Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Microsoft

Documents Unsealed in Microsoft/Caldera Case 79

Mirele writes "The Salt Lake Tribune reports in an article today that a lot of formerly secret documents that Microsoft had submitted in the now-settled Caldera case have been unsealed. These documents include a deposition by a former Microsoftie that indicated she had destroyed e-mail correspondence when urged to do so by her boss. They also show Microsoft's inclination to overdesignate documents as secret. The judge unsealed all but about 30 documents. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Documents Unsealed in Microsoft/Caldera Case

Comments Filter:
  • Moderation? I've seen a lot of on-topic posts recently marked "Troll" or "Flamebait", which tells me we are getting some really bad moderators. Hopefully, M2 will weed some of them out.

    Back when I had points, I could have sworn that a post I marked as being ``Overrated'' ended up being marked as ``Troll''. Maybe those on-topic posts aren't marked as ``Troll'', but someone thinks that that it isn't worth the score it has.
  • Another idea/option for moderation is to have a preference availalbe so that people could replace standard moderation values with a specified moderator's (or a group of moderator's) values.

    This would be sorta like the "employee's picks" section at video rental places.

    Maybe I want to trust a group of "M$ hAterZ" picks and preferences more than the standard. You wouldn't need M2 for these postings. Give anyone in the goup unlimited group moderation points (which would not affect the real moderation scheme). Ideally, let anyone view the moderation history of a group.

    This way comunities could form within a comunity. I could chose to read slashdot with a anti M$ view. You could even have a "Natalie Portman Hot grits petrified spargle MEEPT first post" group with any such post moderated up to 5...

    Maybe I am on crack. Yeah, that's the ticket.
  • What's with #15? What happened in August '89?
  • Companies that want to survive in the long term will have to take this into account in the future. At $16 1/16 per share (down from $65, IPO @ $20), the lesson of eToys will need to be learned by everyone else

    Uh, I don't think eToys's stock is low because of the etoy.com thing. Rather, eToys reported a high loss for Q4 of 99. (Losing 38 cents per share) (see http://q uote.fool.com/Snapshot/financials.asp?symbols=ETYS &currticker=ETYS [fool.com])

  • How would you know that? Is the pre-nup public?
  • It looks like Microsoft may follow the Open Source model in the dozens of suits pending:

    1. Settle Early

    2 Settle Quick

    MRM
  • You will also note many of them are bitter, angry posts about how "unfair" poor Microsoft is treated on Slashdot. Utterly ridiculous, considering that for years nearly all of the "mainstream" computer/internet press acted like they were part of the MS PR Dept.

    I'm not so sure this is all past tense...

    Is MS behind it somehow? Nahhh, I don't think so. If word got out that they were ordering employees to post on Slashdot, it would be more embarassment that they really don't want right now.

    Would it be more or less embarassing than being caught commiting purjury?
    Personally I doubt Microsoft would care about lowering their status amongst a group of people who don't have the highest opinion of them in the first place.
  • Security by obscurity is a valid solution in certain situtations...

    For instance, for where you are forbidden to hide something in the first place. Like these court documents. What was MS going to do, encrypt them with their key, and then place them into evidence? Talk about pissing off a judge. So the only way to use any kind of security was by hiding it out in the open, which is what stenography is.

    Just spouting "Security by Obscurity" as the sole reason for something being a bad idea is quite simplistic.
  • Does the company that wants to seal documents have to give a specific reason why each document has to be sealed? If so, then I would think that it'd be harder for Microsoft to seal so many documents (which kinda answers my own question, since they have so many sealed.. right?)

    If they don't.. then how is it they get off sealing so many documents? If they seal them, who gets to see them? Only the company that owns them? If that's the case... then.. how does anything get accomplished? (Obviously, there has to be some sort of limit to this, or either the stipulations surrounding sealing documents has to be such that it's too much of a hassle unless you have as much paperwork as Microsoft.)
    I guess what I'm saying is that, me not being a lawyer and all (or very familiar with legalities and such), I'm just wondering about the whole "sealing" stuff.

    Thankie.
  • by gothic ( 64149 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @10:51AM (#1324236)
    I think the answer to that may be how and why it's being done. If that webserver and laptop has my CC numbers, and other sorts of personal info on it that I really didn't want anyone abusive to have, I'd be more then happy when they took it away from the person. Even if wasn't my info at all, but maybe a collection of other people's info.
    I guess the answer could be so wartered down to this: If what is in those files shows the company/person is taking part in illegal activities then it should be 'okay'...
    But then, in the fun of humanity, that brings up another question. Will the law enforcement actually stick to that? Will they just say "Oh, well, we thought there might be something on there damaging, guess we were wrong, sorry about the HD, you'll never see it again."
    On the other hand, I'm not too sure if I would want the officals to have (or not have) the ability to take data on probable cause. That's just too sticky of a situation, and maybe can only be figured out on a per-situation basis.
  • Someone moderate this up, it's funny.
  • by dirk ( 87083 ) <dirk@one.net> on Saturday January 29, 2000 @11:01AM (#1324238) Homepage
    You are not imagining things. Every time I see the "Bill Gates of Borg" icon, I know I will see a flood of pro-MS FUD and anti-Linux/Open Source diatribes posted in the discussion within. You will also note many of them are bitter, angry posts about how "unfair" poor Microsoft is treated on Slashdot. Utterly ridiculous, considering that for years nearly all of the "mainstream" computer/internet press acted like they were part of the MS PR Dept. I've always been glad that Slashdot was here, to deflate some of that - not just from MS, but from any large company.


    I alwayd find posts like these funny. Being someone who likes MS (no, I don't agree with everything they've done, but I also don't think they are evil and the spawn of satan) and someone who has tried Linux and thinks it could be good given time to mature and if companies port software to it, I guess I am an MS FUD spreader. People seem to think the point of /. is to bash Ms and support OSS, and I'm not sure where they got that idea. /. was created to basically give an outlet for people to express "unpopular" opinions (yes, at the time it was mostly OSS people, but it wasn't created to praise OSS). Now people seem to think that it was built for them to praise OSS and bash MS and anything else deemed "unworthy" of the praise of the open source community, thus thrusting us into the reverse of the original situation. People who don't want to see MS destroyed are now the "unpopular" opinion being held down be the OSS masses. Just because someone doesn't think MS is evil and must be destroyed by any means nessasary doesn't make them part of the "MS PR department" anymore than liking Linux makes you an automatic "Linux zealot". /. is not for OSS discussion, it is for discussion, period.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    You *have* one.. It's called browsing at Score:1. With hard thresholds. Then even the logged in Trolls with low-low Karma are filtered for you. And on the off chance that an AC has something important to say, it'll be scored up.

    Not all AC's suck. The ones that *DO* suck just happen to be exceptionally vocal. And as for IP banning, god no. I'm behind a transparent caching proxy, and if it's IP gets banned, I'm hosed. Despite me not being a Troll. And what about Dynamic IP's? Gonna ban an ISP for one Troll? Lets not go getting facist now.

    Anyway.. Just browse at 1. Then again, most logged in users don't have anything to say either.. And browsing at 2 just gives you Karma Whores.. So the solution?

    Don't worry so much about /. comments. Who cares? =)
  • Get an account, and set your parameters acordingly (unless you have one and posted anon). I read at -1 always, but I would think that at +1 or +2 you wouldn't have much to worry about.

    [ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
  • I won't say whether or not MS is participating in any program of this sort. I've no way of knowing.

    However, I am a long-time participant in a mailing list that shares certain characteristics with this forum. The population of that forum is at least slightly above the norm in technical experience and is quite diverse in terms of the platforms used.

    In that forum, I find that there's an informal cadre of MS defenders. Some, I believe, do argue from their perspective of the truth. That might be true of all of these people, in fact. But there is certainly an air of self-interest at play. When you ask an MSCE, expect to hear positive comments about MS products and environments.

    This isn't universally true, thankfully. There is at least one MSCE in that forum that is as critical of MS products as others. In fact, his insights often prove quite interesting, given the "inside information" (at least, from the perspective of one such as myself that avoids MS products {8^) he can cite.

    But remember that there are a lot of people that depend upon the universal acceptance of MS products for their financial well being. That may very well be behind the pro-MS postings read here.
  • Security by Obscurity?

    I think the above poster was simply referring to legal maneuvering. The only alternative would be to have no security at all.

    [ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
  • I couldn't agree with you more. We need to get more people talking like this. 10 years ago I would have never thought we'd be running x86 systems with DOS. And yet win95/98 is just that... a really nice front end for DOS... they even still use himem.sys. I thought by the year 2000 everyone would be running on Alpha or something. Even PIII's are based on the original 8086 instruction set in IBM PC/XT's

    Intel is also part of techinal dark ages. I don't think they've screwed over as much people as Microsoft has, but still. I'm still wondering about the fast devlopment of the asus athlon mainboards. They went from not devloping a mainboard to shipping it in less than 24 hours. I've also heard stories about intel products not ariving on time to distributors who sell AMD products. Very strange... Brandon

    • However, it is first and foremost "news for nerds"... That's why we see stories about Processors, Satelites, Planets, and anything else.

    "News for Nerds" has to be understood in context. Like it or not, there is an editorial bent to Slashdot. Articles are already posted by a non-secret cabal of people who are predominantly Open Source supporters who dislike and distrust Microsoft. These people clearly don't define people who have bought-in to the Microsoft Mindset as being Nerds. If you like and support Microsoft, in the minds of those who originally wrote "News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters." you are not a Geek, you're mainstream. There really is (or has been) a counter-culture element to Slashdot.

    Actually, there's is pro-MS sentiment among the traditional Slashdot denizen, where MS supports Open Source or Open Standards. Even Bruce Perens supported MS in the recent AIM controversy. And, even a closed minded fanatic like me supports MS [slashdot.org] in their serious adoption of the Open XML Standard.

    • Why should it be suprising that finally there's a less biased moderator out there who can mark someone as a troll for bashing microsoft? I personally dislike seeing posts marked up simply bcause the take a swipe at MSFT or say something good about Linux, regardless as to whether or not it's actually true or not.

    Unlike most other Media, Slashdot has an "Open Editorial Policy" that includes Moderators. These people also tend (although clearly less and less so) to be Open Source supporters who dislike and distrust Microsoft. This situation is not unfair. These people just have an opinion and a world-view. "Bias" is the perjorative term for people with a certain world-view.

    One could just as easily accuse the Moderator who gave the 'Troll' Moderation originally as having a bias. After all, the humorous post that someone felt was a troll wasn't actually met with the flames you'd expect from a troll. That post was light humor that even the most rabid MS supporter would not take seriously. I think the Moderator just didn't like it and wanted to mark it down. If one wanted to put labels on opinions one might call that bias.

    • The day that moderation falls into the hands of a "secret cabal with opensource credentials" is the day i never come back here again.

    And the secret cabal wouldn't miss you at all, I'm sure. Hey, take heart, there's always comp.os.advocacy.windows!

    • Right now, this place is fun simply for the fact that there's a wide range of opinions and ideas. It would suffer horribly if people realized there was no point in disagreeing with anybody because the "secret cabal of moderators" would mark them down to -1, effectively out of sight.

    Well, first of all, as I said, there already is in place a cabal of editors who support a certain Open Source/Anti-MS bent to articles. Every media has some editorial policy.

    Now, let me say that I have to agree with others who've pointed out the problems with my half-baked idea of allowing a "secret cabal of Open Source Supporters as Moderators", but, once upon a time, the Moderators effectively were a small group of Open Source/Anti-MS people, yet dissent was fostered. Fostered enough that Moderators of opinions that went against the prevailing opinions were even eventually allowed.

    There is a real potential problem here. MS supporters in the population at large greatly outnumber Open Source supporters, and they have more resources. As these MS supporters continue to find and colonize Slashdot, there is the possibility that Slashdot will lose it's distinctiveness and become just another ZDNet Talkback Forum.

    • If it were the way you described it, it'd be simply a site dedicated to patting the backs of open source developers. How much fun would that be?

    I dunno. As I said, Slashdot was once run for, by and about Open Source Advocates. There was plenty of good technical discussion, lots of heated debate and less hot grits down the pants. You hear a lot of nostalgia for the good old days of Slashdot. I guess I'd be sad if I saw that Slashdot was becoming dominated by people who wanted to discuss fashion at the Emmy's or some other nonsense.

    I'm sad now that I see so many flames that get moderated up whenever a Slashdot article poster states an honest and well-founded, but anti-MS opinion in the articles. Gee Microsoftheads, you've got just about every other Technical media locked down, must you have this one too?


    -Jordan Henderson

  • Here's what I don't understand:

    I'm constantly seeing people saying "I'll probably be moderated into oblivion, but..." before a post supporting Microsoft, and yet I constantly see posts like the one above being moderated up! It's not like you can browse at a moderation level of 2 or 3 and not see anything but anti-ms FUD, people. The pro-MS voice *is* being heard on Slashdot.
  • "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Reic..I mean Lewinsky."

  • What good would banning IP addresses be, really?

    Anyone can get a free ISP account which assigns IP addresses dynamically. Their IP address would be different each time they logged in. Banning the IP address would be useless.
  • im only responding to the comment about M$Office, try staroffice (from Sun), freeware, reads M$Office docs, and runs under anything but mac.
  • No offense to the poster, but if you don't want your posts to look like the one I'm replying to, learn some basic HTML formatting (or at least hit <ENTER>). Oh, and preview your posts.

    To start a paragraph, use <p> and when it's done, use </p> (just a formality, really).

    If you would like to emphasise a point, use <em> to start the emphatic part and end it with </em>. Do we see a pattern emerging?

    <strong> is used to start a section of powerful text (couldn't think of a better word) and, of course, it is ended with </strong>.

    Note: intelligent parsers and some search engines use the <em> and <strong> tags to find important words. The simple <b> (bold) and <i> (italic) tags don't have this effect. That, and a browser may decide to render emphatic or strong text with different techniques, depending on country, etc. (ie underline).

    If you make a list of items, start each one with the <li> (list item) tag.

    Sample HTML:

    <P>This paragraph is <em>just a sample</em> of what you would type. The results are shown below.</P>
    <strong>Note:</strong>
    <li>How much nicer it is to read.

    Results in:

    This paragrah is just a sample of what you would type. The results are shown below.

    Note:

    How much nicer it is to read.

  • by auntfloyd ( 18527 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @08:43AM (#1324253) Journal

    Reichel had a personal relationship with Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates

    If that's not disturbing, I don't know what is.

    ~~~~~~~~~
    auntfloyd
  • Look at Windows 95 when it was released. They probably spent just as much on hype and advertising as they did on building the damn thing. If they spent more money testing and debuging thier software, they wouldn't be hated by so many people. How can Microsoft get respect from consumers if it lies and neglects them?

  • It would be interesting to know what part of the company was so secret? Marketing has always been the most important part of Microsoft's business plan (even over the product, imagine that). Maybe even plans for taking over competitors (Netscape, obviously Caldera). Perhaps there are some juicy Windows secrets - not that anyone would care all that much. Most likely it's a Halloween type thing, and personally that has all gotten a bit old to me.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 29, 2000 @08:46AM (#1324256)
    With much poking around, I was able to uncover some of the 30 still sealed documents. Though government ninja SEALs came into my house before I could make copies, I did manage to make a note of some of the titles. This is what I found:
    1. MS-Empire Beta specs
    2. Prostitutes in the Pacific-Northwest
    3. MS-Cheese: a proposal
    4. The Satanic Bible
    5. Hop on Pop
    6. H4X0R YR m0m
    7. O'Reily's Evil in a Nutshell
    8. Clinton's Porn Bookmarks
    9. Trolling /. for Dummies
    10. The Neiman-Marcus Cookie archives
    11. Natalie Portman: a proposal
    12. Mein Kampf for Dummies
    13. e-mail Subject: let's see DR-DOS heal THIS one!!!!
    14. The Victoria's Secret fall catalogue
    15. Aug 22, 1989 New York Times
    16. A guide to burning socks
    17. Visual Masturbation Studio: a proposal
    18. Advanced Petrification

    hopefully this will shed a little light on the state of affairs . . .
  • In 1997, Caldera argued Microsoft was abusing its ability to designate documents, noting blank pages, magazine articles, and photos of a woman and an insect had been stamped "confidential," as well as routine, outdated e-mail and a list of the yardage of golf courses in China.

    That's sthe secret: women, insects, and Chinese golf courses. I think you can all draw your own conclusions.

    ~~~~~~~~~
    auntfloyd
  • I dont think that having another woman as a relationship is such a biggie for Bill.

    Remember, at the last Comdex he brought a microsoft staffer to dance with him instead of his wife. (!?) She must be at home 'with the kids'.

    Theres some insight for ya.
  • by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@yaHORSEhoo.com minus herbivore> on Saturday January 29, 2000 @08:50AM (#1324259) Homepage Journal
    The Golf Courses in China are telling. These were obviously part of a plot between Bill Gates and the Ryder Cup to buy China, thus preventing the import of Linux or competing sports.

    Other confidential evidence includes precicely what the woman in the photo was doing with the insect, and why "Customer Base" was etched on one wing.

    It is, however, completely untrue that Microsoft was intending to file 2.5 solar masses of blank paper as confidential, which would have sucked the Caldera legal team into an artificial black hole. That was intended for the DOJ team.

  • Microsoft's initial tendency to overdesignate documents as confidential likely was not aimed at the news media, but at other potential plaintiffs, Boyce observed.

    "We want to be perfectly frank about it, Microsoft would have liked to have tried this case in secret because there's no question what's going to happen now, the sharks are circling out there, and this isn't going to be the only antitrust action that's going to be filed against Microsoft, at least if [media reports] are correct, there are just a lot of potential litigants out there waiting to pounce," he said.

    That's interesting. After knowing of MSs behavior for years and years, it's good to see other people opening their eyes to what they've been up to.

    What does it say of a company and it's buisness practises when "the sharks are circling" and, "[there are] a lot of potential litigants out there waiting to pounce."?

    Some of you might blame the sharks who are circling, but where there's smoke, there's fire. MS wouldn't be atracting so many sharks if it wouldn't have left the water so bloody with destroyed companies.

    What MS forgot is: In a growth market, a rising tide floats all boats.
    _________________________

  • by Money__ ( 87045 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @09:19AM (#1324262)
    I agree with your assessment of the internets influence as a "consumer watch dog" (with millions of eye balls, no monopolistic practice goes un-noticed).

    But the question remains, what historical archive is there out there? Where can I find MS and NS press releases from 1996? Where does one go to find company histories?

    What's interesting is, most of the time, the companies are the ones maintaining there own historical archive. Doesn't this make them their own historian? Wouldn't companies be free to exploit revisionist practices on their own actions? (perhaps a more informed (/.er) can point to me a resource I'm not aware of).


    _________________________

  • Wow, somebody moderated this as 'Troll'. Hard to believe.

    Now, you can look at it as a Troll if you squint just right, but it's still hard to fathom that something poking fun at Microsoft could be so moderated here.

    It's not abuse, but it is disturbing. It looks like this place is changing. There is at least one frequent poster who posts with impunity from microsoft.com and is frequently, and usually validly IMO, moderated up. Now, there's really nothing evil or wrong about this. It's just that things are clearly changing.

    Is it impossible that there's a coordinated PR offensive against Slashdot (and possibly other Open Source advocacy sites) by MS sympathizers? After the Holloween Memos, where the author openly fretted about what to do about Linux and Open Source, I wouldn't put anything past 'em.

    Obligatory on-topic comment: With this story clearly showing that MS will do everything in their power to hide their true intentions, it's just not hard to believe that there is a coordinated PR attack going on.

    Perhaps Moderation (and even Meta-Moderation) should be limited to a secret cabal who actually have demonstrated Open Source credentials rather than just posers (like me!). A lot of people would scream that this is unfair, but I don't see anything wrong with assuring that this place's editorial policy stays consistent over time.

    Like it or not, Moderators do serve editorial functions and any media has a right to choose it's editors.

    Of course, if this, admittedly drastic, step were taken I'm not sure that Meta Moderation would be needed at all.


    -Jordan Henderson

  • Perhaps Moderation (and even Meta-Moderation) should be limited to a secret cabal who actually have demonstrated Open Source credentials rather than just posers (like me!). A lot of people would scream that this is unfair, but I don't see anything wrong with assuring that this place's editorial policy stays consistent over time.

    The problem is, that'd do the opposite.

    Right now, there's a very large pool of moderators, and bad ones are drowned out in a sea of meta-moderation. (And if you meta-moderate, you will have noticed that it went from 90% bad moderation to 90+% good moderation over a few short months).

    If your plan were implemented, you'd go to a much smaller pool of moderators, and many of them would be people who have demonstrated that they're much better at writing good code than they are at being impartial moderators.

    Some of 'em engage in flames in every online discussion in which they participate, and some of 'em are over-responders, engaging in protracted threads in which they respond to every post made on a subject, abusing +1 bonuses the whole way (if they have them).

    Do you want those guys being a significant fraction of the moderators? I can think of one Open Source coding god who can barely keep positive karma. I've moderated him down a time or two myself.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Oh, poor baby. I'm sorry that you cannot stand to have your opinion challenged by someone with a different one.

    The fact of the matter is, Slashdot is 99% Linux and Opensource positive. The 1% of the posts that disagree and even talk about positive things coming from Microsoft is hardly a "flood".




    Any discussion, no matter how serious or important can only be improved by dissention. What's the point of a discussion if it's one-sided?

    Some of us play devil's advocate. While I wouldn't call it a troll, these are most definately *NOT* black and white issues. There are shades of gray.

    Microsoft is not 100% wrong or 100% evil. They do good things, and I for one don't believe that those good things should be washed away in the typical anti-MS propoganda.


  • What is the correct use for a +1 bonus. I often check "No Score +1 Bonus", but I'm sometimes not sure.

    My general rule is that if what I'm making a top-level comment on the story, and I think my Comment is not just a joke, or maybe not a real funny joke (why do I do it at all in this case?), I go ahead and take the +1 bonus. If I'm responding to something 2 or above, I leave the +1 Bonus in place. Otherwise, I remove the +1 bonus. Sometimes I forget to check 'No +1 Score Bonus' when I should by these criteria..

    It is annoying when someone responds to a posting rated at 0 with a rating of 2 so that I (I assume that most people, like me, browse at 1 or above) see the response but not the original. Then, if I want the context I have to go check the below threshold Comments.

    I often wish that 'No Score +1 Bonus' were the default.

    I somewhat hope that this gets marked down as 'Offtopic'. On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be many articles involving Moderation and Meta-Moderation lately so that we can vent these issues out. It seems like it sure is time for such an article with all the Moderator abuse I've seen lately. For example, the other day on the Mozilla M13 story there was a post that gave a link to the mirrors and someone marked it as 'Offtopic' (!?).


    -Jordan Henderson

  • Let's hope they don't start believing this quite from George Orwell's 1984...

    He who controls the past controls the future.

    ...or we're all in big trouble! How about Open Source History? ;)
  • IANAL, but IIRC the sealed documents are still open to the opposing counsel and can be discussed in court, but unlike most of the court papers you can't subsequently review the material in the courthouse library.

    Also, a court seal isn't automatic. The judge has a right to ask how public disclosure of the information will harm the company, and he can't be overwhelmed by thousands of irrelevant claims. If he feels that the lawyers are trying to pull a fast one, he can start focusing their attention on the task by threatening sanctions against the lawyers individually or their client. (An example of the latter is a flat assertion that he'll only seal 100 documents, so the client should choose wisely.)

    Judges are (wisely) hesitant to invoke these sanctions without overwhelming need, but they can consider a company's previous actions. If a company has had 80+% of its classified papers opened in previous cases, many judges will be hesitant to rubberstamp subsequent requests.
  • LOL! This is really good.

    Yes, my Comment does look pretty Funny in retrospect. Didn't mean it that way when I wrote it. It's pretty paranoid, all in all.

    I never saw this use of a +1 Moderation to actually criticize a Comment before. Put me right in my place.

    Sheesh, I seriously need to think about getting a life.


    -Jordan Henderson

  • People seem to think the point of /. is to bash Ms and support OSS, and I'm not sure where they got that idea. /. was created to basically give an outlet for people to express "unpopular" opinions

    I really don't think that /. was set up as a discussion outlet for "unpopular opinion". I think the quote is "News for Nerds", and the result may be popular or not so popular.

    /. is becoming more mainstream and therefore less selective. People are posting that have no clue about Unix (a traditional nerd essential). They sometimes don't have the capacity to deal with a command line. Some have made poor decisions to go with the MS solution and must be pro-MS or they get burned.

    Old school /. discussion was more pure and focused. People now seem paranoid when they see pro-MS posts because most of us have had terrible problems using MS products. We know that anyone defending MS must be either confused, clueless, or up to something.

    MS flamewars are not what we need ( Although the "old school" /. GNOME vs. KDE were tons of fun.)

    Just wanted to say /. is not about popularity or bashing MS or even linux. News for nerds. Most nerds I know just happen to be unpopular, bash MS, and like Linux.

    ed
  • What the hell?

    Yes, Slashdot does seem to cater to Linux and Opensource stuff the most. However, it is first and foremost "news for nerds"... That's why we see stories about Processors, Satelites, Planets, and anything else.

    Why should it be suprising that finally there's a less biased moderator out there who can mark someone as a troll for bashing microsoft? I personally dislike seeing posts marked up simply bcause the take a swipe at MSFT or say something good about Linux, regardless as to whether or not it's actually true or not.

    The day that moderation falls into the hands of a "secret cabal with opensource credentials" is the day i never come back here again. Right now, this place is fun simply for the fact that there's a wide range of opinions and ideas. It would suffer horribly if people realized there was no point in disagreeing with anybody because the "secret cabal of moderators" would mark them down to -1, effectively out of sight.

    Personally, when I moderate, I always look for the more intellegent comments coming from views that aren't the normal slashdot norm. the higher they're scored, the more people see them, and it generally starts a good discussion.

    I've learned a lot here either from my replies to my comments and/or other discussions i didn't take place in, because two smart people with different views will post a string of comments poking holes in one anothers arguments. That's good. If it were the way you described it, it'd be simply a site dedicated to patting the backs of open source developers. How much fun would that be?
  • You *have* one.. It's called browsing at Score:1. With hard thresholds. Then even the logged in Trolls with low-low Karma are filtered for you. And on the off chance that an AC has something important to say, it'll be scored up.

    My personal settings are: browse at 1, show full comment at 2, no hard thresholds -- that way, if I find a reparented comment at 2, I can figure out why it's there.

    Not all AC's suck. The ones that *DO* suck just happen to be exceptionally vocal.

    And show no signs of stopping, sadly.

    And as for IP banning, god no. I'm behind a transparent caching proxy, and if it's IP gets banned, I'm hosed. Despite me not being a Troll. And what about Dynamic IP's? Gonna ban an ISP for one Troll? Lets not go getting facist now.

    I agree. The moderation and meta-moderation are supposed to be the community's way of policing itself. If you have a problem with a post, keep your "willing to moderate" option checked and maybe it'll come up. If you think a post was scored unfairly, make a habit of meta-moderating.

    Anyway.. Just browse at 1. Then again, most logged in users don't have anything to say either.. And browsing at 2 just gives you Karma Whores.. So the solution?

    I'm not a karma whore, and I suspect there are a lot fewer than the trolls might think. I just post what I post, and occasionally my stuff gets moderated. I've been moderated up, I've been moderated down; unlike the trolls, I don't waste a lot of time figuring out what to say to please / piss off "the Slashdot community".

    Don't worry so much about /. comments. Who cares?

    Best bet for trolls; if you're not a moderator, ignore them. They're not going anywhere, especially if people keep lavishing attention on them.

    Jay (=
  • What is the correct use for a +1 bonus. I often check "No Score +1 Bonus", but I'm sometimes not sure

    Not that I know the "correct" answer but my impression is that taking the bonus is like awarding yourself an upward moderation. In other words, it should be used for posts that you think ought to be a +2 and moderators should knock it down if they disagree. I think the FAQ supports [slashdot.org] this view.

    I often wish that 'No Score +1 Bonus' were the default.

    I agree.
  • Bob, I'm a systems administrator in Siliicon Valley. I agree that we shouldn't punish someone because they are too successful. But success always comes at a price. The average end user consumer gets a great deal! They get a one- stop shop for everything "software" on their computer. Heck, Microsoft even innovates some hardware for PC's too! Yes, the prevalance, and pervasiveness of comuters is overtaking our society at a mind boggling rate. I would even go so far as to say the growth has accelerated beyond anyone's control! The problem is not really about how succesful Microsoft has been. It's more of an issue of who they had to hurt to get there. I am a 10 year veteran of the computer industry. I've watched Microsoft completely crush every competing technology out there, through whatever means necessary. As a compuuter industry professional, I am sorely disappointed at where we are at today. I honestly feel that Microsoft's dominance, if left to it's own devices, is driving us into a "technological dark ages" There are a great many innovative technologies that would have vastly benefitted the computer industryindustry. ALL of them have been sacrificed for the sake of backwards compatibility with old hardware and software. And it's entirely because Microsoft has painted us into this virtual corner with their totally proprietary operating system, and applications that ONLY work on their all too shortsighted proprietary operating system. I happen to LIKE Microsoft office. Microsoft just won't make it for my platform (UNIX). But they probably cannot ever port it to UNIX because it relies on facets of their closed source proprietarty OS that it requires to operate. They use this "integrated" approach to lock people into using an OS that they control, rather than something that the community controls through standards, and concensus. Imagine how boring it would be if GM were the ONLY company who could make the roads you drive, and you could only use a GM car. You could buy a Chrysler, but it wouldn't fit on the road, or the tires wouldn't grip the pavement. So, you could only drive it in the confines of your home or business. I genuinely fear the outcome! Microsoft's sales, and marketing over the past decade has been nothing short of a social engineering masterpiece! Therere are better products, and there always have been. If Microsoft can't buy them, they aggressively crush them with legalities and/or marketing dollars. The trend is disturbing! As en employee of one of Microsoft's competitors, I've watched our corporate family be infiltrated by people loyal to Microsoft products, and have successfully gotten them installed. The social, and political ramifications are very heartbreaking. I'm growing tired of watching my workplacebe torn apart by political battles between corporate IT people who buy what they see on TV the night before, and the engineers I support, who all know there is a better way, but have this Microsoft crap rammed down their throat unvoluntarily. Eventually, the engineers quit, eroding the viability of our once thriving Microsoft competitor. (Divide and conquor works!) The trend is not unlike the inquisition, in a way... the digital dark ages are upon us, and Microsoft's brainwashed everyone into thinking they are the OS/application/internet religion of choice. I, for one, believe wholeheartedly in the division of church and state. Long live Open Source Software! Bryan S. Manternach UNIX Systems Administrator Silicon Valley, CA, USA.
  • It [Microsoft] also argued some information should remain highly controlled, even if it seemed outdated, such as details of licensing deals that might offend other companies who negotiated with Microsoft. "Customers often have long memories," said Norman Tonina, a controller at Microsoft.

    IOW, Microsoft wants a legal shield to prevent its customers from realizing how shafted they got. Typical.
  • I've even heard a rumor that Bill had a one week out of the year vacation with another woman written into his pre-nuptual.
  • by bons ( 119581 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @08:55AM (#1324278) Homepage Journal
    Let us look at a few cases: Microsoft, eToys, DeCSS, Amazon, Doubleclick...

    All of these companies have performed action that worked well in the file and forget media of the past. The actions of any of these companies would be forgotten a year from now if they were reported on TV, radio, newspapers, or even Time.

    But that doesn't happen anymore. Now the articles tend to remain. Older article's can be stored in search engines, links to them persist. In the case of eToys, the personal "boycott eToys" web pages will probably be around for awhile.

    I predict that the days companies can afford to overreact are limited. These actions by Microsoft will be remembered. Doubleclick's "please pull your article" blunder only increases the unfavorable press about them. DeCSS is now easier to find than Linux installation instructions.

    The internet is different from conventional media in three ways: the target audience is larger, the speed of communication is faster, and the memory is more persistant.

    Companies that want to survive in the long term will have to take this into account in the future. At $16 1/16 per share (down from $65, IPO @ $20), the lesson of eToys will need to be learned by everyone else. I expect to see "ads not provided by DoubleClick" messages under adspaces soon, especially with links pointed to news articles or /. stories. (not a bad idea for Andover)

    And that kind of damage can last a long time.

    -----

  • by Effugas ( 2378 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @09:40AM (#1324279) Homepage
    It should be obvious why anyone overseals documents--say you don't want 100 documents from being released. Rather than seal those 100--and thus making obvious which ones *you* consider the most damaging, seal 2000. If you lose the case, and all the documents need to be unsealed, you haven't told the press or your enemies which 100 to look into for damaging information. You prevent leakage of information by hiding content in plain sight.

    Yours Truly,

    Dan Kaminsky
    DoxPara Research
    http://www.doxpara.com
  • You are not imagining things. Every time I see the "Bill Gates of Borg" icon, I know I will see a flood of pro-MS FUD and anti-Linux/Open Source diatribes posted in the discussion within. You will also note many of them are bitter, angry posts about how "unfair" poor Microsoft is treated on Slashdot. Utterly ridiculous, considering that for years nearly all of the "mainstream" computer/internet press acted like they were part of the MS PR Dept. I've always been glad that Slashdot was here, to deflate some of that - not just from MS, but from any large company.


    Is MS behind it somehow? Nahhh, I don't think so. If word got out that they were ordering employees to post on Slashdot, it would be more embarassment that they really don't want right now.


    It seems to me these are just people who genuinely like Microsoft/Windows, and feel much like missionaries among the Heathen Open-Source savages here on Slashdot. ;-)


    Moderation? I've seen a lot of on-topic posts recently marked "Troll" or "Flamebait", which tells me we are getting some really bad moderators. Hopefully, M2 will weed some of them out.

  • by JudgePagLIVR ( 145069 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @09:46AM (#1324281)
    It's interesting to see that companies are beggining to see the potential legal signifigance of electronic documents. At my company (I work at a printer company, not HP), there was recently a pretty strong set of protocols instituted to ensure that competing companies could not get internal information (it's always been there, but we've recently been strongly encouraged to tighten up our practices).

    So the question, again, becomes this: when does privacy end and obstruction of justice begin? We balk at governments for seizing peoples' laptops and webservers, yet we have a good laugh as we watch Microsoft scramble to burn all their documents. Is there really a difference?

  • That is an Urban Legend and thus, not true.
  • "Here's the haystack with the needle you requested."

    This is an interesting legal move to help prevent leeking, but what it did for micros~1 is gave the prosocuter a stick to beat them with.

    Like a boy crying wolf, MSs crys for help in keeping things secret go unheard when most the documents are just noise. I can't help but notice the simularity between this and the security through obscurity point made in the DeCSS story.
    _________________________

  • 19. Deleting Documents for Dummies
    20. Preventing the Government from Intercepting Emails for Dummies
    21. Why Bad Hair Cuts Make You Look Innocent in Court
    22. Bug = Feature: A Technical Support Manual
    23. Alpha = Final Release: Good for Business
    24. Which Countries to Buy First
    25. Why Inventing Stuff is Harder than "Borrowing" Others' Inventions
    26. A Design for a Virus Which Replaces Linux with Windows and Bills for it Automatically
  • Security by Obscurity?

    I thought we had already debunked this.

  • by cyanoacrylate ( 47864 ) on Saturday January 29, 2000 @10:00AM (#1324286)


    I'm fed up with this kind of KRAP. Maybe heavy abusers should get their IP addresses published on the 'I fucked with slashdot' list. They might be a little less interested in wasting my time and everyone else's who wants to legitimately read other people's opinions on slashdot.


    Other thought: I want an option to ignore all posts by ACs.



    That's all.
  • You say that you dont think MS is behind the pro-MS postings here. You then support this by saying that MS would be too embarrassed if caught.

    Embarassment didn't seem to stop them here:
    Microsoft Admits to Secretly Paying for Independent Ads [slashdot.org]

    Remember they have billions and billions, so why not have a few stooges post online to help keep their stock prices up? Seems like a good idea to me, if I were in their shoes.

Feel disillusioned? I've got some great new illusions, right here!

Working...