Comment: Re:Crowdsource the effort (Score 1) 336
Wow -1 Flamebait? I guess all you song and movie torrenters have taken over Slashdot.
|
|
Wow -1 Flamebait? I guess all you song and movie torrenters have taken over Slashdot.
Shameless articles about torturing animals (even insects are beneath this) and astroturfing posts cheering them on. Wag of the finger, site I used to love...
It's cooperative effort to confront a huge, insidious problem on the internet. I'm as paranoid about government control, but this is hardly a blip flashing on my radar. My only problem is that by giving Homeland Security a vital role, it's that much more unlikely that it'll ever go away.
That's ridiculous analogy. You want to treat cancer by incinerating victims, too? But, since there's a slam on MS, I see you're getting modded up.
I think I know what you're implying. It's a very common refrain to claim that the US doesn't really have much poverty based on metrics like TV ownership. But, the cost of luxury tech items in relation to salaries is far different today. Fifty years ago, owning a TV was like buying a used car. Hell, I can get the big screen I bought 5 years ago at 1/4 the price and much higher quality (damn it!). Never mind the depreciation of buying these items used. Same with a PC.
No, you can't compare poverty in sub-Saharan Africa to poverty in the worst of Detroit's slums, but it's poverty nonetheless.
Yes, it's a waste apparently when poor people do it, because they're poor. For the rest of us, it's good old fashioned American technology-based entertainment.
Which NASA buried all those probes into Martian soil?
It's the lack of willingness to pay for it.
Pretty weak excuse that is. Practically every forum has some sort of rating or "flag this" system. Plus, a heuristics system can flag content that needs to be screened. No one needs to slog through 8 hours/day of "my baby is so smart" videos.
That theoretical figure might be an excuse not to hire screeners for 100% coverage, but not an excuse to do nothing.
I've seen far too many contemporaneous and historical political pages being modified for political purposes, usually to water down or outright whitewash a scandal. Heck, even some scientific content I wouldn't bother reading on Wikipedia if there was a strong enough political angle; e.g. climate change or the nuclear industry.
Life. Don't talk to me about life. - Marvin the Paranoid Anroid