If you swap caps with control, then in vim you can use Control-[ for escape, which is also a pretty good option. (That's what I do.)

The problem I had was I wanted to map the CapsLock key to Control, and the LeftCtrl key to Hyper. There are built-in xkb rules for doing both, but they don't work right when you try to combine them, and the documentation available for xkb is hard to understand, to say the least. I finally got it working by hacking one of the rules definitions in the system-provided definition files to do what I wanted -- I gave up trying to figure out how to do it the "right" way.

Unfortunately it's hard to get xmodmap to play nicely in cases like hotplugging keyboards or using Gnome, at least under Linux. There is a standard option for swapping caps lock and control (or escape, or several other similar options), but if you want a layout option that isn't built-in, then prepare yourself for a world of frustration.

You could also invest in a tool to remap the key next to 'A' to "Control," like God intended. You don't need to get a whole new keyboard. Write on the key with a marker if you're the kind of person that looks at key labels when you're typing.

If you click through to the "article," you'll get a long list of ten-word sentences formatted as tweets. When did this become an even remotely acceptable way of presenting something?

Good lord. If you work for Google, can't you figure out how to create a blog? My mother did it.

Unless for some bizarre reason you are purposefully trying to avoid non-GMO food, then you shouldn't care.

If you want to ensure that you are buying non-GMO food -- which is what the anti-GMO activists want -- then all you have to do is buy food that is so marked. This law doesn't change that at all.

Considering this, I find the fact that the numbers of spouses with the same college major is as low as it is -- 10% on average according to TFA -- to be a little surprising.

No, "why one is a problem" is only obvious to SJWs. The rest of us don't see that targeting advertising towards a particular demographic is a problem.

Well, "management-imposed restraints" doesn't actually answer the question of why, so your question wasn't unreasonable.

Based on the trajectory of Slashdot after the Dice takeover, though, presumably the real answer for "why" is "because our managers are total morons."

Perhaps this source will help.

In chromium/chrome, you can save the file as "nobennett.user.js" and drag it from your file manager onto the chrome://extensions page; chrome will then give you a popup to ask you to confirm.

In firefox, you can install it using the Greasemonkey plugin.

There might be other options for other browsers; this was the first/only user script I've ever written, so I don't know all the tricks.

I was surprised to find this show up on the Slashdot front page, and then realized that since the last time we had a Bennett post, I had switched computers, and so my user script to block them was no longer installed. Since I'd already seen it, though, I figured I'd post a link to the script again: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/3235db049b18699c082b#file-gistfile1-txt.

This article isn't as stupid as Bennett's normal tripe; at least he seems to have identified a real issue here, although Slashdot is still allowing him to use their website as his personal blog. One amusing thing, though: he's complaining that United isn't responding to his emails about the hole. I've asked Slashdot repeatedly (through both e-mail and comment threads) to make it possible for us to block Bennett posts, or at least to comment on why they won't. The Slashdot staff have, so far, completely ignored me. They have apparently been too busy adding "share to TwitBook" buttons to the stories.

The program under discussion isn't serving a predominately female community.

The post I referenced in my original reply that you objected to said:

If your point is just that most people don't hate the videos enough to complain about them in the comment section, then there's no point arguing further, because we agree.

Roblimo made the claim that a sparse number of complaints is evidence that people like them. That seemed to be what you were defending as well, but if that's not the case, then it doesn't matter.

My post has nothing to do with an assumption that everyone shares my dislike.

My point is that Roblimo has absolutely no proof that thousands of people like these videos. Neither do you, unless you've got a stash of private communication from people that like them. You're making a leap that there is some silent majority that enjoys them, but doesn't talk about them, because otherwise you'd expect more negative comments.

You could be right. I think that's doubtful, given the reasons I've outlined already -- the total of your evidence seems to be that I should "rest assured" that you're right -- but short of taking a poll I can't prove it.

Or alternatively -- and just as reasonable a guess -- only the people who have an extreme dislike for the videos post complaining about them, and the far more who do not post on the subject just don't feel strongly enough about it to complain. I fall into that category; I haven't complained about the video, but I think that a video interview is an extremely poor medium for conveying information.

People come to Slashdot for the comment section. Presumably, if there actually existed a large number (thousands) of people that like these videos, then they would respond to some of the negative comments. That rarely happens.

The complainers have had a positive effect, by the way. Originally there were rarely transcripts of the videos, which made them useless to anyone who has better things to do with their lives than watch them. I doubt we would have ended up getting transcripts for most videos if it wasn't for the complaints.