This has nothing to do with political affiliation, this has to do with recognizing what's important. What tools our president uses to get his job done is fluff, not substance. It is not news, even on the slowest news day.
is it then ? we are using linux, windows, php, asp, gmail, blackberry, mail, cpus to do our job done. and we are talking about these ALL day here. then these are 'fluff' too.
excuse me but youre the first moron i saw on slashdot. ill discontinue this thread.
you are apparently for the opposing party to obama, whatever that is, i guess gop, or an independent or whatever they call it, and you have a beef with guy.
therefore you are unable to realize that a president that is a BLACKBERY ADDICT and an ENTIRE administration that announces they will use GMAIL for correspondence temporarily ARE news in this site.
let me put it in a way that you will understand :
this is a tech/internet/geek/i.t. related site.
A BLACKBERY ADDICT, TECH AFFLUENT PRESIDENT IS NEWS
AN ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCING TO BE USING GMAIL TEMPORARLY IS NEWS.
we the rest of the world do not give a crap about your party's (whatever it is) problems with other parties in your country. or your views on your president.
You know, this gets tossed around a lot, and it bugs the living hell out of me. Who the fuck cares? It's irrelevant! Praising Obama for using technology is no different than something like praising him because he likes rock music. It's a completely superficial thing, and doesn't affect his ability to be president in the least.
oh boy - are you stupid ?
whereas almost all leaders around the world cant tall an email from a messenger pigeon, there is a president at the helm of most powerful country in the world, who is also not only tech affluent, but also an addict of one of its implementations (blackberry).
excuse me, pal, but I do care. if you cant fathom the amount of i.t./tech/nerdiness/geekery/internet culture in this, turn in your geek card on your way out.
that's what you should be typing in the console, if you are unable to perceive the simple logic in your parent post. computers are too dangerous for you to be using.
what kind of shitty post is this ? the poster tries to show obama administration in a bad light as if they commenced any unethical practice, or violated any laws, trying to show what they did same as palin crookery.
all they did was to create gmail addresses UNTIL WHITE HOUSE EMAILS ARE GIVEN TO THEM, so that people will be able to contact them through those email addresses. not only that, but the addresses were PUBLICLY DISSEMINATED.
is there an option to put all future posts and comments of a user on ignore in slashdot ? so that i can avoid bullcrap ?
The person bush & co appointed to department of justice screened fifty applicants and more for their political views. people who told even positive stuff towards gay rights, abortion, any liberal issues even on the internet were screened with the help of a 'special software'.
dont believe me ? well, the woman confessed to all this and more in front of senate committee investigating the issue. 'i have made a mistake' she said. mistake, fifty times.
it would be utterly stupid for any person with a brain cell to believe that an administration which is capable of doing that would not exploit wiretapping for their own political purposes.
wikipedia is so easy to use, so vast that it is much easier to resort to wikipedia for something than britannica. when we are debating, discussing, or wanting to give information about something to someone in a quick fashion, we link the wikipedia page. in our sites, forums and so on. therefore the pageranks of those wiki pages goes up and up, whereas britannica's sucks tit.
it doesnt matter that wikipedia's content can be contested, objectionable, at times unreliable for some controversial subjects - it gives an easy, neat, formatted, quick glance presentation to convey what you are talking about to the person you are linking it to. moreover, the articles that are created with solid references and common knowledge cant be contested, so there isnt too much difference in linking "Anita Ward" or "French-Indian Wars" wiki pages to someone to give out a broad info, and give them a place to start with. not to mention that stuff that doesnt make into britannica editions because 'editors' would find too controversial or distasteful for their political/financial alignment, can easily be found in wikipedia in all their bare truth.
sorry britannica. you are proprietary technology. this is the 21st century of participation and interactivity. wikipedia is participative, and interactive. you are way behind. its good to see you trying to adopt, but its annoying to see that you people rant about stuff that are better than you in many respects. lighten up, its the century of the people. people are the custodians of information now, not a minority literate elite.
think. there has been so many moves made by microsoft, legally or illegally, to prevent open source from progressing. is it that easy to believe someone when they say they see the light ? (even if they did, which they aint). is it that easy to accept them as equal and trusted members of the society just because they contributed a little ?
how did you mod down something flamebait, when it is backed with COURT CASES and verdicts worldwide. just on the eve of an order by Eu telling microsoft to take out ie from windows because it constitutes a monopoly practice.
how long do we have to endure fanboyism ? when will the win7 hype pass ? im new at this. does it take long ?
not as such. this is about security. microsoft's stuff is closed source. your department of defense development/security team cant just hack it and start on it legally. even if they were allowed, parsing through proprietary code is harder compared to open source code, which passes the scrutiny of tens of thousands of people sometimes, before getting into distros, therefore neater.
and lets face it. microsoft's stuff has many security holes. despite it is totally open source, open source code has had much less serious issues with security than closed ms code. appalling in that, because code is closed, it should be a bit more harder to hack through and discover exploits.
why is the parent flamebait then. everything that is even mildly criticizing or in refusal of anything microsoft gets modded down these days. or are we experiencing a fanboi surge following the wake of windows 7 beta ? or is it something like they did with bloggers before vista launch, a marketing trick ?
Slashdot Mirror
thanks a lot. this will really help.
No it isn't.
This has nothing to do with political affiliation, this has to do with recognizing what's important. What tools our president uses to get his job done is fluff, not substance. It is not news, even on the slowest news day.
is it then ? we are using linux, windows, php, asp, gmail, blackberry, mail, cpus to do our job done. and we are talking about these ALL day here. then these are 'fluff' too.
excuse me but youre the first moron i saw on slashdot. ill discontinue this thread.
let me tell you what is your problem :
you are apparently for the opposing party to obama, whatever that is, i guess gop, or an independent or whatever they call it, and you have a beef with guy.
therefore you are unable to realize that a president that is a BLACKBERY ADDICT and an ENTIRE administration that announces they will use GMAIL for correspondence temporarily ARE news in this site.
let me put it in a way that you will understand :
this is a tech/internet/geek/i.t. related site.
A BLACKBERY ADDICT, TECH AFFLUENT PRESIDENT IS NEWS
AN ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCING TO BE USING GMAIL TEMPORARLY IS NEWS.
we the rest of the world do not give a crap about your party's (whatever it is) problems with other parties in your country. or your views on your president.
You know, this gets tossed around a lot, and it bugs the living hell out of me. Who the fuck cares? It's irrelevant! Praising Obama for using technology is no different than something like praising him because he likes rock music. It's a completely superficial thing, and doesn't affect his ability to be president in the least.
oh boy - are you stupid ?
whereas almost all leaders around the world cant tall an email from a messenger pigeon, there is a president at the helm of most powerful country in the world, who is also not only tech affluent, but also an addict of one of its implementations (blackberry).
excuse me, pal, but I do care. if you cant fathom the amount of i.t./tech/nerdiness/geekery/internet culture in this, turn in your geek card on your way out.
that's what you should be typing in the console, if you are unable to perceive the simple logic in your parent post. computers are too dangerous for you to be using.
here, meet the new troll ..
what kind of shitty post is this ? the poster tries to show obama administration in a bad light as if they commenced any unethical practice, or violated any laws, trying to show what they did same as palin crookery.
all they did was to create gmail addresses UNTIL WHITE HOUSE EMAILS ARE GIVEN TO THEM, so that people will be able to contact them through those email addresses. not only that, but the addresses were PUBLICLY DISSEMINATED.
is there an option to put all future posts and comments of a user on ignore in slashdot ? so that i can avoid bullcrap ?
they are taxed away by socialists, but legal system is fucked up by capitalists. hmmmmm.
its legal suicide.
If not, we need it to tag this story on riaa's behalf.
just as some people were saying 'they are starting to listen to customers now' due to windows 7, this happens.
boy. talk about 'twilight zone' kind of surreal.
The person bush & co appointed to department of justice screened fifty applicants and more for their political views. people who told even positive stuff towards gay rights, abortion, any liberal issues even on the internet were screened with the help of a 'special software'.
dont believe me ? well, the woman confessed to all this and more in front of senate committee investigating the issue. 'i have made a mistake' she said. mistake, fifty times.
it would be utterly stupid for any person with a brain cell to believe that an administration which is capable of doing that would not exploit wiretapping for their own political purposes.
me, my thick stick are going to provide your answer.
wikipedia is so easy to use, so vast that it is much easier to resort to wikipedia for something than britannica. when we are debating, discussing, or wanting to give information about something to someone in a quick fashion, we link the wikipedia page. in our sites, forums and so on. therefore the pageranks of those wiki pages goes up and up, whereas britannica's sucks tit.
it doesnt matter that wikipedia's content can be contested, objectionable, at times unreliable for some controversial subjects - it gives an easy, neat, formatted, quick glance presentation to convey what you are talking about to the person you are linking it to. moreover, the articles that are created with solid references and common knowledge cant be contested, so there isnt too much difference in linking "Anita Ward" or "French-Indian Wars" wiki pages to someone to give out a broad info, and give them a place to start with. not to mention that stuff that doesnt make into britannica editions because 'editors' would find too controversial or distasteful for their political/financial alignment, can easily be found in wikipedia in all their bare truth.
sorry britannica. you are proprietary technology. this is the 21st century of participation and interactivity. wikipedia is participative, and interactive. you are way behind. its good to see you trying to adopt, but its annoying to see that you people rant about stuff that are better than you in many respects. lighten up, its the century of the people. people are the custodians of information now, not a minority literate elite.
think. there has been so many moves made by microsoft, legally or illegally, to prevent open source from progressing. is it that easy to believe someone when they say they see the light ? (even if they did, which they aint). is it that easy to accept them as equal and trusted members of the society just because they contributed a little ?
how did you mod down something flamebait, when it is backed with COURT CASES and verdicts worldwide. just on the eve of an order by Eu telling microsoft to take out ie from windows because it constitutes a monopoly practice.
how long do we have to endure fanboyism ? when will the win7 hype pass ? im new at this. does it take long ?
one of them as of this moment is "masturbation" ...
"I think you've got it" ........
not as such. this is about security. microsoft's stuff is closed source. your department of defense development/security team cant just hack it and start on it legally. even if they were allowed, parsing through proprietary code is harder compared to open source code, which passes the scrutiny of tens of thousands of people sometimes, before getting into distros, therefore neater.
and lets face it. microsoft's stuff has many security holes. despite it is totally open source, open source code has had much less serious issues with security than closed ms code. appalling in that, because code is closed, it should be a bit more harder to hack through and discover exploits.
security. that's important.
obama is doing some moves.
as if stuff happens without working.
you have to switch to the state of having balls to post with your username first, else you will get confused.
after numerous asian countries, and germany, france, all looking into, and some moving some state governments entirely to open source.
why is the parent flamebait then. everything that is even mildly criticizing or in refusal of anything microsoft gets modded down these days. or are we experiencing a fanboi surge following the wake of windows 7 beta ? or is it something like they did with bloggers before vista launch, a marketing trick ?
i didnt say anything to the otherwise. i told 'when they expelled his family'.