Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:If you haven't got a thick skin (Score 1) 68

by msobkow (#47790893) Attached to: Study: Social Networks Have Negative Effect On Individual Welfare

Hey, if you want to torture yourself with a thin-skinned attitude by going on the 'net, go ahead.

But don't expect the 'net to change just because you're offended. It's not going to happen.

Trolls like you amuse me. Didn't your mama call you upstairs for breakfast a few minutes ago?

Comment: If you haven't got a thick skin (Score 3, Informative) 68

by msobkow (#47788985) Attached to: Study: Social Networks Have Negative Effect On Individual Welfare

If you haven't got a thick skin, get off the internet. People will disagree with you, contradict you, post things that make you uncomfortable or that you find downright revolting.

The world is not "your oyster." People who disagree with you and that you find disagreeable have every bit as much right to be there as you. And when you consider the fact that some people find your Bible quotes and homilies offensive (as do I), it soon becomes clear that it's impossible to please everyone.

If you only want to hang out with like-minded people, form a nice little coffee-clique of people and socialize instead of trying to find "happiness" on the 'net.

Comment: Mechanical Label Punch (Score 2) 524

by starseeker (#47788095) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Old Technology Can't You Give Up?

Weird as it sounds with all the electronic label printers you can get today, there's just something about the old style "punch the label as a 3D letter into tape" approach that I prefer. Especially when the tape punch is a serious tool, not those cheap plastic versions:

Comment: IRC (Score 4, Insightful) 524

by starseeker (#47787927) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Old Technology Can't You Give Up?

IRC is still used as a major form of (semi) real time collaborative tool in free software development. Freenode remains hard to beat for this purpose, and I don't really see it changing anytime soon. It's not so much a question of not giving it up as seeing no compelling reason to replace a (very nicely) working solution to the problem.

Comment: Re:Better Idea (Score 1) 63

by jc42 (#47787721) Attached to: Robot Printer Brings Documents To Your Desk

But you can't then just leave the printed document in the tray. That's not secure. You need to have a shredding module attached so that after the email is sent the original can be destroyed.

Well, maybe, but neither the sender nor the recipient knows anything about the various other addresses that have received a copy of the document, plus information on the send/receive times.

It's not clear how any of this could be made secure to either party's satisfaction. If the printer can decode the document and make a legible copy, it can also forward the electronic version of that copy (and/or the decoding keys) to a third party.

Comment: Re:"Moderation?" Don't you mean "Censorship?" (Score 1) 68

by jc42 (#47787659) Attached to: Study: Social Networks Have Negative Effect On Individual Welfare

Call me cynical, but I just don't see Facebook adopting a sane moderation system, like for example anything that approximates slashcode. Their equivalent of "moderation" would better resemble censorship. They would simply hide the thoughts and comments they don't think you would like. Of course, it would be for your own good...

It's likely that a portion of the story is something that we also see here on /.: None of them really support anything that might be called a true "discussion". The reason both here and FB and the other "social media" is the approach of having a running string of "latest" topics, which quickly scroll off the bottom and out of sight. If you don't happen to see a thread in the first hour or so, you generally won't ever see it, and won't contribute to it. So, except for a few rabid topics like religion or partisan politics, where a small group can have fun running it out to thousands of rephrasings of each person's personal views, most discussion threads are typically shallow, and peter out at a depth in the single digits.

I've talked to a number of people here who express disappointment at how shallow the /. discussions usually are. They start of hoping to find in-depth analyses that point them to information that they hadn't run across or noticed. But they're disappointed with most of the threads, which only repeat a few things that those familiar with the topic already know, and then the threads just stop.

FB is quite a lot worse this way than /., of course. I've been on it for some years, and I've never noticed a "discussion" that got to depth greater than 3. I'm sure they exist; I've just never seen them. And a lot of my friends are quite well-informed "geeks" who in person can engage in long discussions. Why don't they do this on FB? Well, they may try, but quickly learn that few people ever read, much less reply to, their comments. Over here, we do sometimes get a bit deeper than that, and I've seen a lot of good information here at depth 5 or 6. But still, that's not very deep as discussions go.

I've seen much better (i.e., deeper and more informative) discussions on nearly every mailing list I've been on. If you want actual informative, socially interactive discussions, that's a noticeably better model for a forum's structure.

But the "social media" is primarily just an electronic form of the old "see and be seen" sort of social event. Such things have always been known as shallow and uninformative, although they can be fun if populated by the right crowd.

Comment: Re:*drool* (Score 1) 151

by msobkow (#47787427) Attached to: Intel's Haswell-E Desktop CPU Debuts With Eight Cores, DDR4 Memory

Working on my pet project. Having Eclipse start in under 10 minutes. Being able to run *all* my code manufacturing jobs all at once, instead of having to run three at a time on my laptop (the longest job takes 20 hours to run.)

Believe me, I could use the CPU power. I'm not an "average" user, just a broke one. :P

UNIX is many things to many people, but it's never been everything to anybody.