Like others I found the headline confusing. I read it as "Researchers are predicting the use of Wikipedia as a vector for the spread of disease". This may mean that:
Wait, slashdot is posting a story about lack of "editing, peer review, and proofreading"? That, good sirs, is irony.
Read some recent history. Ask your dad.
No. I ran out on his mother for a reason.
If gals are attacked simply for being female, you'd have a point.
Sorry. The hashtag isn't #yesallmenexceptgmhowell
Glad to see the concept of 'original sin' is alive and well.
They've already demonstrated themselves to be lazy, incompetent, and largely indifferent to security.
Maybe. Or maybe they're just cheap.
Holy shit. First post (that I can see at my threshold) captures things in their entirety. Are you sure you belong on slashdot?
You can't fix stupid.
You can fire them though.
Not if they're a GS employee.
Check out the latest Matt Taibi piece in Rolling Stone about the slap on the wrist the bankers got from the DOJ.
So, I guess you want to take away the people's right to choose their own fate.
So, are you coming out as a straight-up anarchist, then?
I thought that was a given.
Expect any posts that point to disappeared posts to be disappeared as well, with the account modbombed into oblivion and permanent '-2' status.
Be careful for what you wish for, please. I'm worried those "flags" might be doing something inappropriate.
But of course they are.
Eleven comments and nothing by the GNAA? There might be hope for slashdot after all.
I don't know that I would categorize movies as 'spoon feeding' the audience. Maybe you need to find better movies:)
But what I will say is that there exist different media for different purposes.
Depends on what the goal of the author is, and the length of the work. Not a place for a hard and fast rule.
"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde
