Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:This (Score 1) 207

You must be kidding. ASCII isn't even sufficient to write English, let alone the many other languages which genuinely benefit from being typeable.

Strange, I never had a problem with it, and the abc's taught in English classes are a subset of it. Also, you didn't seem to have a problem expressing your thoughts in English, without unicode :-)

Code pages were a much simpler solution that worked.

Comment Too bad they're doing it wrong ... (Score 1) 129

It's not just people posting insults in the internet who are trolls. On the other hand, maybe they're just trolling us?

It's s stupid idea. There's enough crap floating around on the internet - there's no need to add to the visual blight on the landscape, in what will surely turn into a contest to see who can get their stuff featured on a billboard. In other words, they need to read up on the law of unintended consequences. Or talk to Barbra Streisand ... :-)

Comment Re: Unbelievable (Score 1) 593

Really? So you find nothing wrong with Paul telling slaves that if they can't win their freedom, they should be content? Nonsense - owning someone is not an expression of love or kindness.

To look down on someone living as gay is in conflict w/His teachings. Two entirely different things. Someone behaving gay cannot be a Christian anymore than a murderer or rapist can. However if they repent

Then there are a lot of non-christian priests and pastors and deacons out there. Also, where do you draw the line beyond which someone "cannot be a Christian?" If you don't allow minor sins, nobody can be a christian, because nobody can even know all the little sins they commit.

So where are you going to put transsexuals like me? Who, if anyone, would I be allowed to marry without "sinning?" Remember, "the Word" is silent on this topic.

Comment Re: The latest version as well? (Score 1) 59

I have no problem with gays, lesbians, bisexuals, drag queens, whatever - except that their attitude towards us is like a useless appendage - handy to drag out when it gains "the community" something, but otherwise ignored, or worse, blurring the line between cross-dressers, etc., and transsexuals, helping perpetuate the myth that transsexuals are really gay men in dresses.

Toxic? You betcha! "Chuck you Farley Brown! I don't need you to tell me what I am or how to live my life" is probably a pretty muted response.

Comment Re: The latest version as well? (Score 1) 59

Gays, Lesbians, and Bisexuals are about sexual practices. Transgendered is a bastardized term that includes cross-dressers and drag queens, which is a sexual fetish (not that I'm criticizing this, to each their own, etc). Unfortunately, even in the LGBT, many people think that transsexuals are really just gay cross-dressers. This attitude comes from the top down, as many of the influential LGBT organizations are directed exclusively by gay white men.

They don't get that transsexuals are different - live brain scans have proven that our brains resemble our target gender both in sexually dimorphic areas, and in the overall networking. Even the general public is often more enlightened ,,, sheesh! When they argue that they've helped transsexuals by having drag queens on their floats, it's way past time to take them seriously.

Not that I ever had contact with any LGBT groups - didn't need to deal with their crap in addition to my own :-) But I see others buying into the whole "you need to let us keep you safe in our gay ghetto because it's a safe space where we all can live authentic lives" bullcrap. Sure, I've known a few gays and lesbians, but that doesn't mean that I need their weird brand of withdraw-from-the-world protection - I leave that to the cults.

We achieved social acceptance long before gays came out of the closet - Christine Jorgensen is a good example of early fame and fortune. We got this reception because the vast majority of people are curious. It was only when the gay rights movement came out and started rioting that we got caught in the back-splash of religious intolerance. So, in a way, they've been riding our coat-tails to a certain extent. After all, we could marry in our target gender without enabling legislation, they couldn't.

The worst part is, if you say any of this, "you're harming the community." My message to them is "You're not my community. My community is family, friends, neighbors, acquaintances ... without respect to color, ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender, physical or mental illness, etc ...." Rather than hiding in a gay ghetto because I need protection to live an authentic life (btw - how the heck do you live an authentic life when you're so paranoid about the rest of the world???) I help shape the world around me to be my "safe space" - for everyone.

I also don't like the bogus "self-affirming" games that transsexuals in the LGBT movement play ... the latest one was "this year we should all wear purple to mark the Transgender Day of Remembrance." A pretty safe thing to do because nobody outside their little group even knows what it signifies ... and if it ever gets to the point where people do, will they be pressured to out themselves by cooperating? This is slacktivism. Why not wear a T-shirt that says "Yes, I am a transsexual. Any questions for me?" and a big smiley face to invite discussion. I'd wear it to the mall ... but them? "Oh noes!" "Too dangerous!" They wouldn't dare take any action to pay it forward in memory of those who fought for our rights before us. No wonder they feel they have to hide in the gay ghetto to have their "safe spaces" and lead their circumscribed "authentic lives." Deep down, they are ashamed.

Stockholm Syndrome is what it is.

Comment Re:GPL enforcement? I don't want to be involved! (Score 1) 44

If you create a closed-source derivative of bsd-licenced software AND DISTRIBUTE IT, the derivative is not as free as the original. Users of the derivative are being deprived of freedoms that existed in the original. They dont have the ability to modify the original parts of the derivative once its binary only.

And be honest with yourself, if you create a closed source derivative of BSD licensed software would you be doing it mostly for the benefit of yourself or for others ?

Absolute freedom is a fantasy, absolute freedom permits people to take away other peoples freedom (to have power over them), once that happens freedom is no longer absolute.

The distributed binary is just as free as the original binary. And they DO have the EXACT SAME freedom I have - to develop their own derivative from the same source I used. Not my problem if they don't have the talent - they can always hire someone else to do it. What they don't have is the right to tell me what I have to do.

If I create a closed-source bsd-licensed derivative, OR my own completely original or derivative BSD-licensed code, that is MY choice. The people who have hired me to work on software, either as an employee or as a contractor, didn't give out the source code, and that is why they could afford to pay me. Same with almost everyone who works in the software biz. Open source is not a obligatory, nor is it desirable in many cases (like when you want to eat).

However, closed source does NOT limit other people's freedoms - they are, as I pointed out, free to use the same original source to make their own derivative. And they're free to release the source or not when they distribute binaries, as they wish, unlike the GPL.

There is nothing preventing users of the derivative to develop their own version using their own skills to create their own derivative from the same source I use, so users have the same freedoms I have. If they don't have the skills, sucks to be them but I don't owe it to them to give them my source. They have other options, such as paying someone else to develop their own derivative.

Comment Re:This is *SO* unethical ! (Score 1) 246

There's a HUGE difference between "these changes will be effective immediately" and "these changes will be effective retroactively."

I don't see anything being done retroactively. They are merely changing the code for displaying user names going forward. Without a time machine they cannot retroactively change the HTML generated in the past. But effective immediately, the database field user names will be pulled from for display purposed will change from User.Alias to User.FullName. Nothing retroactive about it, from a legal stance that it (although IANAL). From a moral stance, it is more murky.

Modern content management systems store comments, etc, in a database and dynamically change the page as the data changes. Example - change your sig, and then go look at your old posts - they will all have the new sig.

Comment Re:This is *SO* unethical ! (Score 1) 246

Ethics, schmethics! The lesson to learn is to never give out your real name, use prepaid cards and throw-away email, and if they snoop your IP, use a proxy.

Sure, but some of us would rather give them the opportunity to do something dickish and then hold their feet to the fire - otherwise, it will just continue and eventually become "best practices" and "industry standard" :-)

Comment Re:This is *SO* unethical ! (Score 1) 246

"They are breaking the terms under which posters made their previous posts."

Did you read the terms? I didn't -- never signed up for that site. I have ready many terms of sites I have signed up for and virtually all of those include some line where they can change the terms in the future. Not saying they had that -- but you are talking as if you read the terms and know exactly what it says and are full of righteous indignation.

If you haven't read the terms, then you are full of something other than righteous indignation. I leave exactly what that is up to the reader's imagination.

They themselves are admitting that the previous terms allowed anonymous posting, and that this change will be made retroactively unless you tell them by the day after Christmas to delete all your comments. Or did you not even read the summary???

If anything, they should make the default, if any, be to remove all anonymous comments unless you give them permission to show your real name. Even though even that is stupider than just enacting the new policy going forward, and leaving comments posted under the previous policy the way they were.

Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a rock.