.00. What's more, with the Pokemon craze, we could probably sell for as high as $175.00 and still make a profit.
When you market to the 5-15 year old segment, initial investment is usually not a concern, IMHO.
Our interview with Donnie J Barnes (which has more meat than this interview)
/. interview is different than this interview?
So, the
"LWN also has notes from a brief conversation with Donnie Barnes."
Which 'this' does 'this' refer to? Help me out, here, Rob.
Oh, and (Score:0 Redundant). heehee
"BTW I am still doubtful about the utility of a computer larger than a palmtop without a keyboard."
Here's an idea.
I used to work for a Honda dealership in Dallas. In the shop were three bookcases of enormous size (10'H x 25'L x 18"D). Three. And all three were full to overflowing with Honda service manuals.
Imagine if all of those books were on a server somewhere in the shop. All you would have to do is stick one of these devices on every bench. Add a stylus (NOT a screwdriver) and voila, instant access without ever having to leave your bench.
Advantages: Never loose another book. Never have another book thrown away because it's worn out. Never worry about losing the one service manual you could find for a '78 Accord (those things are almost priceless, y'know). Doesn't take up nearly as much space as a terminal. Or a desktop. Or even a laptop. Cheap in bulk. And I'm not even mentioning the possibility of integrating it with email and the main shop servers...
Even at $400.00, this is still a reasonable investment. Figure 20 techs x $400.00 = $8,000, less with the discount. If I were the service manager, I would look long and hard at this kind of solution that would, in the long run, save money, time, and hassle.
That's the utility in this...
"I don't see why the trolls still can't create a bunch accounts so they can negatively affect the meta-moderation."
/. readership (80,000+), a troll would have to be very persistant and very patient. To be sure it could be done, except for the fact that M^2 status comes from the same middle-of-the-road, average /. demographic. IOW, to M^2, one still has to post regularly.
I think that with the massive amount of
I do see that as a possible attack strategy, however.
"Every post offers a way to classify it. Every registered reader is allowed to select one of the categories...People will read the articles and comments, classify some of the posts, then click submit before leaving and go on."
/.ers probably remember this one; heck, I think we all posted to it. It contained 1505 comments. To put the responsibility of moderation on everybody is, IMHO, unfair. I know I posted quite a few times and got caught up in the raging debate. It would have sucked for me to try to track down all of the comments to try to moderate them, while still participation in the discussion.
/. started. 'Course he didn't have 80,000+ users and who knows how many lurkers, either.)
Good idea. One little snag, though. This story was posted awhile back. I think all
This is part of the reason why we have moderators in the first point, and also why Rob doesn't let them post. The moderators take out the garbage and find the gems while the rest of the readership dives in headfirst. Without the moderators, again IMHO, the readership would be too busy trying to moderate and post to produce much worthwhile content. (I know, I know, Rob didn't have moderators when
"- 15 minute of fame - one random (or semi-random) post per thread to be given score of 5. This is like random breath testing, if you know that your post could be eyeballed by a sizeable fragment of /. readers, would you be encouraged to be more careful in your average writing? Debateable ..."
/. readership would like to see posts that consist of MAE LING MAK, NAKED AND PETRIFIED because this person managed to get his post moderated up on a fluke. While I think it's a good idea (Moddo, like the Lotto, but different :-), good implementation would be difficult at best.
The only problem I can see with this will be the troll who tries to post 10e6 comments per thread in the hopes of having one moderated way up. I don't think that
"- karma seekers - the problem with mass communications is that mediocracy tends to dominate, e.g. newsgroups find inital experts are driven out by the noise. It would be nice if I could permanently donate my karma to the rare gurus that do wander past so that they could be encouraged to post more enlightening information rather than fighting through the history ranks"
Great Idea(tm). I just don't want to have to permanantly donate my karma. But the idea that you could give your karma to a rotating group is excellent. (Let's see, RMS gets my karma Monday and Tuesday, Bruce Perens gets it Thursday and Friday, and ERS gets it Saturday and Sunday. Wednesdays will be either for me or for Alan Cox.)
Good point about voting for posts. However, I would be afraid that voting for posts would possibly cause the system to degenerate into a popularity contest ("Oh, Mr. X has posted again. I have to vote positive for him, because he is cool") as opposed to a unbiased system of moderation. Might be workable, but make it to where the readership cannot see the votes, only the user. Or something.