I don't pay them anything and all I have to do is scroll to the bottom of the page. I don't particularly like the site but have gotten a few answers from it over the years.
I have never given them so much as an email address and, assuming there was at least one posted answer to a question, I have always been able to scroll down to the bottom of the page and see the answer(s).
It might not work for "everyone" put it certainly works for non-paying customers at least some of the time.
when you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you generally don't have a lot of energy to put into public protests.
Seems to me that's a perfect time to start thinking about public protest. Rising food costs and unemployment were major factors sparking the unrest in Egypt, Jordan, Tunisia, etc.
I tend to agree but I think the parent was making a statement about bias, not how trustworthy one is over the other. MSNBC does have a pretty obvious bias to the left. I don't think they're outright as disingenuous as FoxNews so I think you're right, it's not a fair comparison. But if you look at strictly from a NPOV perspective neither of them are shining pillars of neutral and fair journalism. That said, not many news organizations are anymore because, being owned by big media companies, ratings and revenue trump the truth every time.
You can check out a fairly entertaining interview of Brian Greene by Stephen Colbert from last Thursday on Colbert's web site.
I can't say this will educate you further one way or another and I am certainly not qulified to weigh in on either side of the debate but the guy was pretty candid with Stephen and, well, I found it entertaining...
I think at this point we're just feeding the troll... I wouldn't bother, he obviously has a stick up his arse about something. Thanks for jumping in though. As mentioned in another post I really was just taking a cheap shot at Google's instant crap.
Well TFA (Fox News so they could be as wrong as you seem to think I am) says this:
Published January 26, 2011 | FoxNews.com
A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit weighed in Wednesday on a matter of grievous import to the nation's prisons: Dungeons & Dragons. And the Court's ruling was bad news for naughty nerds nationwide, concluding that the innocent-seeming board game was inviting trouble.
Emphasis mine. And, BTW, since when does being wrong on/. deserve a Troll mod? It's not like I was deliberately trying to mislead people. My comment was based on my understanding of the situation from RTFA. Ah, well I guess I'll just go crawl under my bridge and forget about it.
Ah, I got you. I guess I read TFS as saying "orignally called "Satan's Game" [by the idiots who don't understand it]" etc... I immediately flashed back to that wonderful period in the 80's when parents everywhere starting looking at us funny whenever we talked about the game.
Never saw Mazes and Monsters or saw news (hysteria really) from the 80's about D&D?
My parents almost made me see a psychiatrist over that crap until my brother and I sat my Mom down and made her play a game with us. We interspersed the play with quips about how it was encouraging us to read, expanding our vocabulary and working our imagination in ways that TV and Video Games never could.
Can't say I specifically remember "Satan's Game" but doesn't sound far off...
Wait, is this one of those whooosh moments? Sorry, nm.
Fully admit - did not RTFA, is this new though, an appeal of the original case.
And as a long time D&D'er I think they missed the important role the Caller plays as the gang^H^H^H^H party leader. DM? That would be more like the old, ex gangster that acts as an informal liaison between the cops/community leaders and the current gangs.:-)
Good to know, I never really bothered to check for that because, as mentioned, I typically use ixquick and for the occasional time I turn to Google (image search!) I tend to have JavaScript turned off. I really only noticed on other people's computers.
My comment was more of a jab at Google's "instant" results. I am not going to pretend I've never downloaded anything illegally but I can say without reservation that it's been a long time. That is because 1) I spent a considerable amount of time I might have spent downloading illegally turning my collection of over 500 Grateful Dead and Phish tapes (obtained legally and with the bands' blessing) plus my collection of CDs into OGGs and 2) becuase of the slow but steady progression toward saner, legal distribution options on the part of the general mass media (hulu, netflix, comedy central and other network websites).
I don't need to "pirate" (arrr!) anymore because I don't mind paying for good content and I don't have to jump through stupid hacks to get said good content.
But go ahead and generalize; anyone who searches for "torrent" must be sea faring, murderous scum. No one is *really* downloading a Linux dist, the latest LibreOffice or a game update to a Blizzard title via Bittorrent.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, google "SCO linux headers" or "SCO errno.h".
If openness is a virtue, what is sort-of-openness?
Pure self interest?
Goatse alert, don't be fooled. The goggles, they do nothing!
tuxrocks4, you're a dick.
Where is the blog post?
Frankly it was "The Outlaw Jose Wales" in space.
You just answered your own question.
Can't remember who said this...
John Stewart?
I don't pay them anything and all I have to do is scroll to the bottom of the page. I don't particularly like the site but have gotten a few answers from it over the years.
I have never given them so much as an email address and, assuming there was at least one posted answer to a question, I have always been able to scroll down to the bottom of the page and see the answer(s).
It might not work for "everyone" put it certainly works for non-paying customers at least some of the time.
Posted from SeaMonkey. Personally I still like having an HTML editor, browser and email client all in one package.
Right, and by also asking for their city of birth they can get the first five digits.
when you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you generally don't have a lot of energy to put into public protests.
Seems to me that's a perfect time to start thinking about public protest. Rising food costs and unemployment were major factors sparking the unrest in Egypt, Jordan, Tunisia, etc.
May I be the first to just say - "Wooosh!'
Asimov's Laws? Unless, is there something about motion, gravity and robotics that has passed me by all these years?
I tend to agree but I think the parent was making a statement about bias, not how trustworthy one is over the other. MSNBC does have a pretty obvious bias to the left. I don't think they're outright as disingenuous as FoxNews so I think you're right, it's not a fair comparison. But if you look at strictly from a NPOV perspective neither of them are shining pillars of neutral and fair journalism. That said, not many news organizations are anymore because, being owned by big media companies, ratings and revenue trump the truth every time.
Fixed what? FoxNews is News Corp. so I fail to see how this changes his opinion that MSNBC is as biased as FoxNews,
Ah yes, Viacom, sorry, forgot how idiotic our entertainment companies can be here. Wasn't trying to tease anyone!
You can check out a fairly entertaining interview of Brian Greene by Stephen Colbert from last Thursday on Colbert's web site.
I can't say this will educate you further one way or another and I am certainly not qulified to weigh in on either side of the debate but the guy was pretty candid with Stephen and, well, I found it entertaining...
I think at this point we're just feeding the troll... I wouldn't bother, he obviously has a stick up his arse about something. Thanks for jumping in though. As mentioned in another post I really was just taking a cheap shot at Google's instant crap.
Well TFA (Fox News so they could be as wrong as you seem to think I am) says this:
Published January 26, 2011 | FoxNews.com
A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit weighed in Wednesday on a matter of grievous import to the nation's prisons: Dungeons & Dragons. And the Court's ruling was bad news for naughty nerds nationwide, concluding that the innocent-seeming board game was inviting trouble.
Emphasis mine. And, BTW, since when does being wrong on /. deserve a Troll mod? It's not like I was deliberately trying to mislead people. My comment was based on my understanding of the situation from RTFA. Ah, well I guess I'll just go crawl under my bridge and forget about it.
Ah, I got you. I guess I read TFS as saying "orignally called "Satan's Game" [by the idiots who don't understand it]" etc... I immediately flashed back to that wonderful period in the 80's when parents everywhere starting looking at us funny whenever we talked about the game.
Never saw Mazes and Monsters or saw news (hysteria really) from the 80's about D&D?
My parents almost made me see a psychiatrist over that crap until my brother and I sat my Mom down and made her play a game with us. We interspersed the play with quips about how it was encouraging us to read, expanding our vocabulary and working our imagination in ways that TV and Video Games never could.
Can't say I specifically remember "Satan's Game" but doesn't sound far off...
Wait, is this one of those whooosh moments? Sorry, nm.
This is the appeal of that case. The initial ruling was upheld yesterday.
Fully admit - did not RTFA, is this new though, an appeal of the original case.
And as a long time D&D'er I think they missed the important role the Caller plays as the gang^H^H^H^H party leader. DM? That would be more like the old, ex gangster that acts as an informal liaison between the cops/community leaders and the current gangs. :-)
Yeah, sorry. I didn't know what you meant at first but just noticed the extra "." I put in the link.
The correct link is https://ixquick.com/ .
Good to know, I never really bothered to check for that because, as mentioned, I typically use ixquick and for the occasional time I turn to Google (image search!) I tend to have JavaScript turned off. I really only noticed on other people's computers.
My comment was more of a jab at Google's "instant" results. I am not going to pretend I've never downloaded anything illegally but I can say without reservation that it's been a long time. That is because 1) I spent a considerable amount of time I might have spent downloading illegally turning my collection of over 500 Grateful Dead and Phish tapes (obtained legally and with the bands' blessing) plus my collection of CDs into OGGs and 2) becuase of the slow but steady progression toward saner, legal distribution options on the part of the general mass media (hulu, netflix, comedy central and other network websites).
I don't need to "pirate" (arrr!) anymore because I don't mind paying for good content and I don't have to jump through stupid hacks to get said good content.
But go ahead and generalize; anyone who searches for "torrent" must be sea faring, murderous scum. No one is *really* downloading a Linux dist, the latest LibreOffice or a game update to a Blizzard title via Bittorrent.