Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Conversation or Propaganda (Score 1) 42 42

also to engage in the much-needed conversation of diversifying the tech field with more pluralistic perspectives.

LOL yeah, why don't you try actually clicking that link and reading the comments. /. was totally fed up with this "much needed" agenda (and the spurious justifications for it) well over six months ago.

Comment Fair to Say (Score 1) 550 550

Except neither side was willing to let any of that go. That's the problem I had with it.

Well, I concede you've got me there.

As I've said before, Slashdot's ownership/editors soon realized that straightforwardly anti-Gamergate articles were getting soundly debunked in the comments, so they stopped mentioning it directly in the title or summary (the recent Brianna Wu interview is rare in that regard, at least these days).

Instead, they've posted countless articles with the same pattern: "Harrassment, mysogyny, threats. Harrassment, mysogyny, threats . . . oh btw Gamergate" (i.e. they attempted to wrap GG in identity politics). Many /. users (including me) still recognized the propaganda for what it was and call it out. Yes, I admit it's very difficult for me to "let that go" unchallenged. Fortunately, even that editor tactic didn't work for very long.

Comment The Accusation (Score 2) 550 550

Nathan Grayson wrote an article that gave positive coverage to Zoe Quinn’s Depression Quest, without disclosing that he was thanked in the credits and clearly knew Quinn. DQ was only one of 50 games covered in the two paragraph article, yet was somehow singled out in three ways:
a) The article’s title “Admission Quest” was a play on DQ’s title.
b) The only screenshot (a huge background to the title) featured from any of the games was from DQ.
c) DQ was the first game (of only four) mentioned in the very short prose, praised as a “powerful Twine darling.”

Grayson wrote another article about Quinn’s role in a failed game jam TV show, painting her in a positive light. Despite the fact that the two were good enough friends to have planned an upcoming trip to Vegas together, this article also failed to disclose their relationship.

You can try to ignore the accusation, censor and libel those who exposed what Grayson did, or try to strawman the accusation into something else . . . but none of that makes it go away.

Comment I Could've Lived With That (Score 1) 550 550

Point being, I'm actually quite glad that Slashdot didn't add Gamergate to the stinking, festering pile of identity politics it already took upon itself to be responsible for.

I would have been all for /. simply covering the journalism scandal (and resulting failed blackout&censorship, and eventual reform to ethics policies) and leaving identity politics out of it. Problem is, they tried to do the exact opposite and it blew up spectactularly in their faces.

Comment Everybody List What You Think Went Wrong (Score 3, Insightful) 550 550

For me, the three* agendas of this /. regime that best demonstrate how out-of-touch it's been with the users (if not outright saying "fuck you" to them) are:

1. ramrodding of Beta down everyone's throats
2. shameful attempt to ignore Gamergate (still not a single article on /. covering the journalism scandal, when there should have been at least one for each of a dozen or so events/milestones), and later (after the cover-up and news blackout didn't work) joining the campaign to intimidate and libel those who spoke out against the corruption
3. constant stories about women being less represented in STEM vs. the general population, with analysis of the cause always limited to accusations of sexism (and devoid of analysis of innate female preferences, or corporate agendas designed to inflate the workforce)
* Honorable mention for Bennett Haselton

The Company, however, has not successfully leveraged the Slashdot user base to further Dice's digital recruitment business

I, for one, am damn proud you were also unable to "leverage" the user base against Gamergate in order to protect corrupt journalists and fall in line with rest of the colluding outlets who tried to cover up the scandal and smear the dissenters (fuck knows why you thought it was a good idea to try). Countless other forums outright banned pro-GG discussion, and Slashdot's long history of user moderation and fierce opposition to censorship must have been a much-needed thorn in your side.

Comment Mod Parent Up (Score 1) 91 91

Yes, Ouya lied about openness and only revealed the truth in (now deleted) forum posts shortly before launch.

Here's what the Kickstarter page said about openness and hackability:


Hackers welcome. Have at it: It's easy to root (and rooting won't void your warranty). Everything opens with standard screws. Hardware hackers can create their own peripherals, and connect via USB or Bluetooth. You want our hardware design? Let us know. We might just give it to you. Surprise us!

But close to release, I decided to never buy one after I learned that the company didn't support a genuine end user recovery mode, and witnessed an Ouya employee (Al Sutton) berating and insulting the customers who insisted on one.

His attitude about custom firmware was shocking as well.

From a long-dead ouyaforum.com thread:

I'm keeping a track of how many requests we get relating custom firmware, and from what I'm seeing the user base is not as interested in custom firmware as you might think, which is echoed by this thread (we've shipped 60,000+ units, and less than 10 people have commented in the last month in this thread about getting access to recovery mode).That doesn't mean that we're shooting the idea down, you need to keep in mind that in terms of priorities this is way down the list as you'd expect from any feature where it's being requested by less than one tenth of one percent of the user-base.

After people began calling Al Sutton out over this and citing the Kickstarter page to him, he made things even worse by implying that root access was a priviledge and that Ouya was doing modders a special favor by having it, and that Ouya hadn't promised much of anything (instead attempting to compare the console's openness to that of consoles you can buy at Gamestop).

As for "Open"; Well, a year or so ago the idea of going into a gaming centric store like GameStop or Game, buying a console, taking it home, writing a game on it, and publishing it without spending big money on development kits, licensing, and the like was pretty much non-existant. That's where OUYA is open; It's open to anyone to write games and apps without having to pay dev kit and licensing fees, it's open in that once you have your console you can code for it.
The reason you can still simply get root access is that I've seen people want to tinker beyond what most users would do. OUYA could stick to what was originally put on the Kickstarter page and take away root from non-devkits, but I, for one, would be against that, because I've seen that people do use it constructively and responsibly, and not everyone bricks their device then raises a support ticket to try and get OUYA to fix it.

It really floored me to read this a week before Ouya's launch, given the kickstarter page's promises of hackability.

Anyone with a reflashable phone (or any pretty much any other Android device whatsoever capable of using custom ROMS) knows that a real recovery mode is absolutely essential, in case the OS/kernel gets borked. And a functioning non-OS-dependant recovery mode isn't just important for hackers. It could also be the difference between a faulty official update merely inconveniencing you, or outright bricking your console. Ouya's supposed "recovery mode" relies on an already-bootable OS, so it's useless.

Even worse was the principle of the thing, and the evil behaviour of promising a feature from the beginning, then trying to handwave it away at crunchtime and citing a vague low demand (which wouldn't matter even if true). It reeks of Elite:Dangerous, which announced that they disabled the offline mode right before release.

Comment MIght Get a LOT Worse (Score 1, Interesting) 132 132

Just wait until they figure out they can spin a "harrassment" narrative painting all H-1B skeptics as "hold-out racists defending a white boys' club." From what we've seen over the last year, we damn well know a huge chunk of tech news media would fall right in line to parrot that propaganda (even if that means pulling a complete 180 on their previous position, and even if it means abandoning their core readership).

Comment Fiction vs. Reality (Score 2) 176 176

If 'politically correct' means not wanting to award a prize to a game encouraging vigilante, or state sponsored, murder of low level minor criminals then I suppose that's what you should call it, personally I prefer 'not being a dick'.

That a game depicts (and even glorifies) some kind of evil (or just "being a dick") behavior doesn't mean it "encourages" that behavior in the real world. We know the difference and we don't need you or anyone else to police content for us.

Just because poaching is a major issue doesn't mean that routinely killing poachers is the best answer. We don't encourage people to stalk and kill murderers, rapists etc.

Correct. But we of course do make shitloads of games where such behavior is depicted (and even glorified). Do you get it yet?

Comment And The Editors Know It Too (Score 4, Insightful) 202 202

What's appalling is that the /. editors must be aware of her history by now. It's been pointed out repeatedly in the comments of multiple stories posted to the front page (including OAPI's founding). They're exploiting serious issues to try to build publicity and goodwill for hypocritical, attention-seeking "activists" who clearly deserve the opposite.

Comment Ethics, Set, Match. (Score 2, Informative) 385 385

You want me to give a shit about the "other things" gamergate represents start a new fucking movement. I could give two fucks what that movement has to say at this point.

Hey, I recognize that shitty attitude. It's downright identical to Gawker's . . . right before the FTC got involved in December (in direct response to GG pressure), and Gawker was forced update their disclosure policy (and tons of articles that were then clearly in violation). And things have only gotten worse for them since. Read it and weep:

The section of the FTC's website that deals with disclosures was updated late last month:


Some of this new guidance directly reflects the language and particulars of the concerns GamerGate asked the FTC to address.

"Is “affiliate link” by itself an adequate disclosure? What about a “buy now” button?"

Consumers might not understand that “affiliate link” means that the person placing the link is getting paid for purchases through the link. Similarly, a “buy now” button would not be adequate

Does this guidance about affiliate links apply to links in my product reviews on someone else’s website, to my user comments, and to my tweets?

Yes, the same guidance applies anytime you endorse a product and get paid through affiliate links.

The revised webpage contains a great deal more language that needs to be analyzed but these two examples in particular reflect specific complaints GamerGate had about how Gawker Media handle their affiliate link disclosures. I know of no other group of people who were vocally complaining about this specific practice to the FTC. In addition, the FTC emails from my previous posts confirm that, yes, the FTC tailored part of their new guidance because of frequent complaints sent by GamerGate.

That's only scratching the surface of the FTC guideline updates directly attributable to Gamergate (follow that link for plenty more), but you get the idea.

Yes, you're free ignore the disclosures on Gawker articles if they bother you, or don't care . . . but they will be made available to you, by law . . . just as Gamergate wanted from the very beginning of the journalism scandal. Deal with it.

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is too dark to read.