I didn't see that comparison being made in the article submission. There's no need to get defensive about piracy. This is a victory against phishing scams that we should be happy about. Piracy is another issue for another day.
I think they're waiting for Tiger to come out and also to build up their product stock so that they're not always out, like they were with the iPod minis on release.
I have a friend who makes fun of D&D constantly. In fact, he's always going on about medieval fantasy and how goofy it is. He made fun of all three Lord of the Rings movies and couldn't seem to grasp basic concepts. "I thought the idea was that they were a group of guys going to the mountain." "Uh, yeah, the fellowship broke at the end of the first one. It's called 'changing plotlines'."
Then after all this, he goes and reads Star Wars novels while naming his IRC bot "Corellia."
It's controversial because of the debate over man-made versus natural cycles. It's been politicized so that the left believes it's man-made (to go with the pro-nature crowd), and the right believes it's a natural cycle (to go with the pro-industry crowd).
Until people can recognize their own biases when coming to the discussion, it will be a lot more difficult to have any meaningful conversation on the matter, which is disappointing because you'd be amazed at how expanded your worldview can get when you talk to someone whom you disagree with but who is very eloquent about their position. Unfortunately, the anonymous nature of Slashdot as well as the problematic moderation system makes it hard for us geeks to have any such meaningful discussion at this point in time.
It's an interesting article, no doubt, but why do I have a feeling the discussions will degenerate into political debates about global warming? It's kind of sad we can't just discuss things rationally anymore.
Of course, then you realize Slashdot's editors have to know that these subjects cause political debates. Then you understand--it's all about page hits for OSTG. Why do you think we got a Mozilla vulnerability and Linux root exploit article today? Each article is full of people arguing.
I believe the editors post flamebait articles intended to incite arguments because it generates page hits. Hence the endless cycle SCO, RIAA, Microsoft, Linus-did-this-today, SCO, RIAA, Microsoft, Mozilla, etc.
Look at the posts already written so far. They're all Microsoft bashes. In an article on a Linux root exploit, everyone is so defensive and hilariously predictable that they keep bringing up Microsoft, as though it's some sort of operating system penis contest.
"Linux root exploit in both 2.4 and 2.6? M$!!1 Just look at Microsoft! Don't criticize Linux; it is perfect. M$!"
Instead of a valid, calm, and rational discussion of this major security flaw in the Linux kernel, we get endless defensiveness and justifications. The complete opposite reaction, of course, when there's some new user-ran executable attachment that gets labelled a "Microsoft hole" by Michael.
This doesn't happen in the BSD world--when there's a flaw announced, everyone patches it and moves on. They don't spend their time making MORE Microsoft jokes. Yes, we know Windows has had its share of flaws. Take a look at its marketshare; it's the biggest beta test of all time. A fairer comparison would be comparing Linux/X-Windows/KDE/Mozilla to Windows, which would then bring things about even. But, conveniently, posts in this discussion aren't comparing evenly, ignoring the Mozilla vulnerabilities posted on the same front page today! Instead, we're getting Linux versus Windows comparisons, when Linux is just a kernel.
For the sake of being a mature technical community, let's keep the discussion on Linux for a change.
How is "the taxation of trade routes is under dispute" geared toward children? How are Senate scenes and Palpatine's complicated ascendy to taking control (I still don't feel like figuring out what exactly happened there) geared toward children? How is Anakin killing "the women and the children too" geared toward children?
When Anakin falls in the lava and has to have most of his body replaced with robotics, how is that geared toward children?
And finally, why do you think "geared toward children" means stupidity? If the first films were geared toward children, nobody seemed to notice because they didn't do it in a stupid way, they did it in a way everyone could enjoy. Pixar is the master of this today--"Finding Nemo" is something both children and adults can enjoy.
Since everyone can edit pages, and you suggest moderation, why not just let everyone have moderation abilities too? Just average the communities rating of that page or contribution to the page, and balance it based on the number of users in the community (i.e., the more people there are, the less a single vote counts toward the final score, to avoid problems like Slashdot where one single mod takes you down a point). The final score would be viewed as a general community opinion of the piece, including all elitists, experts, non-experts, and trolls alike, and taken however you want to view it.
Just so people understand, my political position was to vote for Nader for the second time last year. I'm no fan of torture and abuse, nor am I a rabid Bush supporter (I'm no rabid supporter of anything...too subjective).
The link simply was not relevant to the section on the rape page. Abu Ghraib is a case of humiliation and social torture, not rape. The section talked about rape and torture as a social policy of the government and society, and then linked to Abu Ghraib. It was too much of a potential political statement, aside from being irrelevant, as though it was saying rape is a common social and government policy of the US.
Worse yet, when I put up the link to Saddam's Iraq, it was removed and its relevance was argued. To deny the relevance of Saddam's Iraq in a section on government rape and torture, when the Wiki page on Saddam's Iraq itself describes it, further solidified my guess that there was a POV being interjected, whether intentionally or not.
I often find that most of the major articles have one or two hardcore guys with an agenda who "monitor" all the contributions everyone else puts in. For instance, the page on rape had a section called "Rape and Sexual Torture" and talked about societies where rape is tolerated and accepted as a government function. Then the link at the end was "Abu Ghraib prison scandal."
While Abu Ghraib is definitely an abuse situation, there were no cases of rape involved, and it's not standard U.S. policy to rape people. U.S. society doesn't view it as a viable, standard policy. Based strictly on the wording of the section, the link didn't apply.
Well, anyway, I changed the link to something clearly more pertinent (in my mind)--"Human rights in Saddam's Iraq." The Saddam page specifically describes how rape was used against political dissidents and citizens, just as the section on the rape page talked about, so already it was more relevant than the Abu Ghraib link. Also, I had feelings that the Abu Ghraib link was politically motivated, and rather than have the page start political flamewars, I felt a link to Saddam's Iraq was something everyone could agree on.
This one hardcore guy wouldn't let go. Eventually, I removed both our links and stuck in the Rape of Nanjing as a compromise--something more pertinent to that section than either of the links we had. The other guy seemed to agree and let it be. Then I didn't watch the page for a month or two.
I came back, and sitting beside my Nanjing link was, you guessed it, Abu Ghraib again, snuck in with some other major update. The page on Abu Ghraib doesn't even mention rape except that one prisoner is claiming it without proof. However, the Saddam page mentions rape, and Nanjing is just a given.
I also find this same thing in other articles. For instance, the Windows XP article contains a "fisher price" comment. I removed it and said it was a personal comment that implies a majority of users feel that way, and that if you're going to imply it, you should cite it. The hardcore guy of the Windows XP page stuck the link right back and linked to a couple of blogs and news sites where the author mentions the "fisher price" interface--still no hard numbers to show the majority of users actually feel that way, but now it looks "official" simply because he linked to some sites that use the term.
I've stopped looking at Wiki with the assumption of objectivity. Just about the only fun pages there are the ones about games and such.
Thank you, CmdrTaco, from one pirate to another. Without the valuable news service Slashdot provides, I would never know about the latest piracy-tracking websites that allow me to download everything without--gasp--paying for it. I just know all the artists I'm protecting from their willingly signed contracts and all the filmmakers who spent a year of their lives making the movies I'm ripping will appreciate my actions. Damn the MPAA/RIAA for going after the downloaders, exactly as you, Rob Malda, and other Slashdotters suggested they should in 2000 during the Napster trial!
It's my right to illegally copy someone else's works and distribute them how I want. I feel I'm entitled to everything just because I want it and don't want to pay for it. Well, except GPL code--that stuff is protected by GPL copyright, darn it, and down with any company who "steals" it! But otherwise, I think all my actions are justified because I don't want to feel guilty about being a thief, so I invent entire mindsets about how it's the copyright holders whose rights I'm violating who are the bad guys. How dare they attempt to make money putting out stuff! I'm entitled to freely obtain everything they put out for sale. I also never had to work for anything in my life, and my parents bought my car for me growing up, so it's only natural I have the same sense of whiny entitlement the other bitter freeloaders have.
In case you're dense, it's sarcasm...and no, I won't be surprised to see this modded down.
People keep saying that, but you can't prove it until we get equal market share with IE. I'm looking forward to that.
Perhaps the fact that Firefox has already had several security exploits out despite its extremely small userbase in comparison to IE (Google Zeitgeist had it at something like 98+% to less than 1% when they still had their numbers up) out to make you stop in your tracks and think.
Firefox won't ever get the market share Internet Explorer has. Firefox is too bloated, too complicated, and difficult to develop for. I'm still questioning why every single widget is reimplemented and loaded up into memory when we have desktops that provide widgets for their apps to use. Thank goodness for Opera.
IE is designed to be lax in its interpretation of the HTML, CSS, HTTP headers etc that it receives. Gecko is designed to be strict --- well, as strict as possible while making it possible to view 99% of the Web.
Okay...then why are the comments tables in Slashdot spilling over onto the navigation bar in Gecko?
There's been a surge of retro gaming in the past year, as evidenced by Nintendo's "Classic NES" series for the Gameboy. Older gamers love it for the nostalgia, and younger gamers love it as a trendy, retro kinda thing where you go back in time to see where today's gaming came from. Nintendo confirmed this with sales demographics for their Classic NES games which showed a lot of young gamers buying them as well as the older gamers.
Congratulations on parroting every lame-o, pro-piracy mindset talking point. "Copyrights are just censorship, dude!" Maybe if you ever got a job and started, say, writing your own music or made your own films, you'd have a different position. It's not "greed" to want to make money to survive. I love how people typing on computers, living in houses, and driving cars, all pretend to dislike the monetary system that spawned all that technology. "It's greedy to want to make money!"
Speeding laws were also created to "restrict access to high speeds." Do you break speeding laws?
While this is true there are programs that ran on 98 that don't run on XP.
Most of them are system-dependent apps like Norton. The vast majority of applications from the past will run on Windows XP. If you're referring to DOS applications, well of course those will not run on NT as there is no DOS kernel in NT.
If they don't make a newer version of the program you are SOL. With OSS you just recompile, which is relatively painless for small applications. Even if a simple recompile doesn't work it is still possible to modify the source to get it to work.
How many people are going to roll their own source code to get an application working? The point is to achieve desktop success, not marginalize it into the world of programmers writing for other programmers.
That seems pointless to me. Why wouldn't you just make one shell with all the options of GNOME and KDE?
I absolutely, 100% agree, but then when you say that, the "choice" people come at you. I was just illustrating how the redundancy between these two major desktop projects could be removed, turning a negative into a positive.
It seems like after you got everything to work as one DE with different shells, you would only be one small step away from merging them completely into one.
Maybe with the removal of redundancy between the two projects, that would happen as the next logical step.
I do think GNOME and KDE should integrate as much as they can to keep things compatible and consistent BUT it's good to have two seperate environments
Why?
especially since they seem to aim at different crowds.
What different crowds are they aiming at?
Also, competition is a good thing.
Not at the expense of progress. Repeating a mantra about competition whenever someone suggests not reinventing the wheel is counterproductive, in my opinion.
I'm confused by this. You don't need to recompile your kernel to include a new driver. You can build modules without rebuilding the entire kernel. Also I build the madwifi-driver, which is partially proprietary and outside of the kernel, without having to recompile the kernel.
I want to be able to go to a manufacturer's website, run their installer, and suddenly have my driver installed thanks to a unified API.
It goes even further than that. In Linux, all the basic utilities like ls, passwd, and so on are provided in seperate packages. Even gcc is a seperate package, and everything is developed all over the world by each project's volunteers all contributing simultaneously to these various projects.
Under BSD systems like FreeBSD, all those utilities are provided with the operating system and integrated by a core group of volunteers, sometimes even ported from the Linux world. There is no seperate package...they are part of FreeBSD. No GNU/FreeBSD arguments in the BSD world.
But I thought IE wasn't tied to the OS? Slashdot told me they were lying when they said that, and that IE is easy to remove with free utility software.
The contradictory criticisms are confusingly conflicting!
After reading such a thoughtful, nonbiased, objective article submission, I'm left at a loss as to how to respond with my own subjective opinion without ruining the objectivity laid down by this stunning example of research and fact.
It really makes me thankful that there are people like Peter Jackson who at least understand the basic themes of a source material and know how to reflect it in the film versions, even in the face of plot changes. When dealing with science fiction, fantasy, and other geek niche genres, it helps for Hollywood types to stop behaving like Hollywood types and treat it with the same passion a geek has for it.
Unlike the rest of us who have to post our thoughts in comments, Michael insists on ramming his thoughts at the top of the page by sticking them in an article. There they won't be subject to moderation or comment replies, yet people who attempt to reply to it by posting a new thread in the article discussion get modded "Offtopic." Welcome to Slashdot.
Let's see all your justifications for piracy! We know they'll get posted to this discussion, since protecting your copyrighted works is EVIL and WRONG on Slashdot, even though it's what people were saying they should do during the days of the Napster lawsuit.
Remember, copyrights only matter when we're bitching about "GPL source theft!" Post your backhanded justifications for piracy in this thread to get it out of the way, under the guise of "consumer rights" or "free advertising." Let's hear it!
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't see that comparison being made in the article submission. There's no need to get defensive about piracy. This is a victory against phishing scams that we should be happy about. Piracy is another issue for another day.
You don't have the "rights" to anything. Point to me in the Bill of Rights where it says iTunes must let any 5 simultaneous users stream!
Don't like it? Don't use iTunes. Use something else. Nobody's holding a gun to your head.
I think they're waiting for Tiger to come out and also to build up their product stock so that they're not always out, like they were with the iPod minis on release.
No, that's just what they do on their lunch hour.
I have a friend who makes fun of D&D constantly. In fact, he's always going on about medieval fantasy and how goofy it is. He made fun of all three Lord of the Rings movies and couldn't seem to grasp basic concepts. "I thought the idea was that they were a group of guys going to the mountain." "Uh, yeah, the fellowship broke at the end of the first one. It's called 'changing plotlines'."
Then after all this, he goes and reads Star Wars novels while naming his IRC bot "Corellia."
It's controversial because of the debate over man-made versus natural cycles. It's been politicized so that the left believes it's man-made (to go with the pro-nature crowd), and the right believes it's a natural cycle (to go with the pro-industry crowd).
Until people can recognize their own biases when coming to the discussion, it will be a lot more difficult to have any meaningful conversation on the matter, which is disappointing because you'd be amazed at how expanded your worldview can get when you talk to someone whom you disagree with but who is very eloquent about their position. Unfortunately, the anonymous nature of Slashdot as well as the problematic moderation system makes it hard for us geeks to have any such meaningful discussion at this point in time.
It's an interesting article, no doubt, but why do I have a feeling the discussions will degenerate into political debates about global warming? It's kind of sad we can't just discuss things rationally anymore.
Of course, then you realize Slashdot's editors have to know that these subjects cause political debates. Then you understand--it's all about page hits for OSTG. Why do you think we got a Mozilla vulnerability and Linux root exploit article today? Each article is full of people arguing.
I believe the editors post flamebait articles intended to incite arguments because it generates page hits. Hence the endless cycle SCO, RIAA, Microsoft, Linus-did-this-today, SCO, RIAA, Microsoft, Mozilla, etc.
Look at the posts already written so far. They're all Microsoft bashes. In an article on a Linux root exploit, everyone is so defensive and hilariously predictable that they keep bringing up Microsoft, as though it's some sort of operating system penis contest.
"Linux root exploit in both 2.4 and 2.6? M$!!1 Just look at Microsoft! Don't criticize Linux; it is perfect. M$!"
Instead of a valid, calm, and rational discussion of this major security flaw in the Linux kernel, we get endless defensiveness and justifications. The complete opposite reaction, of course, when there's some new user-ran executable attachment that gets labelled a "Microsoft hole" by Michael.
This doesn't happen in the BSD world--when there's a flaw announced, everyone patches it and moves on. They don't spend their time making MORE Microsoft jokes. Yes, we know Windows has had its share of flaws. Take a look at its marketshare; it's the biggest beta test of all time. A fairer comparison would be comparing Linux/X-Windows/KDE/Mozilla to Windows, which would then bring things about even. But, conveniently, posts in this discussion aren't comparing evenly, ignoring the Mozilla vulnerabilities posted on the same front page today! Instead, we're getting Linux versus Windows comparisons, when Linux is just a kernel.
For the sake of being a mature technical community, let's keep the discussion on Linux for a change.
Should be "ascendency." :)
How is "the taxation of trade routes is under dispute" geared toward children? How are Senate scenes and Palpatine's complicated ascendy to taking control (I still don't feel like figuring out what exactly happened there) geared toward children? How is Anakin killing "the women and the children too" geared toward children?
When Anakin falls in the lava and has to have most of his body replaced with robotics, how is that geared toward children?
And finally, why do you think "geared toward children" means stupidity? If the first films were geared toward children, nobody seemed to notice because they didn't do it in a stupid way, they did it in a way everyone could enjoy. Pixar is the master of this today--"Finding Nemo" is something both children and adults can enjoy.
Since everyone can edit pages, and you suggest moderation, why not just let everyone have moderation abilities too? Just average the communities rating of that page or contribution to the page, and balance it based on the number of users in the community (i.e., the more people there are, the less a single vote counts toward the final score, to avoid problems like Slashdot where one single mod takes you down a point). The final score would be viewed as a general community opinion of the piece, including all elitists, experts, non-experts, and trolls alike, and taken however you want to view it.
Just so people understand, my political position was to vote for Nader for the second time last year. I'm no fan of torture and abuse, nor am I a rabid Bush supporter (I'm no rabid supporter of anything...too subjective).
The link simply was not relevant to the section on the rape page. Abu Ghraib is a case of humiliation and social torture, not rape. The section talked about rape and torture as a social policy of the government and society, and then linked to Abu Ghraib. It was too much of a potential political statement, aside from being irrelevant, as though it was saying rape is a common social and government policy of the US.
Worse yet, when I put up the link to Saddam's Iraq, it was removed and its relevance was argued. To deny the relevance of Saddam's Iraq in a section on government rape and torture, when the Wiki page on Saddam's Iraq itself describes it, further solidified my guess that there was a POV being interjected, whether intentionally or not.
I often find that most of the major articles have one or two hardcore guys with an agenda who "monitor" all the contributions everyone else puts in. For instance, the page on rape had a section called "Rape and Sexual Torture" and talked about societies where rape is tolerated and accepted as a government function. Then the link at the end was "Abu Ghraib prison scandal."
While Abu Ghraib is definitely an abuse situation, there were no cases of rape involved, and it's not standard U.S. policy to rape people. U.S. society doesn't view it as a viable, standard policy. Based strictly on the wording of the section, the link didn't apply.
Well, anyway, I changed the link to something clearly more pertinent (in my mind)--"Human rights in Saddam's Iraq." The Saddam page specifically describes how rape was used against political dissidents and citizens, just as the section on the rape page talked about, so already it was more relevant than the Abu Ghraib link. Also, I had feelings that the Abu Ghraib link was politically motivated, and rather than have the page start political flamewars, I felt a link to Saddam's Iraq was something everyone could agree on.
This one hardcore guy wouldn't let go. Eventually, I removed both our links and stuck in the Rape of Nanjing as a compromise--something more pertinent to that section than either of the links we had. The other guy seemed to agree and let it be. Then I didn't watch the page for a month or two.
I came back, and sitting beside my Nanjing link was, you guessed it, Abu Ghraib again, snuck in with some other major update. The page on Abu Ghraib doesn't even mention rape except that one prisoner is claiming it without proof. However, the Saddam page mentions rape, and Nanjing is just a given.
I also find this same thing in other articles. For instance, the Windows XP article contains a "fisher price" comment. I removed it and said it was a personal comment that implies a majority of users feel that way, and that if you're going to imply it, you should cite it. The hardcore guy of the Windows XP page stuck the link right back and linked to a couple of blogs and news sites where the author mentions the "fisher price" interface--still no hard numbers to show the majority of users actually feel that way, but now it looks "official" simply because he linked to some sites that use the term.
I've stopped looking at Wiki with the assumption of objectivity. Just about the only fun pages there are the ones about games and such.
Thank you, CmdrTaco, from one pirate to another. Without the valuable news service Slashdot provides, I would never know about the latest piracy-tracking websites that allow me to download everything without--gasp--paying for it. I just know all the artists I'm protecting from their willingly signed contracts and all the filmmakers who spent a year of their lives making the movies I'm ripping will appreciate my actions. Damn the MPAA/RIAA for going after the downloaders, exactly as you, Rob Malda, and other Slashdotters suggested they should in 2000 during the Napster trial!
It's my right to illegally copy someone else's works and distribute them how I want. I feel I'm entitled to everything just because I want it and don't want to pay for it. Well, except GPL code--that stuff is protected by GPL copyright, darn it, and down with any company who "steals" it! But otherwise, I think all my actions are justified because I don't want to feel guilty about being a thief, so I invent entire mindsets about how it's the copyright holders whose rights I'm violating who are the bad guys. How dare they attempt to make money putting out stuff! I'm entitled to freely obtain everything they put out for sale. I also never had to work for anything in my life, and my parents bought my car for me growing up, so it's only natural I have the same sense of whiny entitlement the other bitter freeloaders have.
In case you're dense, it's sarcasm...and no, I won't be surprised to see this modded down.
People keep saying that, but you can't prove it until we get equal market share with IE. I'm looking forward to that.
Perhaps the fact that Firefox has already had several security exploits out despite its extremely small userbase in comparison to IE (Google Zeitgeist had it at something like 98+% to less than 1% when they still had their numbers up) out to make you stop in your tracks and think.
Firefox won't ever get the market share Internet Explorer has. Firefox is too bloated, too complicated, and difficult to develop for. I'm still questioning why every single widget is reimplemented and loaded up into memory when we have desktops that provide widgets for their apps to use. Thank goodness for Opera.
IE is designed to be lax in its interpretation of the HTML, CSS, HTTP headers etc that it receives. Gecko is designed to be strict --- well, as strict as possible while making it possible to view 99% of the Web.
Okay...then why are the comments tables in Slashdot spilling over onto the navigation bar in Gecko?
There's been a surge of retro gaming in the past year, as evidenced by Nintendo's "Classic NES" series for the Gameboy. Older gamers love it for the nostalgia, and younger gamers love it as a trendy, retro kinda thing where you go back in time to see where today's gaming came from. Nintendo confirmed this with sales demographics for their Classic NES games which showed a lot of young gamers buying them as well as the older gamers.
Focking awosome! I con't woit to try out thos wonderfol softwore.
Congratulations on parroting every lame-o, pro-piracy mindset talking point. "Copyrights are just censorship, dude!" Maybe if you ever got a job and started, say, writing your own music or made your own films, you'd have a different position. It's not "greed" to want to make money to survive. I love how people typing on computers, living in houses, and driving cars, all pretend to dislike the monetary system that spawned all that technology. "It's greedy to want to make money!"
Speeding laws were also created to "restrict access to high speeds." Do you break speeding laws?
While this is true there are programs that ran on 98 that don't run on XP.
Most of them are system-dependent apps like Norton. The vast majority of applications from the past will run on Windows XP. If you're referring to DOS applications, well of course those will not run on NT as there is no DOS kernel in NT.
If they don't make a newer version of the program you are SOL. With OSS you just recompile, which is relatively painless for small applications. Even if a simple recompile doesn't work it is still possible to modify the source to get it to work.
How many people are going to roll their own source code to get an application working? The point is to achieve desktop success, not marginalize it into the world of programmers writing for other programmers.
That seems pointless to me. Why wouldn't you just make one shell with all the options of GNOME and KDE?
I absolutely, 100% agree, but then when you say that, the "choice" people come at you. I was just illustrating how the redundancy between these two major desktop projects could be removed, turning a negative into a positive.
It seems like after you got everything to work as one DE with different shells, you would only be one small step away from merging them completely into one.
Maybe with the removal of redundancy between the two projects, that would happen as the next logical step.
I do think GNOME and KDE should integrate as much as they can to keep things compatible and consistent BUT it's good to have two seperate environments
Why?
especially since they seem to aim at different crowds.
What different crowds are they aiming at?
Also, competition is a good thing.
Not at the expense of progress. Repeating a mantra about competition whenever someone suggests not reinventing the wheel is counterproductive, in my opinion.
I'm confused by this. You don't need to recompile your kernel to include a new driver. You can build modules without rebuilding the entire kernel. Also I build the madwifi-driver, which is partially proprietary and outside of the kernel, without having to recompile the kernel.
I want to be able to go to a manufacturer's website, run their installer, and suddenly have my driver installed thanks to a unified API.
It goes even further than that. In Linux, all the basic utilities like ls, passwd, and so on are provided in seperate packages. Even gcc is a seperate package, and everything is developed all over the world by each project's volunteers all contributing simultaneously to these various projects.
Under BSD systems like FreeBSD, all those utilities are provided with the operating system and integrated by a core group of volunteers, sometimes even ported from the Linux world. There is no seperate package...they are part of FreeBSD. No GNU/FreeBSD arguments in the BSD world.
But I thought IE wasn't tied to the OS? Slashdot told me they were lying when they said that, and that IE is easy to remove with free utility software.
The contradictory criticisms are confusingly conflicting!
After reading such a thoughtful, nonbiased, objective article submission, I'm left at a loss as to how to respond with my own subjective opinion without ruining the objectivity laid down by this stunning example of research and fact.
It really makes me thankful that there are people like Peter Jackson who at least understand the basic themes of a source material and know how to reflect it in the film versions, even in the face of plot changes. When dealing with science fiction, fantasy, and other geek niche genres, it helps for Hollywood types to stop behaving like Hollywood types and treat it with the same passion a geek has for it.
Unlike the rest of us who have to post our thoughts in comments, Michael insists on ramming his thoughts at the top of the page by sticking them in an article. There they won't be subject to moderation or comment replies, yet people who attempt to reply to it by posting a new thread in the article discussion get modded "Offtopic." Welcome to Slashdot.
Let's see all your justifications for piracy! We know they'll get posted to this discussion, since protecting your copyrighted works is EVIL and WRONG on Slashdot, even though it's what people were saying they should do during the days of the Napster lawsuit.
Remember, copyrights only matter when we're bitching about "GPL source theft!" Post your backhanded justifications for piracy in this thread to get it out of the way, under the guise of "consumer rights" or "free advertising." Let's hear it!