1) I am not so thrilled with the number of stereotypes and racist jabs I'm reading on this thread. C'mon Slashdot: I thought you people were smarter than this.
2) Honest question(s) for Isam Bayazidi: long-term (20+ years) do you think the Internet will serve to a) promote a moderate view of Islam, b) promote a radical view or c) both? If you had to guess, how to the "numbers look" when it comes to the Islamic web right now? I would guess 99-1 (at least) in favor of moderate, am I way off?
Having read both books, I can say with confidence:
1) Dan Brown used themes inspired by the research in HBHG
2) So have the "history" and "discovery" channels- for years and years and years
This is the kinda lawsuit I like to read about: the kind that looks stupid, wastes money, and ultimatley proves nothing.
Keep it up, morons. Lawsuits like this make the "anarchists" like me sound less crazy.
I am all for a flat tax, except that they naturally benefit wealthier brackets coming from the current system. I realize this is apples-to-oranges, but I also see why many feel "flat tax" in unfair.
I think the government in 2006 has become a useless "pointy hair boss" trying hard to feel important. No where is this more obvious than in current tax codes. But I figure, like Matthew Leskow (sic) says: if someone is going to take advantage of this stupidity, it may as well be us.
Howdy friends, Josh here with another pro-small business rant.
Why support the "WalMart" of accounting? As a small business owner, I would not dare waste my time attempting my own taxes, my fiance's, or my business's. I'm not stupid, mind you, but lazy. I have no interest in "games" and "cheats"- I just want to be left alone to earn a fair living for myself and my family. I am one of those "young idealists" who believes a man can live well without having to comit crimes against decency against his fellow man.
And yeah yeah, man as in "mankind". Like any women come near this site anyway.
Anyhow, my local accountant is great. I won't even name her, as she is already satisfied with her current clientelle (and this is still her "busy time"). She charges more than H&R block, but she also does far more: she greets me with a hug, answers my phone calls, and takes the time to explain how "the system works" and what I need to do to protect my stakeholders.
McDonalds is tasty, and can't be beat for a $5 pricetag. However, once in a while I am happy to buy a steak.
It's you dollar, friends. It's your power.
Peace.
Fuck the haters.
Say it with me now:
up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-B-A-B-A-sele ct-start
How many times can you and your buddy (or modified ROB) blow up em dem aliens? Hurry up man! Reagan is counting on you, you brave Contra warriors!
Ya know, looking back, sometimes I'm amazed I'm not more insane than I am.
Hey man, not to be a troll, but the URL in your tagline caught my eye so I checked it out.
I'm in the midst of a similar project: http://picmojo.go2mojo.com/
What are the odds you'd be interested in working together?
I argue that everyone *is* an expert, depending on the material.
I have friends who could not begin to function in the "real world" but who could author a doctorate thesis on "The Simpsons".
As stated by others, ultimatley, the value of an "expert" decree on Wiki would be dependant on an author's reputation. When a comment here on./ grabs my attention, I tend to peek at a few other comments left by the author. Almost invariably I can see subjects on which the author has expertise, and other subjects on which the author needs to do a bit more research. Won't this apply to Wiki just the same?
The parent post is a solid idea. Still a bit rough, but I think this could also help address the "what do we do when 90% of people are *wrong* on a given subject?" issue.
That said, I think it is also essential for Wiki to maintain sources to "non-expert" and "divergent" opinions. Consider the "evolution" issue as posed by a few others; here we have one theory which has been granted far more credibility (Darwin), versus a pair of theories which seem more rooted in cultural traditions than in science (Creationism, Intelligent Design).
Yes, it may be tempting to say "WikiPedia should disregard all non-science (anti-science) on the issue of evolution". But really, what does that even mean? Scientific theory is based on observation; observation is always limitted by its circumstances. I read science which debuncts what I was taught in school almost every day (and I was only born in '80 mind you). However, for the greater good, it is essential to keep a record of where we are, and how we got here, and that naturally includes many, many things which in retrospect appear silly, absurd and absolutley false.
To put it another way; yes, I will continue to believe that the Earth is round (at least for today), but what *I* personally enjoy most about WikiPedia is my ability to get "lost" in the "science" of a flat-Earth theory. Personally, I find it hard to accept anything as "truth" or "fact", but I have no problem disregarding things which I find to be "wrong". I learn by a process of reverse-engineering; evaluating the lies I have been fed in a vain attempt to distinguish them from what I believe to be true.
I know Socrates is dead and all (at least according to Wiki), but am I the only one who does this?
For XMAS this year, the fiance gave me Simpsons season 7. Halfway through it, I realized that *THIS* was the season (IMO) that marked the end of the greatest television show in history.
I will still watch season 3-6 now and again, and quite a few later episodes are real gems.
But nothing past season 7 is getting my $40. Sorry. I bought my tshirt, I ate my butterfingers, but I draw the line with season 8.
However, I would gladly pay $160 for another season of Futurama.
By why would a website being launched by Microsoft use anything other than Windows Server?
Don't get me wrong; I'm a LAMP fan myself, it just struck me as odd.
Dear Santa,
I have been very good this year. I worked hard, paid (most of) my bills, and didn't strangle anyone, even though they deserved it.
Please bring me a Luck Liu bot this Christmas. I'll promise to walk her twice a day and pet her all the time.
P.S. Please hurry, I got the munchies and these cookies won't last too much longer.
Love,
Josh
Man, I just can't stop worrying about this one (I'm currently working on a similar project facing similar issues). I see your point in that a 4 day waiting period will turn off some potential users, but I argue that this is inevitable. Some users are turned off because Wiki is offered in different languages (sad but true). Others simply hate the font. (I'm 25 with grey hair because it took me a very loooong time to accept that you can't please all the people all the time).
Speaking personally, I always visit a website a few times before (if) signing up. I see if they are still around in 6 months, and if they've built any sort of reputation. After signing up, it may be weeks or months before I actually do anything with it. I still have a cafepress account somewhere that has yet to sell a tshirt. Looking at user behavior on the MOJO network, I see I am not alone in this pattern of behavior.
The goal in all of this is not to LIMIT discussions and opinions about a subject, only to provide an ENCYCLOPEDIA; a collection of OBJECTIVE FACTS to be used as a research tool and reference guide. There are countless venues for opinions to be shared (where are we right NOW?) But Wiki is not a blog, not "news", not like anything that has come before it. Call me naive, but I believe in objectivity. Without it's objectivity, Wiki is nothing that hasn't been done a zillion times before. Those willing to wait 4 days to edit are willing to think it through, and ponder it out. Sure, it may not be objective, onjective may not even exist, but at least the process involves *thought*. I know, I know...it's not much, but quite frankly, I'll take it.
Sorry to keep ramblin on/. Thanks for the bandwith. And just so you know, I've taken a goood loooong look at that rackspace managed hosting ad. I might even get around to clicking on it...in about 3 months.
You raise a few interesting questions. Who, ultimatley, deserves blame/credit/responsibility for Wiki?
"The Machine" v. "The People"?
IMO, all of the above will always fall on the people.
I have a bad habit of sounding like a total jackass (like right now, for example) by spitting out a random remark without much thought or even the courtesy of a spellcheck. Once apon a time, while new to Wiki, I wanted to see if I could (if so inclined) polute a popular article with my own babelling opinion. I could. Sadly, I did. Months later, "pieces" of my rant were left, but more importantly, my ill-behaved model was being used by others in the article.
Most important: I can't, for the life of me, remember which article is was.
Had this "four day" gap been in place, I would almost certainly have forgotten my "point" long before 4 days, and thus, not polluted the Internet with more crap.
But, like I say above, I am an adult- I take full responsibility.
However, I still say it's a good policy. A fair, common-sense solution to a very complicated problem.
And no, I am not affiliated with Wiki or anything. I just think the admins are given too little credit for an accomplishment that rivals Google in my eyes (money isn't everything).
Not to troll, but how is this slogan anything but accurate?
ANYONE can edit Wiki.
ANYONE can take the time to learn how to use and benefit Wiki before contributing.
ANYONE can benefit from a non-Google source of the "worlds information" that has been protected from the scum of the Internet (ref to Spammers, idiots, etc, not Google).
I agree 100%. Requiring prior participation is not the same as requiring a "premium" subscription fee or some other such nonsense. IMO, anything that protects the quality of Wiki is in the best interest of us users.
Excuse me for being a troll, but from Teoma's website: "Search results appearing under the heading "Sponsored Links" are provided by Google" http://sp.teoma.com/docs/teoma/about/searchwithaut hority.html. I did not know this, but Ask Jeeves is also serving Google ads.
By the way, Teoma looks like an AWESOME service. Thanks for sharing it.
Slashdot Mirror
1) I am not so thrilled with the number of stereotypes and racist jabs I'm reading on this thread. C'mon Slashdot: I thought you people were smarter than this. 2) Honest question(s) for Isam Bayazidi: long-term (20+ years) do you think the Internet will serve to a) promote a moderate view of Islam, b) promote a radical view or c) both? If you had to guess, how to the "numbers look" when it comes to the Islamic web right now? I would guess 99-1 (at least) in favor of moderate, am I way off?
Having read both books, I can say with confidence: 1) Dan Brown used themes inspired by the research in HBHG 2) So have the "history" and "discovery" channels- for years and years and years This is the kinda lawsuit I like to read about: the kind that looks stupid, wastes money, and ultimatley proves nothing. Keep it up, morons. Lawsuits like this make the "anarchists" like me sound less crazy.
I am all for a flat tax, except that they naturally benefit wealthier brackets coming from the current system. I realize this is apples-to-oranges, but I also see why many feel "flat tax" in unfair. I think the government in 2006 has become a useless "pointy hair boss" trying hard to feel important. No where is this more obvious than in current tax codes. But I figure, like Matthew Leskow (sic) says: if someone is going to take advantage of this stupidity, it may as well be us.
Howdy friends, Josh here with another pro-small business rant. Why support the "WalMart" of accounting? As a small business owner, I would not dare waste my time attempting my own taxes, my fiance's, or my business's. I'm not stupid, mind you, but lazy. I have no interest in "games" and "cheats"- I just want to be left alone to earn a fair living for myself and my family. I am one of those "young idealists" who believes a man can live well without having to comit crimes against decency against his fellow man. And yeah yeah, man as in "mankind". Like any women come near this site anyway. Anyhow, my local accountant is great. I won't even name her, as she is already satisfied with her current clientelle (and this is still her "busy time"). She charges more than H&R block, but she also does far more: she greets me with a hug, answers my phone calls, and takes the time to explain how "the system works" and what I need to do to protect my stakeholders. McDonalds is tasty, and can't be beat for a $5 pricetag. However, once in a while I am happy to buy a steak. It's you dollar, friends. It's your power. Peace.
Fuck the haters. Say it with me now: up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-B-A-B-A-sele ct-start
How many times can you and your buddy (or modified ROB) blow up em dem aliens? Hurry up man! Reagan is counting on you, you brave Contra warriors!
Ya know, looking back, sometimes I'm amazed I'm not more insane than I am.
I'm with you. This is a great idea. If only I had your email address...
90% are virgins! har har har Oh wait, I took the time to decode it. That make me the bigger dork, doesn't it? Damn.
Hey man, not to be a troll, but the URL in your tagline caught my eye so I checked it out. I'm in the midst of a similar project: http://picmojo.go2mojo.com/ What are the odds you'd be interested in working together?
I argue that everyone *is* an expert, depending on the material. I have friends who could not begin to function in the "real world" but who could author a doctorate thesis on "The Simpsons". As stated by others, ultimatley, the value of an "expert" decree on Wiki would be dependant on an author's reputation. When a comment here on ./ grabs my attention, I tend to peek at a few other comments left by the author. Almost invariably I can see subjects on which the author has expertise, and other subjects on which the author needs to do a bit more research. Won't this apply to Wiki just the same?
The parent post is a solid idea. Still a bit rough, but I think this could also help address the "what do we do when 90% of people are *wrong* on a given subject?" issue. That said, I think it is also essential for Wiki to maintain sources to "non-expert" and "divergent" opinions. Consider the "evolution" issue as posed by a few others; here we have one theory which has been granted far more credibility (Darwin), versus a pair of theories which seem more rooted in cultural traditions than in science (Creationism, Intelligent Design). Yes, it may be tempting to say "WikiPedia should disregard all non-science (anti-science) on the issue of evolution". But really, what does that even mean? Scientific theory is based on observation; observation is always limitted by its circumstances. I read science which debuncts what I was taught in school almost every day (and I was only born in '80 mind you). However, for the greater good, it is essential to keep a record of where we are, and how we got here, and that naturally includes many, many things which in retrospect appear silly, absurd and absolutley false. To put it another way; yes, I will continue to believe that the Earth is round (at least for today), but what *I* personally enjoy most about WikiPedia is my ability to get "lost" in the "science" of a flat-Earth theory. Personally, I find it hard to accept anything as "truth" or "fact", but I have no problem disregarding things which I find to be "wrong". I learn by a process of reverse-engineering; evaluating the lies I have been fed in a vain attempt to distinguish them from what I believe to be true. I know Socrates is dead and all (at least according to Wiki), but am I the only one who does this?
For XMAS this year, the fiance gave me Simpsons season 7. Halfway through it, I realized that *THIS* was the season (IMO) that marked the end of the greatest television show in history. I will still watch season 3-6 now and again, and quite a few later episodes are real gems. But nothing past season 7 is getting my $40. Sorry. I bought my tshirt, I ate my butterfingers, but I draw the line with season 8. However, I would gladly pay $160 for another season of Futurama.
By why would a website being launched by Microsoft use anything other than Windows Server? Don't get me wrong; I'm a LAMP fan myself, it just struck me as odd.
...that the favicon on http://www.urge.com/ looks like the Netscape logo? Pretty ironic, no?
Thanks for the heads up.
Forgive a newbie for being stupid.
P.S. nl2br($this_text)?
Dear Santa, I have been very good this year. I worked hard, paid (most of) my bills, and didn't strangle anyone, even though they deserved it. Please bring me a Luck Liu bot this Christmas. I'll promise to walk her twice a day and pet her all the time. P.S. Please hurry, I got the munchies and these cookies won't last too much longer. Love, Josh
Man, I just can't stop worrying about this one (I'm currently working on a similar project facing similar issues). I see your point in that a 4 day waiting period will turn off some potential users, but I argue that this is inevitable. Some users are turned off because Wiki is offered in different languages (sad but true). Others simply hate the font. (I'm 25 with grey hair because it took me a very loooong time to accept that you can't please all the people all the time). Speaking personally, I always visit a website a few times before (if) signing up. I see if they are still around in 6 months, and if they've built any sort of reputation. After signing up, it may be weeks or months before I actually do anything with it. I still have a cafepress account somewhere that has yet to sell a tshirt. Looking at user behavior on the MOJO network, I see I am not alone in this pattern of behavior. The goal in all of this is not to LIMIT discussions and opinions about a subject, only to provide an ENCYCLOPEDIA; a collection of OBJECTIVE FACTS to be used as a research tool and reference guide. There are countless venues for opinions to be shared (where are we right NOW?) But Wiki is not a blog, not "news", not like anything that has come before it. Call me naive, but I believe in objectivity. Without it's objectivity, Wiki is nothing that hasn't been done a zillion times before. Those willing to wait 4 days to edit are willing to think it through, and ponder it out. Sure, it may not be objective, onjective may not even exist, but at least the process involves *thought*. I know, I know...it's not much, but quite frankly, I'll take it. Sorry to keep ramblin on /. Thanks for the bandwith. And just so you know, I've taken a goood loooong look at that rackspace managed hosting ad. I might even get around to clicking on it...in about 3 months.
You raise a few interesting questions. Who, ultimatley, deserves blame/credit/responsibility for Wiki? "The Machine" v. "The People"? IMO, all of the above will always fall on the people. I have a bad habit of sounding like a total jackass (like right now, for example) by spitting out a random remark without much thought or even the courtesy of a spellcheck. Once apon a time, while new to Wiki, I wanted to see if I could (if so inclined) polute a popular article with my own babelling opinion. I could. Sadly, I did. Months later, "pieces" of my rant were left, but more importantly, my ill-behaved model was being used by others in the article. Most important: I can't, for the life of me, remember which article is was. Had this "four day" gap been in place, I would almost certainly have forgotten my "point" long before 4 days, and thus, not polluted the Internet with more crap. But, like I say above, I am an adult- I take full responsibility. However, I still say it's a good policy. A fair, common-sense solution to a very complicated problem. And no, I am not affiliated with Wiki or anything. I just think the admins are given too little credit for an accomplishment that rivals Google in my eyes (money isn't everything).
Sounds like you need your own website. ;)
Not to troll, but how is this slogan anything but accurate? ANYONE can edit Wiki. ANYONE can take the time to learn how to use and benefit Wiki before contributing. ANYONE can benefit from a non-Google source of the "worlds information" that has been protected from the scum of the Internet (ref to Spammers, idiots, etc, not Google).
I agree 100%. Requiring prior participation is not the same as requiring a "premium" subscription fee or some other such nonsense. IMO, anything that protects the quality of Wiki is in the best interest of us users.
Excuse me for being a troll, but from Teoma's website: "Search results appearing under the heading "Sponsored Links" are provided by Google" http://sp.teoma.com/docs/teoma/about/searchwithaut hority.html. I did not know this, but Ask Jeeves is also serving Google ads.
By the way, Teoma looks like an AWESOME service. Thanks for sharing it.