First off, I'm not sure that you're using the word "astroturf" correctly there. Astroturfing, as was done by Kevin Reichard and shown on Slashdot, is the manner of posting under several different names, all advocating the same thing, in order to give the impression of a "grass roots" campaign or of popular consent. (I also might add that Slashdot didn't get NEARLY as mad about astroturfing by one of their own as they did over Microsoft doing the same thing, another bit of evidence regarding editor bias).
Next, are you claiming that the report referenced in this article has no more validity than Microsoft's Linux Myths page? I'm afraid I don't see the connection, because I haven't seen a similar page from Red Hat, illustrating how Linux is better than Windows. Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me?
What makes me think, for some strange reason, that if they had determined (as I have determined on my own) that Windows 2000 is a superior operating system than Linux, that we would never see this report on Slashdot, or that this article would have even been written?
Why is it that when Microsoft posts something about how Windows is Better, we get a Slashdot article debunking them?
Yet another example of Slashdot moderator bias. Please, change the title of the site from "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" to "News for Linux Users. Stuff that Hates Microsoft".
Don't you guys think that it's a little strange to see a Star Wars site reviewing a Star Wars movie and giving it a 96/100 rating? I mean, what we have here is a group of fanboys (for lack of a better term) who are just fawning over things that 95% of people really don't care that much about.
When I decide whether a DVD is right for me, I look at the technical details; I'm looking for sound quality, picture quality, framerates, ease of navigation, and other technical aspects. Yes, the movie is important, but not nearly as important as quality; that's what DVDs are all about! It's great that they included new scenes, but who cares about it if the picture is shoddy and the sound poor?
I mean, it would be like CmdrTaco reviewing the latest Linux release... oh, wait a minute...
I'm sorry, but I just read the article in question, and this does not seem like a "Tiny" loss to me. According to the article (and you can read it yourself, provided it hasn't been slashdotted) RedHat had a net loss of $53 million. They reported a revenue of $21 million.
Let those numbers sink in. That means that RedHat's revenue was less than half of their loss in the second quarter. And this bodes well for RedHat because...?
Between this and the fact that RedHat's stock is at an all-time-low (just look at the charts over on Nasdaq) we have some SERIOUS troubles for Linux. I wonder if Linus has heard about this problem yet?
I don't object to Redhat making some money (or losing, in this case, but not for lack of trying), but the price for Redhat 7 is really hard to believe. It's anywhere from $65-$80 everywhere I look (in stores). I remember the first time I bought Redhat 5.2, it was a MacMillan Publications release and only cost $30. When will we see other Redhat 7 distros appearing for less cash in local software outlets?
And whatever happened to Redhat's 'discount' package, that comes with only the bare bones Redhat6 disc and an installation guide?
The most common criticisms I tend to hear about wap are of the "Who wants to use the Interent with 4 lines of text" variety. Very few people know what they are actually criticising when it comes to the questions of * What is WAP intended to do * How does it differ from HTML and * How will it improve in the future.
In my view, WAP is pretty well designed, but it's still early days yet. At it's simplest level, WAP is designed to be a method of presenting content to mobile devices, using the Internet as a carrier medium (my viewpoint). It differs from HTML in that it is a highly slimmed-down markup language, based on XML and including support for various phone functions, such as clicking a link to dial a phone number.
The more interesting part is perhaps where it will go in the future. Many people point out that it won't take too much extra computing power before your PDA can present HTML as well as a desktop browser. This is all well and good, but it doesn't take into account the extra funtions that are planned for WAP such as location based services, phone functionality etc. These are things that have no place in HTML, so a separate language of some sort is probably the best way to go.
Personally, I'm investing quite a lot of personal time in WAP with my wap search engine at http://wapwarp.com and a wap developers mailing list http://www.wap-dev.net (hop onboard if you are interested in discussing WAP development with other developers). I am not scared though to imagine that it will be replaced in the future with another standard.
However it's gonna take a bit for me to hop off the WAP bandwagon. I need to see handsets that support any replacing standard and I need to see a widespread buzz that will attract developers and investors.
Whatever the case, WAP is certainly helping bridge the gap between the stationary net and the mobile applications of the future - and that is what's so damn exciting about WAP.
While I would enjoy playing the old Ultima 1 again (unfortunately, Windows 2000 doesn't allow for very good DOS compatability games, and won't run it) I'm worried about their claim of "adding more details". Unless they have Lord British himself working on this project (which, judging from what I could find on their homepage, they do not) then they're likely to get things wrong.
They'll likely put in details that were never meant to be revealed in the original (mainly because no sequels were planned, so the story was completely self-contained). Also, if they put in any kind of false information or take any artistic liberties with the story, then they're risking alienating the die-hard fans of the Ultima series.
It sounds like a good idea, but I'm concerned that adding in details would alter the original game too much and make for a less enjoyable experience. That having been said, sign me up; I can't wait to play the original all over again...
What are they thinking? Don McKlean's "American Pie"? Can you get any more American than that song? What in the world could be objectionable in THAT song?
Doesn't it strike anybody as a little strange that we have RMS speaking out against government leaders for using this tragedy to advance their own agendas (in their case, facial recognition software) while at the same time using this tragedy to advance his own agenda (limiting the power of the Federal government)?
I think that there are terrible implications coming from these attacks, as well, but do you know what? I do NOT want to exchange my life for my freedom. It's an unpopular viewpoint, but if I have to be tracked as I walk through an airport then I will accept this.
When the alternative to being tracked is being the victim of a terrorist attack and losing my life, I will GLADLY give up a little freedom.
Also, RMS makes the comment about facial recognition being useless in this case; however, there were photographs of at least one terrorist meeting with Osama bin Laden before this attack (well before, around the time of the USS Cole, IIRC). That recognition technology could have been used to possibly prevent these disasters from happening.
And you really got me back with that 3rd grade comeback.
I should be ashamed.
Also, I guarantee that I'm twice your age, if not more. Before you think that you're superior, try and learn something, ok? Try getting an MCSE, I hear they're looking for morons who can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground.
So not only are you a shit-eater (see other, earlier comments where halik does not dispute this fact) but you can't even click on the appropriate "Reply to This" link.
Jesus fucking Christ, does it hurt to be as stupid as you?
No, I mean it. Write it down. Then burn it. Then, invent a machine to burn things that have already been burned, then burn it again. Then we'll burn the machine.
Notice the first comment in the cached version of the story is an ASCII graphic, which had been modded up to +1 at the last minute before the story was archived. That comment is now gone. As you can see, the comment was posted by this user. Notice the user info page now says the account has posted zero comments. All comments posted by that account, regardless of moderation score, have been wiped.
Q: Didn't the comment just get modded down?
No, the comment is gone. It is nowhere to be found in the current version of the story. One must go to the Google cache to view it.
Q: Maybe it got modded down just before the story was archived, and is now gone because comments at 0 and below don't get archived?
No, the story had already been frozen into Slashdot's static HTML archive. Look at that Google cached copy again. It clearly says:
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
That also means no more moderation could take place. The comment did not get modded down, it was deleted.
Q: So? It's their site, they can delete comments if they want to!
True. But it's also true that I can criticize them for being liars. Here is what the Slashdot FAQ says about the deletion of comments:
The only time we ever delete comments is if the comment contains malformed HTML that is somehow causing Slashdot to fail to display properly.
Comments are not deleted on the basis of content. [emphasis added]
As you can see from the Google cache, the comment displayed just fine in a standard browser. It was not deleted because it contained malformed HTML. It was deleted for no reason, save that they didn't like it. That is in direct conflict with the statements in the FAQ.
Q: Yeah well, that comment was an ASCII representation of goatse.cx, which is disgusting. I'm glad it's gone.
Odd that you find the human body "disgusting". Do you take showers with your eyes closed so you won't have to look at it?
Q: Look, that comment was posted by a troll; it was modded up by trolls, and therefore it was invalid!
I once again redirect your attention to the Slashdot FAQ. Slashdot brags about being user-moderated. The comment was posted and moderated up by users. How is that invalid?
Q: Because! I said it's a troll! Didn't you hear me?!
Whatever.
Q: Well, why are you posting this? What do you want them to do about it? What are you trying to prove?
The point of all this is that Slashdot's model of anonymous posting, never deleting comments, and purely user-based moderation doesn't work. They are, in fact, aware of this -- hence the deletion of comments (not to mention the vast number of comments modded down by editors rather than users).
There is nothing wrong with the administrator of a message board taking steps, even ruthless ones, to eliminate crap. In fact, most successful message boards on the web are run in this manner. However, since the Slashdot editors refuse to acknowledge this, and still publicly maintain their fantasy of a working user-regulated system, I think it's pretty funny to go around pointing out their hypocrisy and dishonesty.
Q: Don't you have better things to do?
Yeah, but I'm not doing them right now, am I?
Note: This FAQ is public domain. Copy-and-paste it to your heart's content. It is not released under the GPL.
Look, I'm as concerned about the environment as anybody else, but does this strike anybody else as a bit hypocritical? On one hand, we have the UN proclaiming that peace should be the primary goal of humans and nations everywhere (after all, it IS why the UN was founded), but then they say "Look, your weapons are harming the environment. Go ahead and kill people, but just don't hurt Mother Earth".
68% of the world's population has been in a war of some kind (be it civil war, world war, whatever) and so it's quite obvious that the UN is not doing its job. Countries are still stockpiling weapons...
I think it's time for a stand. My theory is that if one country, the USA, were to completely disarm itself, then other nations would follow suit. By destroying all of its weapons, the USA would be finally making a plea for peace in the world. Other nations would see this as a gesture of goodwill, and would be similarly encouraged to disarm.
I'm not a dreamer; I really think this would happen. But we have to convince our governments of this. It's a long-term goal, really. But isn't peace worth it?
I'm gonna get modded to hell for this, but who cares about Karma, anyways?:-)
Exactly what are we (meaning the Linux community) doing when we reverse-engineer these kinds of procedures? I mean, we rant and rave and scream about how terrible proprietary formats are, about how they destroy innovation, about how they are held by Evil Corporations (tm)... And then we reverse-engineer the system calls until we have something that works for us.
Shouldn't we, as a community, be concentrating our efforts on ways to make the computer world a better and happier place, rather than trying to emulate the big companies that are constantly oppressing the minority Operating Systems (Linux, BSD, etc)? These corporations are doing nothing but destroying our rights, and we emulate them.
It's time for the free software "movement" to destroy these corporations and their powerful, vice-like grip on information (including Quicktime formats) and instead develop our own methods of showing video on operating systems that are not inferior *cough*Windows*cough*
I mean, seriously, what's the big deal if it's 0.8 seconds from power to LILO? I, personally, would rather have a BIOS that takes a few seconds to check the RAM, auto-detect devices, and check SCSI drives before it tries to boot the system.
Why are the geeks so concerned about things being as fast as possible? What's an extra 5 seconds of your life? If it takes that long to get things done (and get them done right) then I'm all for a 5 second start up. Yes, it's killed productivity, but let's look at the math: 5 seconds per computer, figure about 1000 computers booted up per month (50 computers, booted up once per work day). That means you're wasting about (carry the 2...) 80 minutes per month waiting for computers to boot.
Now think about the time it takes you to get coffee in the morning; we're talking about 30 seconds or so (if you don't take it black) every day; that's 480 minutes of wasted productivity
Don't get me wrong, this is great, but is it worth the implementation? The numbers say no.
...is delaying more. This is exactly what Microsoft wants. The longer that it can get pushed around in the lower courts, the longer they can continue their monopolistic exploits (no pun intended)
Think about it: They're going to get hit with one helluva fine when this all falls through. And what are they doing? Trying to get their stock values back up to the point where they can take the hit without losing everything.
Slashdot Mirror
Next, are you claiming that the report referenced in this article has no more validity than Microsoft's Linux Myths page? I'm afraid I don't see the connection, because I haven't seen a similar page from Red Hat, illustrating how Linux is better than Windows. Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me?
Why is it that when Microsoft posts something about how Windows is Better, we get a Slashdot article debunking them?
Yet another example of Slashdot moderator bias. Please, change the title of the site from "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" to "News for Linux Users. Stuff that Hates Microsoft".
What makes me think that if it were costly and closed-source, there's no chance in Hell that we'd be seeing it posted to Slashdot?
When I decide whether a DVD is right for me, I look at the technical details; I'm looking for sound quality, picture quality, framerates, ease of navigation, and other technical aspects. Yes, the movie is important, but not nearly as important as quality; that's what DVDs are all about! It's great that they included new scenes, but who cares about it if the picture is shoddy and the sound poor?
I mean, it would be like CmdrTaco reviewing the latest Linux release... oh, wait a minute...
Let those numbers sink in. That means that RedHat's revenue was less than half of their loss in the second quarter. And this bodes well for RedHat because...?
Between this and the fact that RedHat's stock is at an all-time-low (just look at the charts over on Nasdaq) we have some SERIOUS troubles for Linux. I wonder if Linus has heard about this problem yet?
And whatever happened to Redhat's 'discount' package, that comes with only the bare bones Redhat6 disc and an installation guide?
Don't you know the first thing about programming?
Idiot.
The most common criticisms I tend to hear about wap are of the "Who wants to use the Interent with 4 lines of text" variety. Very few people know what they are actually criticising when it comes to the questions of
* What is WAP intended to do
* How does it differ from HTML and
* How will it improve in the future.
In my view, WAP is pretty well designed, but it's still early days yet. At it's simplest level, WAP is designed to be a method of presenting content to mobile devices, using the Internet as a carrier medium (my viewpoint). It differs from HTML in that it is a highly slimmed-down markup language, based on XML and including support for various phone functions, such as clicking a link to dial a phone number.
The more interesting part is perhaps where it will go in the future. Many people point out that it won't take too much extra computing power before your PDA can present HTML as well as a desktop browser. This is all well and good, but it doesn't take into account the extra funtions that are planned for WAP such as location based services, phone functionality etc. These are things that have no place in HTML, so a separate language of some sort is probably the best way to go.
Personally, I'm investing quite a lot of personal time in WAP with my wap search engine at http://wapwarp.com and a wap developers mailing list http://www.wap-dev.net (hop onboard if you are interested in discussing WAP development with other developers). I am not scared though to imagine that it will be replaced in the future with another standard.
However it's gonna take a bit for me to hop off the WAP bandwagon. I need to see handsets that support any replacing standard and I need to see a widespread buzz that will attract developers and investors.
Whatever the case, WAP is certainly helping bridge the gap between the stationary net and the mobile applications of the future - and that is what's so damn exciting about WAP.
They'll likely put in details that were never meant to be revealed in the original (mainly because no sequels were planned, so the story was completely self-contained). Also, if they put in any kind of false information or take any artistic liberties with the story, then they're risking alienating the die-hard fans of the Ultima series.
It sounds like a good idea, but I'm concerned that adding in details would alter the original game too much and make for a less enjoyable experience. That having been said, sign me up; I can't wait to play the original all over again...
What are they thinking? Don McKlean's "American Pie"? Can you get any more American than that song? What in the world could be objectionable in THAT song?
I think that there are terrible implications coming from these attacks, as well, but do you know what? I do NOT want to exchange my life for my freedom. It's an unpopular viewpoint, but if I have to be tracked as I walk through an airport then I will accept this.
When the alternative to being tracked is being the victim of a terrorist attack and losing my life, I will GLADLY give up a little freedom.
Also, RMS makes the comment about facial recognition being useless in this case; however, there were photographs of at least one terrorist meeting with Osama bin Laden before this attack (well before, around the time of the USS Cole, IIRC). That recognition technology could have been used to possibly prevent these disasters from happening.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Good night. Don't let your dad rape you tonight, despite the fact he says he loves you, ok?
Now give Daddy his computer back and go jack off into your mother's bra you stole from her once, ok?
Oh, shit, jacking off would mean being old enough to get erections. Sorry.
Every insult that you have said involves the second-grade humor level of "your mom!".
Now, please, get off Daddy's computer and go back to playing with your Playstation, and don't get angry when you can't complete Oddworld, ok?
I should be ashamed.
Also, I guarantee that I'm twice your age, if not more. Before you think that you're superior, try and learn something, ok? Try getting an MCSE, I hear they're looking for morons who can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground.
Jesus fucking Christ, does it hurt to be as stupid as you?
Let me say that again for those of you who are of short attention span:
Halik eats shit, and does not deny this fact.
Oh, and I'm still waiting for your "good one". I only assume you were waiting for me to point out that you are a shit eater.
Christ, I've seen better English spit out by Babelfish after 12 conversions between English and Hindustani.
And yeah, I'm afraid of your 1337 CAPS skillz.
Idiot.
I can! "halik".
When you get some good insults, come back and try again, ok?
No, I mean it. Write it down. Then burn it. Then, invent a machine to burn things that have already been burned, then burn it again. Then we'll burn the machine.
Idiot.
Q: What is this all about?
Despite the fact that the Slashdot FAQ claims the editors "never" delete comments, proof exists that they have deleted comments on occasion:
Notice the first comment in the cached version of the story is an ASCII graphic, which had been modded up to +1 at the last minute before the story was archived. That comment is now gone. As you can see, the comment was posted by this user. Notice the user info page now says the account has posted zero comments. All comments posted by that account, regardless of moderation score, have been wiped.
Q: Didn't the comment just get modded down?
No, the comment is gone. It is nowhere to be found in the current version of the story. One must go to the Google cache to view it.
Q: Maybe it got modded down just before the story was archived, and is now gone because comments at 0 and below don't get archived?
No, the story had already been frozen into Slashdot's static HTML archive. Look at that Google cached copy again. It clearly says:
That also means no more moderation could take place. The comment did not get modded down, it was deleted.
Q: So? It's their site, they can delete comments if they want to!
True. But it's also true that I can criticize them for being liars. Here is what the Slashdot FAQ says about the deletion of comments:
As you can see from the Google cache, the comment displayed just fine in a standard browser. It was not deleted because it contained malformed HTML. It was deleted for no reason, save that they didn't like it. That is in direct conflict with the statements in the FAQ.
Q: Yeah well, that comment was an ASCII representation of goatse.cx, which is disgusting. I'm glad it's gone.
Odd that you find the human body "disgusting". Do you take showers with your eyes closed so you won't have to look at it?
Q: Look, that comment was posted by a troll; it was modded up by trolls, and therefore it was invalid!
I once again redirect your attention to the Slashdot FAQ. Slashdot brags about being user-moderated. The comment was posted and moderated up by users. How is that invalid?
Q: Because! I said it's a troll! Didn't you hear me?!
Whatever.
Q: Well, why are you posting this? What do you want them to do about it? What are you trying to prove?
The point of all this is that Slashdot's model of anonymous posting, never deleting comments, and purely user-based moderation doesn't work. They are, in fact, aware of this -- hence the deletion of comments (not to mention the vast number of comments modded down by editors rather than users).
There is nothing wrong with the administrator of a message board taking steps, even ruthless ones, to eliminate crap. In fact, most successful message boards on the web are run in this manner. However, since the Slashdot editors refuse to acknowledge this, and still publicly maintain their fantasy of a working user-regulated system, I think it's pretty funny to go around pointing out their hypocrisy and dishonesty.
Q: Don't you have better things to do?
Yeah, but I'm not doing them right now, am I?
Note: This FAQ is public domain. Copy-and-paste it to your heart's content. It is not released under the GPL.
68% of the world's population has been in a war of some kind (be it civil war, world war, whatever) and so it's quite obvious that the UN is not doing its job. Countries are still stockpiling weapons...
I think it's time for a stand. My theory is that if one country, the USA, were to completely disarm itself, then other nations would follow suit. By destroying all of its weapons, the USA would be finally making a plea for peace in the world. Other nations would see this as a gesture of goodwill, and would be similarly encouraged to disarm.
I'm not a dreamer; I really think this would happen. But we have to convince our governments of this. It's a long-term goal, really. But isn't peace worth it?
Exactly what are we (meaning the Linux community) doing when we reverse-engineer these kinds of procedures? I mean, we rant and rave and scream about how terrible proprietary formats are, about how they destroy innovation, about how they are held by Evil Corporations (tm)... And then we reverse-engineer the system calls until we have something that works for us.
Shouldn't we, as a community, be concentrating our efforts on ways to make the computer world a better and happier place, rather than trying to emulate the big companies that are constantly oppressing the minority Operating Systems (Linux, BSD, etc)? These corporations are doing nothing but destroying our rights, and we emulate them.
It's time for the free software "movement" to destroy these corporations and their powerful, vice-like grip on information (including Quicktime formats) and instead develop our own methods of showing video on operating systems that are not inferior *cough*Windows*cough*
Why are the geeks so concerned about things being as fast as possible? What's an extra 5 seconds of your life? If it takes that long to get things done (and get them done right) then I'm all for a 5 second start up. Yes, it's killed productivity, but let's look at the math: 5 seconds per computer, figure about 1000 computers booted up per month (50 computers, booted up once per work day). That means you're wasting about (carry the 2...) 80 minutes per month waiting for computers to boot.
Now think about the time it takes you to get coffee in the morning; we're talking about 30 seconds or so (if you don't take it black) every day; that's 480 minutes of wasted productivity
Don't get me wrong, this is great, but is it worth the implementation? The numbers say no.
Think about it: They're going to get hit with one helluva fine when this all falls through. And what are they doing? Trying to get their stock values back up to the point where they can take the hit without losing everything.
The longer this takes, the longer Microsoft wins.