3: "Free" music. I'm sure people are happy that all their favorite bands are downloaded, but there are no new bands to replace them. There will not be a Freddie Mercury or groups like Pink Floyd, Nine Inch Nails, or other items. What you listen to in the mainstream is now dictated word for word, and note by note by corporate drones. The same formula for songs is repeated over and over again. Thanks to piracy, a vibrant, expressive form of art is completely dead, with only predigested stuff available now, or amateur hacks with their ironic beards and acoustic guitars crooning about their cat because everyone else is doing exactly that.
Are you sure you were around 20 years ago? Mainstream/formula music has been around since the dawn of commercial audio recording. Blaming its existence on piracy is silly, and just makes you sound like a **AA shill.
Wikis are generally where information goes to die, yes.
Nonetheless, Wikipedia does not do badly in some respects.
I don't spend much work time there (except to look stuff up)--haven't made any edits there in a couple of months, but would probably want to do some updates when our next major release comes out later this year.
As for whether I'm any good or not--that's debatable, but I was lucky enough to land on a team with one of the best reputations in the business, and I like to think I know which side the bread's buttered on, so I stick with it.
Since, as part of my job (which includes very flexible hours/locations), I'm encouraged to blog, take part in mailing list/forum discussions, and suchlike, it could be argued that they're paying me for my Wikipedia edits about their product as well.
Dunno why I'm trying to play Devil's Advocate here, but there ya go.
OTOH, I am pretty sure that the folks in Legal would say that I'm definitely not being paid to do marketing or to post inaccurate information.
I guess I could add a disclaimer "I work for SomeMultinational but any material I post here about SomeSoftware reflects my own understanding and views and not necessarily those of my employer" to my user page... or something. <grin/>
About a year ago, keeping up with FB started to seem like a bit of a job, ain't nobody paying me to do it, and it has seldom if ever proved all that helpful or useful in ways that couldn't be accomplished via other, less intrusive, less annoying ways.
Those "You have 532 messages" messages keep piling up in my Some Rainy Day... mail folder, and I keep finding other things to do than to log in to read them.
I write technical documentation for a specialised and fairly complex software product. There are not many people who are qualified to do so.
Assuming that I stick to the facts, provide citations, and don't attempt to hide the fact of my employment with the producer of this software from anyone, is there some other potential reason why I shouldn't contribute to Wikipedia articles about this product?
Pulling up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... in the comfort and safety of my own home was heaps easier and cheaper than going to a bar where I'd be any chance at all to get useful info regarding that topic, especially when you figure in the airfare to Beijing and back.
BTW, you're aware that "lookout" is a noun, and "look out" is a verb, and that they're even pronounced differently, right?
Yes, let's just conveniently ignore the fact that guns tend to stand out from most other objects that can be used to kill or main people since guns are *intended* and *designed* to kill or maim people *at a distance*.
"His problems were a mere subset of mine. Being a well-adjusted member of society, had this person crossed my path online or in real life, I would have done what I could to help him through his problems. Posting images of affluence and outbursts of violence do not suggest being a good provider. It's demonstrating the ability help and support and offer care to other people. We live in strange times now, with technology and dramatic social change working against both gender's natural genetic scripts."
Damn, wish I had mod points right now. Well. Fucking. Said.
Slashdot Mirror
3: "Free" music. I'm sure people are happy that all their favorite bands are downloaded, but there are no new bands to replace them. There will not be a Freddie Mercury or groups like Pink Floyd, Nine Inch Nails, or other items. What you listen to in the mainstream is now dictated word for word, and note by note by corporate drones. The same formula for songs is repeated over and over again. Thanks to piracy, a vibrant, expressive form of art is completely dead, with only predigested stuff available now, or amateur hacks with their ironic beards and acoustic guitars crooning about their cat because everyone else is doing exactly that.
Are you sure you were around 20 years ago? Mainstream/formula music has been around since the dawn of commercial audio recording. Blaming its existence on piracy is silly, and just makes you sound like a **AA shill.
No, they're reporting that it ran in the NYT, which is exactly what they're supposed to be doing.
I believe you intended to say "HTML isn't as popular a beverage".
I hate it when poor delivery spoils what would have been a good punch line.
Posts don't get deleted.
By publishing this, Slashdot is damaging its reputation.
Slashdot didn't publish it. The NY Times did.
Wikis are generally where information goes to die, yes.
Nonetheless, Wikipedia does not do badly in some respects.
I don't spend much work time there (except to look stuff up)--haven't made any edits there in a couple of months, but would probably want to do some updates when our next major release comes out later this year.
As for whether I'm any good or not--that's debatable, but I was lucky enough to land on a team with one of the best reputations in the business, and I like to think I know which side the bread's buttered on, so I stick with it.
Since, as part of my job (which includes very flexible hours/locations), I'm encouraged to blog, take part in mailing list/forum discussions, and suchlike, it could be argued that they're paying me for my Wikipedia edits about their product as well.
Dunno why I'm trying to play Devil's Advocate here, but there ya go.
OTOH, I am pretty sure that the folks in Legal would say that I'm definitely not being paid to do marketing or to post inaccurate information.
I guess I could add a disclaimer "I work for SomeMultinational but any material I post here about SomeSoftware reflects my own understanding and views and not necessarily those of my employer" to my user page... or something. <grin/>
Primate predator bands who enjoy a good gossip when taking breaks from throwing shit at each other. Yep, that's us, pretty much.
About a year ago, keeping up with FB started to seem like a bit of a job, ain't nobody paying me to do it, and it has seldom if ever proved all that helpful or useful in ways that couldn't be accomplished via other, less intrusive, less annoying ways.
Those "You have 532 messages" messages keep piling up in my Some Rainy Day... mail folder, and I keep finding other things to do than to log in to read them.
Like Typhoid Mary was "kind of badass"?
I write technical documentation for a specialised and fairly complex software product. There are not many people who are qualified to do so.
Assuming that I stick to the facts, provide citations, and don't attempt to hide the fact of my employment with the producer of this software from anyone, is there some other potential reason why I shouldn't contribute to Wikipedia articles about this product?
Where oh where is a +1, Troll mod when you really need one? :)
Where I'd HAVE, bloody HAVE any chance at all blah blah blah, thanks very much.
*bangs head against monitor*
Pulling up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... in the comfort and safety of my own home was heaps easier and cheaper than going to a bar where I'd be any chance at all to get useful info regarding that topic, especially when you figure in the airfare to Beijing and back.
BTW, you're aware that "lookout" is a noun, and "look out" is a verb, and that they're even pronounced differently, right?
Some folks in Oxford would like to have a word with you, mate.
I wonder how the user in china has downloaded tor in the first place?
In much the same way that all smart Chinese Internet users have been using VPNs for years, I imagine.
That's Rule 34-B: Any word chosen for a software product is already in use as slang for an obscure sexual practise.
That would be the point that, if you tell users often and loudly enough, they'll come to believe that choice is somehow bad?
Yes, let's just conveniently ignore the fact that guns tend to stand out from most other objects that can be used to kill or main people since guns are *intended* and *designed* to kill or maim people *at a distance*.
"His problems were a mere subset of mine. Being a well-adjusted member of society, had this person crossed my path online or in real life, I would have done what I could to help him through his problems. Posting images of affluence and outbursts of violence do not suggest being a good provider. It's demonstrating the ability help and support and offer care to other people. We live in strange times now, with technology and dramatic social change working against both gender's natural genetic scripts."
Damn, wish I had mod points right now. Well. Fucking. Said.
I've seen bamboo used in China for scaffolding in the construction of steel and concrete buildings 20+ storeys tall.
Yeah, how about a write-up in English?
It's not a field in which I've conducted extensive research but that doesn't surprise me.
The probable future of the human race is merging with machines. We have to start sometime.
Sez you.
That's a pretty lame attempt at a troll, considering that you can buy video cameras about the size of your thumb on Amazon.