Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 2) 2219

by laetus (#46187655) Attached to: Slashdot Tries Something New; Audience Responds!

5-digiter here and avid reader since nearly the beginning. Few comments since there are far smarter people in the forum than me. :) I have to agree with keeping the old site (to me, this is actually a new site compared to the original). The current site is cleaner, leaner, and easier.

1. Comments are king. We can get the stories anywhere.
2. See #1. More whitespace = less comments we can get to. Kill the overkill on whitespace.
3. See #1. Eye-candy = more noise-to-signal. To paraphrase James Carville, "It's the commentor's info stupid."
4. See# 1. Keep comments rankable, nestable, and filterable by rank. Don't want to see the trash.
5. To paraphrase God and/or Google "Don't be evil." Slashdot's ancestry is right there with the web itself, and the open source and Linux communities. Selling info and linking logins to FB, Twitter, etc. is an abomination.

Comment: Re:First thing first (Score 1) 517

by krewemaynard (#38244704) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: To Hack Or Not To Hack?

He is clearly miles and miles in over his head. My advice: STOP. NOW. Don't touch anything and don't say anything. Go read books on ethical hacking and wiretapping / unauthorized access law. He's likely already in violation of several laws, possibly several federal laws. And now he's admitted to them publicly on the internet. -__-

Better yet, hire a lawyer (EFF, maybe?). "I read it in a library" won't help a lot in court.

Comment: Re:I Was a Victim of a Series of Accidents ... (Score 1) 1521

by laetus (#37209520) Attached to: Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda Resigns From Slashdot

I've been a long-term reader and like everyone else, am sad to read about Rob's departure. /. was required reading early on in the .com boom days and the rise of Linux. If you weren't reading /., well, you were pretty much out of it. It's now 2011 and I'm still a loyal reader. That says alot with all the abundant distractions on the net.

Rob's biggest contribution by far is the community he and others created here. I mostly lurk given that I'm by far nowhere near the level of expert you encounter here so often, But I've learned more useful tips and been pointed in the right direction by /. commenters more times than I'd care to count.

Thanks to Rob and the entire community.

BTW, seeing your reference to John Katz made me LOL. That shared history (the good AND the bad) is an integral part of /.

Comment: Re:Try the real one (Score 1) 295

by krewemaynard (#33287068) Attached to: How the Internet Is Changing Language

Just read the real bible and you'll be confusing fundies left and right.

And you can go for even nastier than confusing if you want. For example, find someone who's a fan of that Ezekiel 4:9 bread, and tell them that the whole recipe given by God there continues all the way to Ezekiel 4:13: "and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man". Yep, God's recipe there actually calls for human shit as an ingredient for that bread. (Though Ezekiel himself, for being so faithful and kosher all his life, gets Gods dispensation in 4:15 to eat his with cow shit instead.)

Especially if you spring that on them after they ate some, honestly, no amount of lolcat bible can even start to compare :p

The poop wasn't an ingredient, it was the fuel used to cook the bread: "And you shall eat it as barley cakes; and bake it using fuel of human waste in their sight.”

Doesn't make it a whole lot more pleasant, but let's at least be factually correct.

Comment: Re:Groklaw link (Score 1) 168

by krewemaynard (#32531614) Attached to: Judge Rejects SCO's Motion For a New Trial

Come on guys. Groklaw has been covering this thing since the very beginning. The least you could do is link to the article there. Give a little respect to Pam Jones for following this long slog like a trouper.

Come on guys. Groklaw has been covering this thing since the very beginning. The least you could do is link to the article there. Give a little respect to Pam Jones for following this long slog like a trouper.

Patience...just wait for the dupe.

Comment: Re:Labeling (Score 5, Insightful) 228

by krewemaynard (#32469226) Attached to: Urine Test For Autism

I can't see this being of any benefit in the long term. The problem is, even if they -have- autism or other defects, labeling them will do nothing to have them overcome it and will lead the majority of them to make excuses to why they aren't productive members of society. I really don't understand the western mentality of labeling everyone to try to "help". Which is going to make people want to get ahead in life? Being told "hey you have -insert mental disability here-" or "hey, your not doing to great in -insert school subject here-". One has people making excuses and the other just has them either not focus on that and focus on what they are good at or try harder.

Are you serious? The sooner you get a diagnosis, the more therapy and assistance you can provide, which leads to greater success as the child gets older. Speech delays, learning disabilities...they don't have to be show stoppers. How much harder is it when parents struggle for years without knowing what's going on? How much harder is it for the kid when everyone just thinks s/he's dumb or lazy, not realizing there's an actual underlying condition? When you know what that condition is, you know how to approach it and offer help. It's not just a matter of applying a label and being done with it...it's understanding that the child has a neurological condition and finding ways to work with and around it.

/I have an autistic child, so I'm getting a kick....
//Now hand the keyboard back to your parents, let the grown ups talk.

Comment: Re:Optical nerve still needed. (Score 1) 226

by jsupreston (#31207050) Attached to: The Blind Shall See Again, But When?
That is exactly my problem. With glasses, I am 20/200 in one eye due to a birth defect. It was easy to fix even in the early '70's, but my family didn't have the money for such a surgery. Now, I could have the surgery, but due to over 35 years of atrophy, my optic nerve in that eye is all but dead. That being said, if it were possible to even give me enough sight in that eye to be able to tell more than light from dark, I'd try the surgery. Just for reference, I can make out large shapes (such as human bodies) at about 3'. I can read 2" tall text a letter at a time from a distance of about 1". Anything more than that is impossible for me at this time. At least my other eye is 20/20 corrected. Without glasses, my "good" eye is 20/200 with the bad eye off the chart low.

Testing can show the presense of bugs, but not their absence. -- Dijkstra

Working...