Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment He's trolling and you fell for it (Score 2) 122

You really don't think he understands the irony of his request?
You really don't think he understands (or was explained) the flimsy legal basis for his request?
You really don't think he knew that the headline "Man who violated privacy upset about privacy violation" was going to spread like crack?

Please do not feed the trolls
Please do not reward the media whores.

Comment Re: Bad move (Score 1) 375

You have made a great point. A major point.
Firstly, if implemented, it affects the ranking of a (e.g.) pseudo-science website. It shouldn't hopefully cut it out.
Let's keep real though:
$10,000 network cables for hi fi systems? That's pseudo science.
Any website that mentions 'Turanean' is now pseudo science -even though at one point in time it was an academically acceptable term.
There are a million+ monkey wrenches.
If I write a blog on Atlantean or review a book written by a pseudo-scolar, how does my ranking change? Will it eventually fall off the end and we'll be denied (as far as Google is concerned), fair ranking?
Also, what about free speech? How do "Women against Feminism" rank as it can be argued that it is not politically correct? How does an algorithm cater for all the nuances? What about Stormfront or any site that attacks political correctness?
What if the atheists take control? Where else can I find treatise on Fire Temples and Zoroastrianism?
Someone wrote once "From little bird turds do big ones grow." and I think that is the wedge here. Once you do that, you start losing access to information. And it is sooo easy to drive that wedge harder.
From that we can ask the question if Google has the right to be the world guide in ethics, morality, philosophy and cosmology. About a year or so ago, I have started using different search engines with improved results. Having another language helps too.

Comment Re:can't wait to see it work on fox news web site (Score 2, Interesting) 375

that's a valid complaint

some scientific discoveries go against conventional wisdom and are originally ridiculed. for example, some australian scientists discovered stomach ulcers are caused by a certain species of bacteria in the 1980s. they were rejected, laughed at, people got angry at them. the belief at the time was acid and spicy food formed ulcers. wrong. eventually they won the nobel prize for medicine for their discovery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

but this process is mediated by serious researchers who, adhering to the scientific method, are compelled to reverse themselves in spite of their preliminary reactions

meanwhile, we have antivaxxers, moon landing deniers, GM food ignorance, creationists, climate change deniers, fluoride fearmongers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists babbling about burning airplane fuel and steel, etc... assorted douchebag crackpots who are absolutely, undeniably factually wrong, and oftentimes dangerous (to public health, for example), but enthusiastically keep spreading their lies nonetheless

stupid shitbags like this for example are working very, very hard to kill children:

http://njvaccinationchoice.org...

not they they understand their efforts only work to kill children: they're ignorant braindead assholes, pridefully arrogant in their lack of education

so they need to be shut down in other ways. your freedom to be a moron ends when your beliefs put my life and liberty in danger. so thank you, google

google's algorithm would downplay revolutionary new scientific evidence, like the ulcer causing bacterium, indeed. but this is a short time period, squarely in the realm of brand new scientific research, where, after enough weight, change would come quickly, and so to google's algorithm, if it gets its signals from solid peer reviewed journals that present genuine science

meanwhile, lies and idiocy are not peer reviewed and grow like fungus in the dark and will never, ever change

so they need to be buried at the bottom of google as the brain numbing, sometimes genuinely dangerous puerile prideful ignorance they are

Comment Re: The Only Desktop Environment I Use (Score 1) 91

It's probably because many users of XFCE don't need all the extra functions of other DEs and don't realize that other people do.

I use Xfce for a number of reasons. One of them is the fact that it's easy to customize without installing third-party extensions. I also like the fact that if your needs are simple you can get rid of bells, whistles and gongs that you don't need. However, I fully understand that there are people who either need or want those tools (If anybody should understand that it's me; I use Compiz because I like the flashy desktop effects.) and I appreciate the fact that they're there if you need or want them. For me, one of the important traits of Linux is the ability to decide for yourself what tools you need or want instead of being stuck with what the developers think you want and I'll probably stick with Xfce as long as that's what it provides.

Comment Re:sorry (Score 1) 57

where do you think the "billboard" numbers originate?

Try Tin Pan Alley which was the origin of the billboard numbers. Wikipedia has a good take on it. I'll quote below, that a lot of Rock and Pop actually came from Negro Ragtime, Cakewalk and Blues tunes, although Ragtime and Cakewalk were arguably White genre 'Black' music.
"Initially Tin Pan Alley specialized in melodramatic ballads and comic novelty songs, but it embraced the newly popular styles of the cakewalk and ragtime music. Later on jazz and blues were incorporated, although less completely, as Tin Pan Alley was oriented towards producing songs that amateur singers or small town bands could perform from printed music. In the 1910s and 1920s Tin Pan Alley published pop-songs and dance numbers created in newly popular jazz and blues styles"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Honky Tonk (Tin Pan Alley piano)
http://www.last.fm/music/Winif...

Google

Google Wants To Rank Websites Based On Facts Not Links 375

wabrandsma writes about Google's new system for ranking the truthfulness of a webpage. "Google's search engine currently uses the number of incoming links to a web page as a proxy for quality, determining where it appears in search results. So pages that many other sites link to are ranked higher. This system has brought us the search engine as we know it today, but the downside is that websites full of misinformation can rise up the rankings, if enough people link to them. Google research team is adapting that model to measure the trustworthiness of a page, rather than its reputation across the web. Instead of counting incoming links, the system – which is not yet live – counts the number of incorrect facts within a page. 'A source that has few false facts is considered to be trustworthy,' says the team. The score they compute for each page is its Knowledge-Based Trust score. The software works by tapping into the Knowledge Vault, the vast store of facts that Google has pulled off the internet. Facts the web unanimously agrees on are considered a reasonable proxy for truth. Web pages that contain contradictory information are bumped down the rankings."

Slashdot Top Deals

"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android

Working...