What do I care for your suffering? Pain, even agony, is no more than information before the senses, data fed to the computer of the mind. The lesson is simple: you have received the information, now act on it. Take control of the input and you shall become master of the output.
-- Chairman Sheng-ji Yang,
"Essays on Mind and Matter"
Methinks that video game spending is not the same as video game profits.
My point was that, as video games make up a larger market (on par with music, in this case), they become harder to trivialize, not that there is some profit/artistic merit threshold. The same thing happened with cinema, which at one point wasn't considered real art.
Oh, be consistent, mods! I always plummet to -1 when I joke about Brazilians googling "bond default", "non-inflationary currency", "learn English", and "squatter legal defense".
And that happens more often than you might think. (My joking about Brazil, I mean.)
Ok, so, out of all this, you still think I posted to karma whore. It is my firm belief that my karma was already maxed out
So what? I don't care what you claim to believe. It doesn't matter what motivates you to make posts like you did. It could be for karma. It could be to see yourself get modded up early. It could be to get your name out there and get your beloved geek cred. I don't know what motivates you to karma whore (or more specifically, make posts that get modded up regardless of net karma contribution), and I don't really care which motive you chose. You deliberately withheld information so that could be ride in and be "informative".
See above.
No. "Above" does not explain what was so special about the unique circumstances behind your post that REQUIRED you to spread it across posts. You only say that you wanted to spread it. Yeah. We know that.
That's the easy part: it's the part where you implied that because karma whores post to get modded up, that any post (especially posted by the submitter) that gets modded up must be made by a karma whore.
Ah, nothing like seeing the condescending invocation of a logical fallacy unravel!
That wasn't the argument. As others and I have pointed out to you, it wasn't the "posting informatively" that makes you a karma whore; it was degrading the content of your submission so you could include it in a later karma-allowable post. And it was based on logical probability, not logical necessity.
You can understand how one would think the "it" in "it's anticipated because [...]" refers to iPhone plan pricing,
No, I can't. If you had enough attention span to read things in context, you'd see my complaint (from the beginning) was about/. being used to advertise a product.
me:So why apply this outrage selectively?
you:That's a whole other argument.
Yeah -- if your attention span doesn't reach back to my initial post, part of which complained about/. turning into advertisements.
But that still doesn't change the fact that this was notable, anticipated, and news a lot of people were waiting for.
Each tiny detail is "notable" because people like you feed the hype and make it news. Again, why apply the advertising outrage selectively? Wouldn't it be just as bad to report "special discounts" coming up on Dell systems?
Yes, this really doesn't matter. And I feel the need to respond because you seem like one of those people who paints your opponent in any argument/discussion as ignorant or as using fallacious reasoning, and if I didn't respond, then the assumption is that you're "right".
Projection, much? I respond because I don't like to see idiots get away with ridiculous arguments that appeal to the biases of the readers. Less obviously-flawed arguments? Fine. Flawed arguments that don't appeal to pre-existing biases? Fine. Obviously-flawed arguments that appeal to pre-existing biases? Not so fine.
I posted because I wanted to post that information
Of course -- just not in the original submission where more people would see it and you couldn't get modded up.
Again, since the karma index maxes out, and I'm (probably) already at the max, why do I need more karma, again? If you can explain that, I'd be grateful.
Okay, sure:
IF a) I believe your karma index has maxed out and IF b) Slashcode is transparent enough that it does what they claim it does (!), and IF c) you have control over when a topic comes up where you're going to say something unpopular, THEN you have nothing to gain from karma whoring.
However, a) I don't, b) it isn't, and c) you don't.[1]
I wasn't writing a book review or a journal entry; that information is superfluous to the main point of the submission, which is that Apple and AT&T finally released information on plans.
Right -- in other words, you didn't want to. I know you didn't want to. That was the whole point! You didn't want to include that information upfront, so you could karma whore. I get that. [1]
All of your arguments seem to be based on you thinking I'm trying to "get karma" for the purpose of "criticizing sacred cows".
No, it's not based on any one reason for karma whoring. [1]
Not everyone who posts things that get modded up quickly are "karma whores".
Sure -- just the people who deliberately degrade the usefulness of their posts so that they can spread the information across several and get more karma. [1]
And if you want to bring logical fallacies into it
Which did I make? [1]
I fail to see how it's my fault that this submission itself was anticipated.
I was claiming the(!) iPhone was anticipated, not the submission. [1]
you want to argue that posting them is "part of the problem", sure, I guess I'd agree with that,
Good.
It's appropriate to refer to many branded products such as iPhone as "iPhone" or "the iPhone", and I specifically choose to use the former
Right -- it was a conscious choice to play along. I think it's unfair to be selective about which advertisers/. assists in their plans to manipulate the public./.ers are typically livid about the pain that advertisements are. So why apply this outrage selectively? [1]
[1]Yeah, I know, I'm belaboring a minor point, and this whole subthread has gone way out of proportion to its significance. But if Dave Schroeder is going to defend is position with riduculous arguments and misrepresentations, I might as well correct them.
So? Some people need to build up karma buffers for when they want to criticize sacred cows. I would know. Nothing wrong with building up karma of course, but there's a reason they call them "karma whores".
If you're talking about my post, it contains more detailed information that wasn't appropriate for the submission.
Right, because there has never been a story that had a "read the remaining 28084 bytes" on it.
I apologize for posting something that others considered informative, and will refrain from doing so in the future.
Strawman. The problem wasn't that you posted something informative, but that you intentionally delayed it for a vanity/karma post. It's not something you necessarily should apologize for, but intentionally withholding information from the original posting -- that most people will read -- so you can post it later and get karma, is sleazy.
This has been one of the most anticipated pieces of information dealing with a product which has dominated this any many other news sites. I fail to see how it isn't a valid piece of information that many people were curious about.
Yes, it's anticipated because some sites hype it up. As an advertiser I would love for my product to have this kind of free promotion. It necessarily has a network affect whereby hype generates hype.
Wow, now that one stings! It's almost like you found something factually incorrect with the content of the submission!
I'm just saying, maybe work on including definite articles in your writing?
-Dave Schroeder found a great opportunity to nab some karma.
-Slashdot is partly an advertisement site, as nothing else can explain this "story". Remind me how many other advertisers get to have every new detail about upcoming products made into a/. story?
-Dave Schroeder has a deep, abiding fear of using "the".
Heh, knowing Linux programmers, I bet if you let *them* monkey around with a *completely different planet*, they will somehow screw up earth. Hey, some Ubuntu guys made it so that intalling Ubuntu on a separate hard drive could prohibit access to any OS. Why not go for the glory?
I didn't mention it because I was discussing the possibility of terraforming, in which you'd modify the planet enough to be like earth without continual maintenance. But I suppose a biosphere could count as terraforming as well, in which case the rest of the post would be moot.
Re:Mmmm, chocolate...
on
ATM Turns 40
·
· Score: 1
This is pretty interesting, that's exactly the same process that a few Indian grad student friends of mines said happened when they got phones for their villages. They had short numbers which then got longer.
A few others made the same point, and I disagree. Presumably, whoever does this (and whoever tries to settle) will have an earth presence. Earth governments will be capable of seizing the earth-assets of those deemed to be acting wrongly, and will thus have that leverage against those who act (in our opinion) wrongly, at least once the information reaches earth. So physical defense of Mars territories will probably not suffice.
Re:Mmmm, chocolate...
on
ATM Turns 40
·
· Score: 1
Not many people in England had phones at the time, so the namespace for phone numbers only required four digits. *please mod flamebait, please mod flamebait*
This is an interesting question for property rights theorists. Many people adhere to some sort of Lockean view that by modifying this untouched land, the terraforming organization then owns all of Mars. But then some would say it's a sort of "common heritage" that can't be so privatized. It's also extremely difficult to just terraform "one part" of Mars. (Imagine keeping one part at 1 atm and the rest at Mars's regular atmospheric pressure.)
Regardless, anyone who goes through the expense of terraforming Mars, even a government, is going to want some assurance that the rest of humanity won't leech off their work.
I thought the same thing, so I was confused. But then I realized that if you read it, it can be interpreted to mean *any* software. That is, someone reading that part could believe that "Linux software" encourages users to freely distribute/modify proprietary software.
Yes, in that one niche area.If you train it by doing long division in your head, for example, you would soon get very, very good at long division.
I don't think so. What you are learning to do is not just the e.g. long division, but rather, exciting some specific, externally-identifiable brain process. With practice, you'd learn precisely the range of thoughts that will activate the brainreader. That would, in turn, make you better able to control precisely which kind of thoughts your brain is using. I find it hard to believe this kind of exercising of your brain wouldn't spill over into some other aptitude.
I can't wait till I can buy one of these things. I figure with practice, you can increase the precision of your thought and thus the number of signals you can give. Conceivably, you'd be able to enter text as quickly as you can think it.
Would increasing the use of your brain like this, to give commands, make you smarter in some way, as well?
Slashdot Mirror
What do I care for your suffering? Pain, even agony, is no
more than information before the senses, data fed to the
computer of the mind. The lesson is simple: you have received
the information, now act on it. Take control of the input and
you shall become master of the output.
-- Chairman Sheng-ji Yang,
"Essays on Mind and Matter"
(another Alpha Centauri quote)
There's disable people out there living terribly poor quality lives.. they could be playing WoW.
Charles Dickens called. He wants Scrooge's misanthropy back.
Methinks that video game spending is not the same as video game profits.
My point was that, as video games make up a larger market (on par with music, in this case), they become harder to trivialize, not that there is some profit/artistic merit threshold. The same thing happened with cinema, which at one point wasn't considered real art.
So this means the mainstream media and academia will accept video games as a legitimate artistic medium in 3..2...
Oh, be consistent, mods! I always plummet to -1 when I joke about Brazilians googling "bond default", "non-inflationary currency", "learn English", and "squatter legal defense".
And that happens more often than you might think. (My joking about Brazil, I mean.)
Ok, so, out of all this, you still think I posted to karma whore. It is my firm belief that my karma was already maxed out
/. being used to advertise a product.
/. turning into advertisements.
So what? I don't care what you claim to believe. It doesn't matter what motivates you to make posts like you did. It could be for karma. It could be to see yourself get modded up early. It could be to get your name out there and get your beloved geek cred. I don't know what motivates you to karma whore (or more specifically, make posts that get modded up regardless of net karma contribution), and I don't really care which motive you chose. You deliberately withheld information so that could be ride in and be "informative".
See above.
No. "Above" does not explain what was so special about the unique circumstances behind your post that REQUIRED you to spread it across posts. You only say that you wanted to spread it. Yeah. We know that.
That's the easy part: it's the part where you implied that because karma whores post to get modded up, that any post (especially posted by the submitter) that gets modded up must be made by a karma whore.
Ah, nothing like seeing the condescending invocation of a logical fallacy unravel!
That wasn't the argument. As others and I have pointed out to you, it wasn't the "posting informatively" that makes you a karma whore; it was degrading the content of your submission so you could include it in a later karma-allowable post. And it was based on logical probability, not logical necessity.
You can understand how one would think the "it" in "it's anticipated because [...]" refers to iPhone plan pricing,
No, I can't. If you had enough attention span to read things in context, you'd see my complaint (from the beginning) was about
me:So why apply this outrage selectively?
you:That's a whole other argument.
Yeah -- if your attention span doesn't reach back to my initial post, part of which complained about
But that still doesn't change the fact that this was notable, anticipated, and news a lot of people were waiting for.
Each tiny detail is "notable" because people like you feed the hype and make it news. Again, why apply the advertising outrage selectively? Wouldn't it be just as bad to report "special discounts" coming up on Dell systems?
Yes, this really doesn't matter. And I feel the need to respond because you seem like one of those people who paints your opponent in any argument/discussion as ignorant or as using fallacious reasoning, and if I didn't respond, then the assumption is that you're "right".
Projection, much? I respond because I don't like to see idiots get away with ridiculous arguments that appeal to the biases of the readers. Less obviously-flawed arguments? Fine. Flawed arguments that don't appeal to pre-existing biases? Fine. Obviously-flawed arguments that appeal to pre-existing biases? Not so fine.
I posted because I wanted to post that information
Of course -- just not in the original submission where more people would see it and you couldn't get modded up.
No, we'd call it astro-turfing.
... jedermann wird sterben usw."
I wonder what these German editors will be like...
"Ja, und jedermann soll sofort eine Kompaktleuchtstofflampe kaufen, oder
Well, there was that tax on Zyklon-B...
*ducks*
Cool, thanks for the clarification. Now, for the hard part: define A and B, and say where I made such a statement.
Again, since the karma index maxes out, and I'm (probably) already at the max, why do I need more karma, again? If you can explain that, I'd be grateful.
/. assists in their plans to manipulate the public. /.ers are typically livid about the pain that advertisements are. So why apply this outrage selectively? [1]
Okay, sure:
IF a) I believe your karma index has maxed out and IF b) Slashcode is transparent enough that it does what they claim it does (!), and IF c) you have control over when a topic comes up where you're going to say something unpopular, THEN you have nothing to gain from karma whoring.
However, a) I don't, b) it isn't, and c) you don't.[1]
I wasn't writing a book review or a journal entry; that information is superfluous to the main point of the submission, which is that Apple and AT&T finally released information on plans.
Right -- in other words, you didn't want to. I know you didn't want to. That was the whole point! You didn't want to include that information upfront, so you could karma whore. I get that. [1]
All of your arguments seem to be based on you thinking I'm trying to "get karma" for the purpose of "criticizing sacred cows".
No, it's not based on any one reason for karma whoring. [1]
Not everyone who posts things that get modded up quickly are "karma whores".
Sure -- just the people who deliberately degrade the usefulness of their posts so that they can spread the information across several and get more karma. [1]
And if you want to bring logical fallacies into it
Which did I make? [1]
I fail to see how it's my fault that this submission itself was anticipated.
I was claiming the(!) iPhone was anticipated, not the submission. [1]
you want to argue that posting them is "part of the problem", sure, I guess I'd agree with that,
Good.
It's appropriate to refer to many branded products such as iPhone as "iPhone" or "the iPhone", and I specifically choose to use the former
Right -- it was a conscious choice to play along. I think it's unfair to be selective about which advertisers
[1]Yeah, I know, I'm belaboring a minor point, and this whole subthread has gone way out of proportion to its significance. But if Dave Schroeder is going to defend is position with riduculous arguments and misrepresentations, I might as well correct them.
My karma is already excellent,
So? Some people need to build up karma buffers for when they want to criticize sacred cows. I would know. Nothing wrong with building up karma of course, but there's a reason they call them "karma whores".
If you're talking about my post, it contains more detailed information that wasn't appropriate for the submission.
Right, because there has never been a story that had a "read the remaining 28084 bytes" on it.
I apologize for posting something that others considered informative, and will refrain from doing so in the future.
Strawman. The problem wasn't that you posted something informative, but that you intentionally delayed it for a vanity/karma post. It's not something you necessarily should apologize for, but intentionally withholding information from the original posting -- that most people will read -- so you can post it later and get karma, is sleazy.
This has been one of the most anticipated pieces of information dealing with a product which has dominated this any many other news sites. I fail to see how it isn't a valid piece of information that many people were curious about.
Yes, it's anticipated because some sites hype it up. As an advertiser I would love for my product to have this kind of free promotion. It necessarily has a network affect whereby hype generates hype.
Wow, now that one stings! It's almost like you found something factually incorrect with the content of the submission!
I'm just saying, maybe work on including definite articles in your writing?
-Dave Schroeder found a great opportunity to nab some karma.
/. story?
-Slashdot is partly an advertisement site, as nothing else can explain this "story". Remind me how many other advertisers get to have every new detail about upcoming products made into a
-Dave Schroeder has a deep, abiding fear of using "the".
Yeah, well, wasn't that GMC's slogan? Apparently, they take "one thing" to mean "make cars and run the world's largest health insurance plan". Go fig.
Heh, knowing Linux programmers, I bet if you let *them* monkey around with a *completely different planet*, they will somehow screw up earth. Hey, some Ubuntu guys made it so that intalling Ubuntu on a separate hard drive could prohibit access to any OS. Why not go for the glory?
I'm trying to think ... which response would be wittier:
1) Yeah, but they missed the application deadline.
2) Let's see, invest $100 billion, get $2 million in 40 years. BRILLIANT!
3) They would apply, but "The probability of success is 100% minus epsilon" doesn't mean what you and I think it does.
Yes, I know that domes exist :-P
I didn't mention it because I was discussing the possibility of terraforming, in which you'd modify the planet enough to be like earth without continual maintenance. But I suppose a biosphere could count as terraforming as well, in which case the rest of the post would be moot.
This is pretty interesting, that's exactly the same process that a few Indian grad student friends of mines said happened when they got phones for their villages. They had short numbers which then got longer.
Although that was probably more in the 80s.
A few others made the same point, and I disagree. Presumably, whoever does this (and whoever tries to settle) will have an earth presence. Earth governments will be capable of seizing the earth-assets of those deemed to be acting wrongly, and will thus have that leverage against those who act (in our opinion) wrongly, at least once the information reaches earth. So physical defense of Mars territories will probably not suffice.
Not many people in England had phones at the time, so the namespace for phone numbers only required four digits. *please mod flamebait, please mod flamebait*
This is an interesting question for property rights theorists. Many people adhere to some sort of Lockean view that by modifying this untouched land, the terraforming organization then owns all of Mars. But then some would say it's a sort of "common heritage" that can't be so privatized. It's also extremely difficult to just terraform "one part" of Mars. (Imagine keeping one part at 1 atm and the rest at Mars's regular atmospheric pressure.)
Regardless, anyone who goes through the expense of terraforming Mars, even a government, is going to want some assurance that the rest of humanity won't leech off their work.
Answer: Never attribute to marice, that which can be exprained by stupidity.
I thought the same thing, so I was confused. But then I realized that if you read it, it can be interpreted to mean *any* software. That is, someone reading that part could believe that "Linux software" encourages users to freely distribute/modify proprietary software.
Well, Slashdot *does* keep the ads up even if you subscribe and turn them all off...
Yes, in that one niche area.If you train it by doing long division in your head, for example, you would soon get very, very good at long division.
I don't think so. What you are learning to do is not just the e.g. long division, but rather, exciting some specific, externally-identifiable brain process. With practice, you'd learn precisely the range of thoughts that will activate the brainreader. That would, in turn, make you better able to control precisely which kind of thoughts your brain is using. I find it hard to believe this kind of exercising of your brain wouldn't spill over into some other aptitude.
I can't wait till I can buy one of these things. I figure with practice, you can increase the precision of your thought and thus the number of signals you can give. Conceivably, you'd be able to enter text as quickly as you can think it.
Would increasing the use of your brain like this, to give commands, make you smarter in some way, as well?