I've been experimenting over several weeks after noticing karma loss. Invariably, it always happens after I've used up some moderation points. I take time to moderate carefully, and I would expect to GAIN karma from meta moderation, if not break even.
I then unchecked my "willing to moderate" box, and reviewed my karma for awhile. I saw no losses. This leads me to believe that either a) some meta-moderators are fucking with the system, or b) the act of moderating lowers your karma by default.
I tend to suspect the former.
Part of the problem is that there is no accountability in the moderation system. In other words, you can't go look at a post and see WHO has moderated it up or down. Similarily, with meta moderation you should be able to see who has hit you recently, and for which moderations.
This alone wouldn't solve the problem, but at least you could get a clear idea of whether your moderation is being done fairly or not.
Best regards,
SEAL
I'm surprised they left out Bill Gates
on
Hoax-a-go-go!
·
· Score: 1
I know I saw these hoaxes at least three or four times.
Anytime something sounds devious, the initial reaction is "well, I wouldn't put it past Microsoft";)
... which was in the initial blurb on this thread:) I don't know if I personally would classify it as a violent movie but there were alot of people complaining about the number of graphical beheadings.
While I agree that offensive stuff is readily available on the net, I don't think that software, or the government should be the babysitter.
If the net has things that are unsuitable for children, then maybe they shouldn't be using it unsupervised.
Or another perspective: the Internet is simply a view of the world, seen through your monitor. Most folks wouldn't let their children roam unsupervised through the real world, for fear that they might get harmed or go to the wrong places. But since the net removes that fear of physical harm, people let their kids go gangbusters.
Then parents find their kids viewing stuff that is morally objectionable to them. So rather than supervising, they scream for filtering and more government regulation of the net. Sounds a little goofy to me.
Implementing a quantum computer would provide an exponential increase in speed for certain algorithms (e.g. factoring large numbers). Now I'm usually not much for conspiracy theories. But right now, we are seeing fledgling attempts in the mainstream scientific community to build these computers.
Now step back and think about who has the most to gain from them. Furthermore, the NSA has generally led civilian scientists by a couple decades in cryptography work.
It makes me wonder how far along they are with this type of computer.
It's Linux, for chrissake. Now don't get me wrong -- Linux is very very good for many things. However, games are not one of them. As you mentioned, there are alot of services that you simply don't need. There are alot of layers of crap that eat up RAM which are unnecessary for a console platform. On top of that, the hardware drivers are often immature or nonexistent (HOW long were we stuck with 3dfx?).
Partly because of these factors, and partly because of Linux's small consumer marketshare -- game developers don't write games for Linux. In the PC world, they write them for DirectX almost exclusively. Only a few very talented people with a hobbyist interest write for Linux (e.g. Carmack).
So even assuming they put together a nice console with reasonable speed and low resource usage, one question remains. Who's going to design games for it? I work for a game company and I can tell you it ain't gonna happen. There is no way you'd strain our relationship with, say, Sony - just to write games for a high-risk new console.
You said this is supposed to be paid on your state income tax. But I live in a state which has no income tax. Are they gouging me somewhere else that I don't know about? Just wondering. I'm not a tax specialist (although Apr 16 is sneaking up on me...):)
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
This is directed at the legislative branch (the U.S. Congress). I'm sure they'll find some way to weasel around it without amending the Constitution, though.
17.5% just sounds outrageous here, though. It'd be tough to make that kind of thing happen. When I already pay around 8% sales tax for my STATE, plus federal income tax, plus property tax, etc etc... it's tough to justify more taxes. To implement a VAT we'd have to overhaul the whole system.
(I'll start with the standard IANAL disclaimer...)
As far as I know, in the U.S., tax can't be charged on transactions across state lines. You'll see the simplest example of this on a mail-order catalog, where you only pay tax if you live in that state.
Now, for the Internet, the dilemma is that it has become very EASY to purchase goods out of your state. UPS and Fed Ex, and even the good ol' US Mail are getting very good at delivering things quickly. And sometimes, you can even download what you purchased.
No more 6-week waits to ship. This has made traditional merchants and the federal government fearful of lost revenue. So they say they want to tax the Internet. But the thing is, IT IS ALREADY BEING TAXED. Inside your state. The way it's supposed to be. The same rules mail-order catalogs use.
So in reality, the government wants to CHANGE the rules on us. So ok... let's say there's some flat tax on Internet transactions. Who ends up paying, really? The merchants (and I expect small business owners will get screwed even more, as usual).
Why? Because the tax rate, combined with the cost of shipping will make Internet purchases generally more expensive than traditional retail. So in order to maintain customer bases, the Internet merchants will have to either lower their prices (and profit margin), or find ways to make Internet shopping preferable, which is difficult. You are already removed from personal interaction with the customer by the nature of an online business.
I think tax changes will only benefit the old-school retail businesses. And I'd expect them to be lobbying heavily for it, if they aren't already. Oh yeah, and they'll probably want to vote for Gore too;)
Sorry, but I have to rant about Sun here for a bit. Before someone says it: no, I'm not some Microsoft troll here. I have used Java and C++ both quite extensively. Also, I've dealt with Sun's marketing people (namely, in getting a piece of software certified 100% Pure Java).
Sun does some things very well. Perhaps the thing they are best at doing, is catering to the "suits". This announcement just felt like more attention gathering to this effect, since Open Source is the buzzword right now.
However, Sun is all about money. Big money. Enterprise level stuff. They don't give a rat's ass about the little guy. You'd be amazed how many emails I've received from them since I got that product certified. Usually, they want me to participate in some conference at $5k a pop.
This announcement is just posturing and nothing more. Look at the second part of it, for example:
2. Is everything in Forte for Java, Community Edition being open-sourced?
No. The binary version of Forte for Java, Community Edition includes two components that will not be open-sourced: the browser and the compiler. If required, the modular design of Forte for Java, Community Edition permits developers to replace these components with alternatives.
Now, I'm not one to bite the hand that feeds me. If Sun wants to make this small open-source handout, then that's fine. But it's more hype than anything. Much like Java in general.
Yes I may sound bitter, but that's just because I'm sick of the games that Sun plays. They are your stereotypical "big" corporation... through and through.
Hope that wasn't too offtopic but Sun just irks me sometimes with all the attention they get for stupid little meaningless gestures. They care about the Linux community about as much as Microsoft does. Don't doubt it for a second.
One other point that people tend to forget, is the benefit of standardization. We, on Slashdot, tend to debate quite a bit about computer industry standards, whether it be hardware, desktop environments, compression, networking, whatever. We can communicate via IP because standards exist that you must adhere to if you want to participate on the Internet.
The same thing goes for the airwaves. If you want to listen to FM radio (in your region), then you know what frequency range to tune in to. Tuners are built with the assumption that these ranges are standardized. Television uses another... and so on, for many different applications. We can all take advantage of these things BECAUSE they are standardized.
So I would say the agencies that uphold the standards are VERY important. Without them, you'd be limited to what works with your own personal equipment. Sorta like a LAN vs. the Internet.
I wonder if the guy who started this thread would also argue that the IETF is worthless and should be abolished?
I just don't see Diablo 2 as a collector's item. I mean... give me a break. This is only a sequel. It's not like this game has a history. Sure, the original game was a top-seller, but that doesn't make me want to rush out and buy a copy of the sequel to place on my shelf and never remove from its plastic.
Take Ultima Ascension, on the other hand. It was the last game in a LONG running series of games which spanned many computer platforms. (Yes it was rushed out too early, but that's another issue). But as far as marketing... yeah - this game made sense to release a special edition for collectors.
I think some marketing goober at Blizzard saw this, and thought... hmm I wonder how many extra copies I can sell for an extra $10 apiece. And the poor developers are probably the ones grumbling about carpal tunnel syndrome now, after signing their names a bazillion times;)
I fully agree with what the previous poster was saying. We (consumers) don't need to spend money on a product that restricts us so severely, with the assumption that something illegal is being done.
Sure, the company making this MP3 player wants to keep the RIAA happy and avoid being bullied. Fighting that stuff costs money and I understand the decision.
But as consumers there is no way in hell we should be buying such a product. To do so is a tacit approval of the RIAA's point of view. Which, in a nutshell, is that fair use doesn't exist, and consumers should have to pay for each and every copy of a protected work.
Well, frankly, that isn't what the law says. But if we just go along with what the RIAA wants, then it might as well be the law.
If, on the other hand, consumers reject "crippled" hardware and other solutions that restrict their freedom then things change. Companies who are bold enough to challenge the RIAA will sell more products. And sooner or later, more court cases will come about and the laws will become more detailed and clarified (hopefully for the better).
NOT buying limited products like this isn't just a moral decision -- it is a practical one.
Why should you download the latest Mozilla milestone? Don't say for personal use... it is still in a testing phase. You have to remember that the developers are counting on your input. Pour over the little details and give them feedback. Some of the crash bugs need to be endured - don't go screaming back to I.E. Hot off the press builds (nightlies) should probably stay with the developers, however, who have more Grits to deal with the situation. Down to the last milestone, you have to think like a tester, not an end user. Your feedback is important to the Mozilla team. Pants off to them... er whoops;) Hats off.
The most recent problem with SSH 1.xx and OpenSSH is that they link against RSAREF which was found to have a buffer overflow. As I recall, this was exploitable only in conjunction with another problem that existed in SSH 1.xx. Also, there was a patch that RSA gave their blessing to... you can probably dig up info at http://www.securityfocus.com - just search in the bugtraq archives.
I haven't even used Mozilla long enough to determine if there are crash problems. The RENDERING problems are enough to keep me from using it as my primary browser.
Try browsing through a few cnn.com pages lately? Getting closer, but still no cigar.
Don't get me wrong... I'm not bashing on Mozilla here. I'm just pointing out that it is still alpha, and people shouldn't expect more. If it works for you, great. If not, then either help them out, or wait for a few more releases.
I agree with you Rombuu. But additionally, I think CmdrTaco probably has enough cash to get a development team working on a Linux player which could handle those files;)
I mean really - there are only a couple of solutions to the "problem" here:
- use your own astounding skill to write a Linux player. - pay someone else to write one. - pay / bribe / beg someone for a conversion. - install Windows. - forget about the movie and move on to something else. - bitch to the masses.
He talks about how Linux should watch out because that "next great thing" is lurking around the corner, unseen. Pointing at the failures of DEC and Lotus is not a good comparison.
The key point that this guy is missing (and alot of these critics do) - is that Linux is not a commercial product.
Sure there are companies and commercial products build around it. But Linux itself doesn't go there. Redhat's stock price could go through the floor[*] but Linux will still be there. And as that next "new thing" catches on, the Linux developers tend to mold Linux into whatever people are asking for.
Anyhow, this author's little seed of doubt is misplaced IMO. Whether Linux is in the limelight, or obscure, doesn't matter to alot of us. It wasn't written FOR corporations - these corporations right now, just happen to like what it has turned into.
... take Hell week, for example. Maybe someone could've measured more brain activity, but I doubt it was useful activity. There's a reason sleep deprivation is often used in POW / capture situations. It can break the spirit of many people, or at least push them over the edge in an otherwise stressful situation.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been experimenting over several weeks after noticing karma loss. Invariably, it always happens after I've used up some moderation points. I take time to moderate carefully, and I would expect to GAIN karma from meta moderation, if not break even.
I then unchecked my "willing to moderate" box, and reviewed my karma for awhile. I saw no losses. This leads me to believe that either a) some meta-moderators are fucking with the system, or b) the act of moderating lowers your karma by default.
I tend to suspect the former.
Part of the problem is that there is no accountability in the moderation system. In other words, you can't go look at a post and see WHO has moderated it up or down. Similarily, with meta moderation you should be able to see who has hit you recently, and for which moderations.
This alone wouldn't solve the problem, but at least you could get a clear idea of whether your moderation is being done fairly or not.
Best regards,
SEAL
Anytime something sounds devious, the initial reaction is "well, I wouldn't put it past Microsoft" ;)
Best regards,
SEAL
... which was in the initial blurb on this thread :) I don't know if I personally would classify it as a violent movie but there were alot of people complaining about the number of graphical beheadings.
Best regards,
SEAL
While I agree that offensive stuff is readily available on the net, I don't think that software, or the government should be the babysitter.
If the net has things that are unsuitable for children, then maybe they shouldn't be using it unsupervised.
Or another perspective: the Internet is simply a view of the world, seen through your monitor. Most folks wouldn't let their children roam unsupervised through the real world, for fear that they might get harmed or go to the wrong places. But since the net removes that fear of physical harm, people let their kids go gangbusters.
Then parents find their kids viewing stuff that is morally objectionable to them. So rather than supervising, they scream for filtering and more government regulation of the net. Sounds a little goofy to me.
Best regards,
SEAL
I'm sure CyberPatrol will swiftly add ACLU and affiliated websites to the following block categories:
;)
Violence / Profanity
Partial Nudity
Full Nudity
Sexual Acts / Text
Gross Depictions / Text
Intolerance
Satanic or Cult
Drugs / Drug Culture
Militant / Extremist
Sex Education
Questionable / Illegal & Gambling
Alcohol & Tobacco
Reserved 4
Reserved 3
Reserved 2
Reserved 1
We wouldn't want to expose our children to the evils of the ACLU now, would we
Best Regards,
SEAL
Now step back and think about who has the most to gain from them. Furthermore, the NSA has generally led civilian scientists by a couple decades in cryptography work.
It makes me wonder how far along they are with this type of computer.
Best regards,
SEAL
It's Linux, for chrissake. Now don't get me wrong -- Linux is very very good for many things. However, games are not one of them. As you mentioned, there are alot of services that you simply don't need. There are alot of layers of crap that eat up RAM which are unnecessary for a console platform. On top of that, the hardware drivers are often immature or nonexistent (HOW long were we stuck with 3dfx?).
Partly because of these factors, and partly because of Linux's small consumer marketshare -- game developers don't write games for Linux. In the PC world, they write them for DirectX almost exclusively. Only a few very talented people with a hobbyist interest write for Linux (e.g. Carmack).
So even assuming they put together a nice console with reasonable speed and low resource usage, one question remains. Who's going to design games for it? I work for a game company and I can tell you it ain't gonna happen. There is no way you'd strain our relationship with, say, Sony - just to write games for a high-risk new console.
Best regards,
SEAL
An integer greater than one is called a prime number if its only positive divisors (factors) are one and itself.
Thus, negative numbers are not prime.
Best regards,
SEAL
Finding that number is left as an exercise for the reader. Heh.
Best regards,
SEAL
I would hope they have doubly implanted breasts. Having just one breast augmented would be a little strange, methinks :)
;)
Sorry I'll go back to my politically correct corner now
SEAL
I'm not being argumentative - just curious:
:)
You said this is supposed to be paid on your state income tax. But I live in a state which has no income tax. Are they gouging me somewhere else that I don't know about? Just wondering. I'm not a tax specialist (although Apr 16 is sneaking up on me...)
- SEAL
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
This is directed at the legislative branch (the U.S. Congress). I'm sure they'll find some way to weasel around it without amending the Constitution, though.
17.5% just sounds outrageous here, though. It'd be tough to make that kind of thing happen. When I already pay around 8% sales tax for my STATE, plus federal income tax, plus property tax, etc etc... it's tough to justify more taxes. To implement a VAT we'd have to overhaul the whole system.
Best regards,
SEAL
(I'll start with the standard IANAL disclaimer...)
;)
As far as I know, in the U.S., tax can't be charged on transactions across state lines. You'll see the simplest example of this on a mail-order catalog, where you only pay tax if you live in that state.
Now, for the Internet, the dilemma is that it has become very EASY to purchase goods out of your state. UPS and Fed Ex, and even the good ol' US Mail are getting very good at delivering things quickly. And sometimes, you can even download what you purchased.
No more 6-week waits to ship. This has made traditional merchants and the federal government fearful of lost revenue. So they say they want to tax the Internet. But the thing is, IT IS ALREADY BEING TAXED. Inside your state. The way it's supposed to be. The same rules mail-order catalogs use.
So in reality, the government wants to CHANGE the rules on us. So ok... let's say there's some flat tax on Internet transactions. Who ends up paying, really? The merchants (and I expect small business owners will get screwed even more, as usual).
Why? Because the tax rate, combined with the cost of shipping will make Internet purchases generally more expensive than traditional retail. So in order to maintain customer bases, the Internet merchants will have to either lower their prices (and profit margin), or find ways to make Internet shopping preferable, which is difficult. You are already removed from personal interaction with the customer by the nature of an online business.
I think tax changes will only benefit the old-school retail businesses. And I'd expect them to be lobbying heavily for it, if they aren't already. Oh yeah, and they'll probably want to vote for Gore too
Best regards,
SEAL
Sorry, but I have to rant about Sun here for a bit. Before someone says it: no, I'm not some Microsoft troll here. I have used Java and C++ both quite extensively. Also, I've dealt with Sun's marketing people (namely, in getting a piece of software certified 100% Pure Java).
Sun does some things very well. Perhaps the thing they are best at doing, is catering to the "suits". This announcement just felt like more attention gathering to this effect, since Open Source is the buzzword right now.
However, Sun is all about money. Big money. Enterprise level stuff. They don't give a rat's ass about the little guy. You'd be amazed how many emails I've received from them since I got that product certified. Usually, they want me to participate in some conference at $5k a pop.
This announcement is just posturing and nothing more. Look at the second part of it, for example:
2. Is everything in Forte for Java, Community Edition being open-sourced?
No. The binary version of Forte for Java, Community Edition includes two components that will not be open-sourced: the browser and the compiler. If required, the modular design of Forte for Java, Community Edition permits developers to replace these components with alternatives.
Now, I'm not one to bite the hand that feeds me. If Sun wants to make this small open-source handout, then that's fine. But it's more hype than anything. Much like Java in general.
Yes I may sound bitter, but that's just because I'm sick of the games that Sun plays. They are your stereotypical "big" corporation... through and through.
Hope that wasn't too offtopic but Sun just irks me sometimes with all the attention they get for stupid little meaningless gestures. They care about the Linux community about as much as Microsoft does. Don't doubt it for a second.
Best regards,
SEAL
One other point that people tend to forget, is the benefit of standardization. We, on Slashdot, tend to debate quite a bit about computer industry standards, whether it be hardware, desktop environments, compression, networking, whatever. We can communicate via IP because standards exist that you must adhere to if you want to participate on the Internet.
The same thing goes for the airwaves. If you want to listen to FM radio (in your region), then you know what frequency range to tune in to. Tuners are built with the assumption that these ranges are standardized. Television uses another... and so on, for many different applications. We can all take advantage of these things BECAUSE they are standardized.
So I would say the agencies that uphold the standards are VERY important. Without them, you'd be limited to what works with your own personal equipment. Sorta like a LAN vs. the Internet.
I wonder if the guy who started this thread would also argue that the IETF is worthless and should be abolished?
Best regards,
SEAL
I just don't see Diablo 2 as a collector's item. I mean... give me a break. This is only a sequel. It's not like this game has a history. Sure, the original game was a top-seller, but that doesn't make me want to rush out and buy a copy of the sequel to place on my shelf and never remove from its plastic.
;)
Take Ultima Ascension, on the other hand. It was the last game in a LONG running series of games which spanned many computer platforms. (Yes it was rushed out too early, but that's another issue). But as far as marketing... yeah - this game made sense to release a special edition for collectors.
I think some marketing goober at Blizzard saw this, and thought... hmm I wonder how many extra copies I can sell for an extra $10 apiece. And the poor developers are probably the ones grumbling about carpal tunnel syndrome now, after signing their names a bazillion times
Best regards,
SEAL
I've found that in the U.S., arse is often used as a substitute for ass in places where ass might be censored.
;P
I guess that behavior will have to stop as soon as our censors find out about the usage of arse in the UK
I fully agree with what the previous poster was saying. We (consumers) don't need to spend money on a product that restricts us so severely, with the assumption that something illegal is being done.
Sure, the company making this MP3 player wants to keep the RIAA happy and avoid being bullied. Fighting that stuff costs money and I understand the decision.
But as consumers there is no way in hell we should be buying such a product. To do so is a tacit approval of the RIAA's point of view. Which, in a nutshell, is that fair use doesn't exist, and consumers should have to pay for each and every copy of a protected work.
Well, frankly, that isn't what the law says. But if we just go along with what the RIAA wants, then it might as well be the law.
If, on the other hand, consumers reject "crippled" hardware and other solutions that restrict their freedom then things change. Companies who are bold enough to challenge the RIAA will sell more products. And sooner or later, more court cases will come about and the laws will become more detailed and clarified (hopefully for the better).
NOT buying limited products like this isn't just a moral decision -- it is a practical one.
Best regards,
SEAL
Why should you download the latest Mozilla milestone? ;) Hats off.
Don't say for personal use... it is still in a testing phase.
You have to remember that the developers are counting on your input.
Pour over the little details and give them feedback.
Some of the crash bugs need to be endured - don't go screaming back to I.E.
Hot off the press builds (nightlies) should probably stay with the developers, however, who have more
Grits to deal with the situation.
Down to the last milestone, you have to think like a tester, not an end user.
Your feedback is important to the Mozilla team.
Pants off to them... er whoops
SEAL
(sorry I couldn't resist...)
Hmm... well, IP was invented before NetBEUI, no?
:)
SEAL
The most recent problem with SSH 1.xx and OpenSSH is that they link against RSAREF which was found to have a buffer overflow. As I recall, this was exploitable only in conjunction with another problem that existed in SSH 1.xx. Also, there was a patch that RSA gave their blessing to... you can probably dig up info at http://www.securityfocus.com - just search in the bugtraq archives.
SEAL
I haven't even used Mozilla long enough to determine if there are crash problems. The RENDERING problems are enough to keep me from using it as my primary browser.
Try browsing through a few cnn.com pages lately? Getting closer, but still no cigar.
Don't get me wrong... I'm not bashing on Mozilla here. I'm just pointing out that it is still alpha, and people shouldn't expect more. If it works for you, great. If not, then either help them out, or wait for a few more releases.
SEAL
I agree with you Rombuu. But additionally, I think CmdrTaco probably has enough cash to get a development team working on a Linux player which could handle those files ;)
I mean really - there are only a couple of solutions to the "problem" here:
- use your own astounding skill to write a Linux player.
- pay someone else to write one.
- pay / bribe / beg someone for a conversion.
- install Windows.
- forget about the movie and move on to something else.
- bitch to the masses.
Guess which one you see most often around here...
Best regards,
SEAL
The key point that this guy is missing (and alot of these critics do) - is that Linux is not a commercial product.
Sure there are companies and commercial products build around it. But Linux itself doesn't go there. Redhat's stock price could go through the floor[*] but Linux will still be there. And as that next "new thing" catches on, the Linux developers tend to mold Linux into whatever people are asking for.
Anyhow, this author's little seed of doubt is misplaced IMO. Whether Linux is in the limelight, or obscure, doesn't matter to alot of us. It wasn't written FOR corporations - these corporations right now, just happen to like what it has turned into.
Best regards,
SEAL
*It's already going that way. Damn I should've sold right after the split.
... take Hell week, for example. Maybe someone could've measured more brain activity, but I doubt it was useful activity. There's a reason sleep deprivation is often used in POW / capture situations. It can break the spirit of many people, or at least push them over the edge in an otherwise stressful situation.
Just my $.02.
SEAL