Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:150 tabs? (Score 1) 142

Different people respond better to different ways of working. Frankly, looking something up and then closing it drivers me utterly crazy - since I'm the kind of person that forgets about something once they can't see it. Doorway amnesia, out of sight, out of mind and all that. Please don't assume that because you find the "having lots of tabs" approach not your cup of tea that everyone is like that.

(Emphasis added). That's the basis of egotism, also known as childishness.

When it operates in politics, you wind up with imbecilic laws like Prohibition and the current War on Drugs. The basis is, "*I* don't want to do that, therefore no one else should ever be allowed to do that either!"

Does anyone else remember this site years ago, back when occurrences of it on Slashdot were relatively rare events?

Comment Re:150 tabs? (Score 1) 142

In this thread: people who never have to work on more than one thing on any given day.

In this thread: Assmunch dipshits. No one works with 150 tabs at once, and no one believes anyone who claims to.

*I* don't personally use that many. In fact I have never needed anything close to 100.

I'm also not automatically hostile to someone who says they do. They have their reasons, and no number of tabs they use on their own equipment is going to infringe on the way I personally want to use my own browser.

So I just don't see a problem here. With a guy who says he uses so many tabs, that is. The flimsy excuse for hostility, on the other hand ... it's a means by which you are shaming yourself. The prevalence of this attitude is destroying Slashdot much faster than the Beta redesign. When so many users engage in this, it tends to repel those who want to converse like adults. Remember that the userbase and the discussions are what actually bring you to this site. Anyone can get a copy of the Slashcode and get some cheap Web hosting.

Comment Re:Straw (Score 1) 142

Nothing personal against you, but anyone who you uses the term "Straw Man" is a big fag that needs to take a break from the Internet for awhile. Maybe take a shower.

That would be much more accurate if you said "No True Scotsman" and not "Straw Man".

Observation: about a year ago, Slashdot users finally discovered, in a collective groupthink style, that there was such a thing as the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. Since then, they have tried to invoke it in every possible conversation, even where it does not apply. Conclusion: there are a lot of insecure nerds who are eager to show off their perceived superior intelligence. Since they are driven by insecurity, they do this not by creating or contributing anything of their own, but by trying to invent flaws in what others say. The other guy made a mistake if you just wish for it hard enough!

I'll give an example. A while back, I personally had some imbecile jump on this bandwagon in response to a post of mine. I mentioned that people who call themselves Christians but then commit acts of violence, for flimsy reasons and without provocation, are not in fact practicing Christianity. Some fool cried "hehe I guss there is No True Scotsman then huh?!" while patting himself on the back fiercely. Apparently this fool decided that knowing nothing about the teachings of Jesus Christ does not actually disqualify him from commenting on the subject. After all, he knew in his twisted little heart that I was wrong, and that only he was clever enough to invent the reason why.

This infantile fevered-ego shit is killing Slashdot much faster than a shitty Beta redesign ever could hope to do. It's just far less trendy to protest it.

Comment Re:Fascists (Score 5, Insightful) 250

In other news, most of Britain wants the UK Government to be removed and replaced by people who are not asshats. Unfortunately, it turns out that nobody who is not an asshat can be persuaded to want the job.

In yet other news ... here's an idea! If you are concerned about propaganda causing your citizens to become "radicalized", why not take the most effective steps possible to prevent that? Create the most sane, free, reasonably run society in which civil rights are sacrosanct, all of the laws are sensible, and all of the laws are equally enforced.

You'll find that far fewer of the citizens would ever want to do anything to oppose that. It's more effective than playing whack-a-mole with an ever-growing list of terrorists.

Comment Re:"Organic" (Score 1) 187

Because the US only tracks people in their jurisdiction right? Remember you have no rights if your not american because american's are the new aryans. Sieg hiel!

I know this is difficult for one-track minds like this AC to understand, but many issues are in fact nuanced and complex. Shockingly, law appears to be one of those. Just to name a single example: data retention laws. They vary by jurisdiction.

Comment Re:Search poisoning (Score 2) 187

If they start poisoning search with for-profit results Google will be quickly reminded that they are not the only search engine in town.

As long as the ads are marked somehow, a user script will be able to suppress them.

It's sad I need to mangle the web to make it usable, but not as sad as not having a mangling facility would be.

As someone who runs NoScript, Adblock Plus and various other user scripts, I think it's a good thing to be able to take control over your own experience. It's good not to be passive. It's good to see only what you want to see. The more people do this, the more these companies have to comprehend that this is the nature of the network in which they have chosen to participate. The Web would lose most of its appeal to me if it were entirely corporate controlled like television.

What's really sad is that other mediums like television, radio, and periodicals are one-to-many, heavily centralized, and don't include such great control over what you see. They're package deals that require you to accept the crap along with the content and are often not worthwhile.

Comment Re:"Organic" (Score 2) 187

That's as bullshitty a term as it is in your supermarket. There *are* no "organic" results when they're calculated based on your tracking history, ad clicks and social connections.

Friends don't let friends get tracked. Use the quack that doesn't track!

I use myself. I like the idea of getting actual Google search results without any sort of Google tracking. They don't even log your IP address and they're outside of US jurisdiction.

By the way I hope our federal legislators appreciate that. I hope they are proud that now, "outside of US jurisdiction" has become a selling point.

Comment Re:Thanks, Obama. (Score 1) 185

BAD MOD: Not everyone will agree with this, but that doesn't mean it's flamebait.

Anyone who needed to have that explained to them is demonstrably resistant to facts and so-called "common sense" and is therefore a lost cause. Mass numbers of non-individuals agreeing with you bandwagon-style is the only thing they would find persuasive.

Comment Re:Real World (Score 1) 91

Your tastes and preferences define your notion of importance. This is empirically verifiable.

I don't dispute that. What I contend is that, while doing so, one should recognize that it amounts to viewing the world through the lens of one's own interests. Any decisions made are tempered by that knowledge.

It's a self-awareness beyond standard ego consciousness. It tends to make you truly ashamed of and prepared to abandon any sort of self-centered, exploitative motive.

It's one of those things that anyone is capable of doing, provided they really want to.

Comment Re:get'em laid (Score 1) 91

I've been saying all along that the schools should get the geeks laid instead of the jocks. Even with this study they still won't listen.

I don't know. There is something romantic about choosing to be a geek, against the grain, up the hill, against all odds and disincentives, doing it because you really want to and not because you were bribed into it. It shows great courage and spirit, which I believe is closer to what life is all about. The ones who "go with the flow" and do whatever is the path of least resistance are cowardly and hedonistic by comparison.

Comment Re:Real World (Score 3, Insightful) 91

I believe that the "real world" is a fallacy. Everyone has their own perception of reality.

I would go so far as to say that you never truly reached adulthood until you can clearly and effortlessly distinguish objective, evidence-based reality from your own subjective feelings and opinions and wishes. Objectivity is when your own tastes and preferences do not influence your decision-making about anything important.

Until you can do that, life is a chaotic mess with no solutions except those that create more and more problems.

Comment Re:Um, (Score 2) 91

Aren't happier people better at pretty much everything? Isn't that sort of the problem with depression?

It's also the problem with alienation and dehumanization, not merely depression. Go out sometime and see for yourself, how rarely people talk to one another like fellow human beings. Usually they would rather talk at someone, listen poorly and keep interrupting (because they have no patience) even when they are listening to an answer to their own question, and generally can't relax and slow down and "take in" much of anything. The irony is, this rushed and hurried approach to life is so error-prone that they accomplish fewer of their goals than they would otherwise.

Compared to that, depression is just a particular special case, an instance of a much more widespread problem with the way we live.

Comment Re:Top gun manufacturers fail to protect users (Score 4, Insightful) 162

From pointing the gun at their face.

Indeed. And "rules that require even more complexity in passwords" backfire because the notion of protecting people from themselves is fundamentally flawed. Note the way you practically never see this notion questioned in any headline or summary.

Comment Re:They didn't "cheat". (Score 2) 288

let's gather together and reinforce our anger/banding-together memes. AKA politics as intended.

It depends on whether the audience has the maturity to read about an event without automatically getting upset about it. Sadly, most Americans have been conditioned by repeated example to do the opposite. This is highly desirable from the standpoint of the media, because irritated emotions tend to shut down critical thinking.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.