Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

83 comments

Corruption in Russia (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37255782)

That certainly is news.

Re:Corruption in Russia (0)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256308)

Corruption in government. This certainly is news.

Re:Corruption in Russia (0)

Pino Grigio (2232472) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256686)

Corruption in Russian government. This is news?

So it's like America (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37255806)

Except the spammers are corporations. And the bribes are campaign contributions. And the public officials are, oh they're still public officials.

In other words (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37255996)

The people who run the business of government are motivated precisely by money, the same as everyone in the private sector. Puts a bit of a damper on the age-old claim that government works for you and me, doesn't it?

Re:In other words (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256262)

The people who run the business of government are motivated precisely by money, the same as everyone in the private sector.

I'd say it puts more a damper on the age-old claims that public officials are somehow the extra circles of hell Dante kept to himself, and are rather just ordinary people just like everyone else.

Re:In other words (1, Informative)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257072)

The difference is that without government help the corporations can not send the FBI to seize my shit. Or send the police to break into my home.
The corporations (without government help) can not put me in prison.

Re:In other words (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37257458)

The difference is that without government help the corporations can not send the FBI to seize my shit. Or send the police to break into my home. The corporations (without government help) can not put me in prison.

Without the governments help you couldn't keep corporations from putting you in their own prisons. I'll never understand pseudo-anarchists. Because the government has police and jails, corporations generally don't. Personally, I prefer it that way.

Re:In other words (1)

OutSourcingIsTreason (734571) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257958)

Without the government there would be no corporations. Corporations are just businesses with government charters that allow them to do business with limited liability provided they follow the regulations.

Re:In other words (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37260458)

Corporations are just businesses with government charters that allow them to do business with limited liability provided they follow the regulations.

So without a government charter, you'd have a business that runs with zero liability (unless you're richer than them and can hire more muscle) which doesn't follow regulations.

Re:In other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37265654)

Who said anything about anarchy?
The main tool of the idiot in an argument that they can not defend with logic is always to take the other side to the ultimate in extremes and defend against that.
Government has a role.
Always has.
Governments rightful role is to protect our freedoms.
Government also has other lesser roles that can not be dealt with by the free market. (There is no free market incentive not to dump waste products into the rivers.)
Other than the protection of our freedoms and the handling of those things that only government can do, it should endeavor to stay the fuck out of our lives.
Government should be weak compared to the people it governs. If it is not then tyranny will always be the result.
If Dell starts ripping off it customers and building shitty product for too much money I can not buy Dell.
I have that choice.
When government takes more of my wages and the streets have more potholes, the bridges are more decrepit and the education system is more fucked up. What can I do about that?
You and your ilk are idiots ruled by emotion with no ability to think beyond wonderful sounding phrases (Everyone is equal, Think of the children, Take care of the poor, everyone should have a job). They do sound good. They are wonderful thoughts.
That does not mean that it is good when the government starts paying people for long periods of time to not work.
It is not good when we pay for farmers to not grow crops. It is not good when tax payers must give their money so that some company can "Make a go of it".
Fuck Bailouts, Fuck Subsidies, Fuck the fact that some federal government should be telling me what I can eat, how much sleep I need, What my clothes should be made of.
Not only is it not their job, They are not and can not be good at it.

Re:In other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37257488)

Actually if there was no goverment the corporation could take your shit and throw you in a private prison. who would stop them?

Re:In other words (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#37258606)

Was it a corporate or government-run school where you completely failed to learn any history?

Re:In other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37267626)

Nice statement.
You sounded like you said something and never had to put forth any coherent information at all.
Great job.

PS
If you had a point to make though you might want to clarify a bit.

Re:In other words (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37267724)

The word privilege literally means 'private law'. The ruling classes, the historical equivalent of the modern corporation, used to have their own private security and law enforcement. Private entities did raid homes, confiscate belongings, and incarcerate people, before the state decided that it should have a monopoly on this behaviour. When the government does it, you have the right to a fair trial and so on. When a private company or individual does it, you have no rights.

Re:In other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263802)

The difference is that without government help the corporations can not send the FBI to seize my shit. Or send the police to break into my home.
The corporations (without government help) can not put me in prison.

For that they'd need to outsource - I believe they're called security consultants.

Re:In other words (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257594)

Of course governments are composed of people like everyone else. That's why they can't be trusted!

Re:In other words (1)

rmstar (114746) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257804)

Of course governments are composed of people like everyone else. That's why they can't be trusted!

Must be pretty horrible being you, unable to trust anyone.

The idea that life is a game, and the one who is richest (in money terms) when he dies wins is relatively primitive. It is mantained by people who end up hating their lives because it sucks. Many people in government work because they want a better world, and not for the money. Making the world a better place is a fantastic way of becoming rich, although perhaps not in numbers.

Yes, I am idealistic. I think it is that what it takes to be truly alive.

Re:In other words (2)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37258050)

Must be pretty horrible being you, unable to trust anyone.

There was an implicit "with power" after that "they can't be trusted". The only awful part is seeing people making the same predictible mistakes (e.g. hoping that Obama would be different).

The idea that life is a game, and the one who is richest (in money terms) when he dies wins is relatively primitive.

I would agree absolutely. What does this have to do with the rest of the thread though?

Many people in government work because they want a better world, and not for the money.

They are the biggest fools of them all.

Yes, I am idealistic. I think it is that what it takes to be truly alive.

If you don't see the world realistically, you won't ever know what needs to be done to reach your ideal. The ideal is peace and freedom. A realistic look at the world tells you that this is incompatible with authority.

Re:In other words (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#37258630)

Actually, I suspect most people can be trusted with power. It's only the ones that actively seek it that generally can't. If you picked 300 random people from the population to run the country for a couple of years, I would expect to see some minor abuses of power, but nothing like the kind of scale we get from career politicians.

Re:In other words (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#37259052)

I think you underestimate the corrupting influence of power.

Re:In other words (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37260490)

Of course governments are composed of people like everyone else. That's why they can't be trusted!

Same as governments. The problem in both cases is that the resulting entity has a mind of its own - it shields the human cogs constituting the machine from seeing the whole picture, so each of them may be a nice guy by himself, but his tiny contribution towards the grand scheme of things can do things that he didn't really intend or envision. This works for both good and bad things, by the way. But, as such meta-organisms have a tendency of becoming sociopathic if let run unchecked, there's usually more evil than good done that way.

Now, with governments, we've eventually realized this, and inserted some checks and balances into the system to prevent it from going completely haywire, or at least make it less likely - we call these "democracy". It doesn't always work, and sometimes even when it does, the correction itself takes time. On the bright side, we can use that to regulate the rest of them to maintain their constructive contribution (which is obviously there - our present quality of life is not the least because of the rise of corporate capitalism in the 20th century) while restraining their sociopathic tendencies.

But, on the other hand, when all you have are entities without any such checks and balances - like corporations in the absence of a government - you end up with a very grim picture. It's like the classic libertarian parable about wolves and sheep, except that here the sheep are in the majority - but still helpless, because they don't get to vote at all (or if they do, it doesn't have any meaningful effect).

Re:In other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37257950)

It's too bad that nobody has ever come up with a way to free us from "the people who run the business of government."

Oh wait, they have, but if we ever move to something like collaborative governance [metagovernment.org] , then we won't be able to blame everything on "the government" anymore, since the government will be us.

Re:In other words (1)

rednip (186217) | about 2 years ago | (#37258946)

So, since you don't believe in the decency of other human beings, we should all live in that uncaring, uncooperative, and unproductive world in which you think would be perfect, maybe? I swear libertarians would rather see children starve in the streets (again) rather than pay any taxes.

Re:So it's like America (2)

al0ha (1262684) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256002)

No it's not like America - it is like doing business in every country on the globe; period.

Re:So it's like America (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256402)

No it's not like America - it is like doing business in every country on the globe; period.

There are many european countries where behavior like this ends up all over the news and gives harsh penalties and effectively puts an end to it. Not that that means it doesn't happen, but a lot less and when discovered it is punished.

Re:So it's like America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37257174)

There are many European countries which are smaller than a city of Russia or America. If we talk for some of the individual European countries, their league is different. But check EU as an entity, nothing different in its own.

Re:So it's like America (1)

SomePgmr (2021234) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257344)

That would happen here in the US too, where spammers are prosecuted and a bribe from a spammer to law enforcement would land everyone in jail. But we're off on an angry rant about something else for the moment. ;)

Re:So it's like America (1)

dmartin (235398) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256638)

America isn't a country on the globe?

Do you mean that America is not special in being like Russia in this regard?

Re:So it's like America (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256156)

except campaign contributions can only be used for political campaigns and people have gone to jail for using the money on themselves.

Re:So it's like America (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256430)

Which has done little to improve the quality of government. Campaign contributions are bribes for all practical purposes.

Re:So it's like America (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#37258692)

That would make a difference, if it weren't for two minor points:
  1. In US Presidential elections, the winner has been the one that spent the most for quite a long time. I suspect that it's the same in most other US elections.
  2. Once in power, there are ample opportunities for exploiting your position to make money.

So, a campaign contribution ends up being an indirect bribe, but it's still a bribe. You could probably improve matters a lot by ensuring that campaign contributions had to be anonymous, paid via an intermediary that would only report the total raised, not who paid it, so donations could not come with strings attached. You can donate money to support candidates that you agree with, not to make candidates agree with you.

+50 to op (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256160)

wish i had mod points

Re:So it's like America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256410)

Insightful? Really?

Moron.

Re:So it's like America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256532)

Story: Spammers are wielding political influence to survive and expand
  (VERY technology related)

You: Lobbying in America is the same exact thing!
  (not only off topic non-technology related, but also ill-informed of the regulations regarding donations in the US election system)

in soviet russia.. (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256748)

the man on the street bribes cops and soldiers, they gotta eat too.

that spammers bribe them only means that the officials got wind of the spamming operation - or that they bought a house..

Re:So it's like America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256776)

As per my copy of Oxford English Dictionary (OED):

Bribe (n: worldwide): monies paid to Officials and Politicians by interested parties to create or enforce laws damaging to everyone except to the said parties, see Campaign Contributions and Lobbying (U.S). Where it is called a Bribe, there are a few options to imprison the donor and the receiver.

Re:So it's like America (1)

VJmes (2449518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37260386)

Campaign contribution sounds better than calling it a bribe.

And the world said (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37255810)

DUH! Still though, worth having evidence. Maybe the higher-ups will scapegoat some people, and things might get marginally better. Who knows.

Premium News, Comrade! (3, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#37255878)

Spammers Bribe Russian Officials

And polluters bribe Chinese officials and large companies bribe American lawmakers and logging companies bribe South American governments and ... well, this list would get ridiculously long if we kept it going. I would be willing to bet that the spammers that operate in the United States have to grease the wheels at their banks and who knows where else? Hell, in Mexico, the police basically make you bribe them on the spot whether you can take a hint or not. You could probably say "Spammers Bribe Officials" and no doubt it's universally true.

Re:Premium News, Comrade! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256250)

Can someone tell me how you go about bribing an official? There are some laws I'd like to have ignored that impact me.

Re:Premium News, Comrade! (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256536)

Can someone tell me how you go about bribing an official? There are some laws I'd like to have ignored that impact me.

1. Have lots of money.
2. Go to official's reelection campaign dinner / kids baseball game / favorite bar and get somebody to introduce you.
3. Make it known that you have lots of money.
4. Profit!

Re:Premium News, Comrade! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256870)

You need a license, which is very hard to come by. There are Corporations and Specialists you can contact though. Read any newspaper, there will a few references every day.

Re:Premium News, Comrade! (1)

bitt3n (941736) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256744)

You could probably say "Spammers Bribe Officials" and no doubt it's universally true.

What would be the downside of loosening entrapment regulations for elected officials, so that it is possible to spam them with bribe attempts, say three to five per year? Dishonest officials would then start ignoring legitimate bribes, just as someone flooded with spam starts missing legitimate messages (albeit the former would do so out of fear of accepting a fake offer).

In the fantasy state where such an idea could be put into practice, perhaps any corporate or political enterprise who donates to a candidate could be liable in proportion to the amount of their support for any fines resultant from his accepting fake bribes. Maybe then these bodies would give more weight to a candidate's integrity relative to his orthodoxy.

Re:Premium News, Comrade! (1)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257532)

What would be the downside of loosening entrapment regulations for elected officials, so that it is possible to spam them with bribe attempts, say three to five per year?

While the rest of your comment makes clear that this is not an entirely serious suggestion on your part, I recommend to you the work of Susan Rose-Ackerman [yale.edu] , who has written quite a bit on the economic effects of corruption.

Oblig... (1)

Thantik (1207112) | more than 2 years ago | (#37255896)

In soviet russia...blah blah blah...

Re:Oblig... (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 2 years ago | (#37255968)

I believe someone already has this one in their sig.

Re:Oblig... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256240)

I'll bite.
In Soviet Russia, spammers pay you!

Re:Oblig... (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37260514)

In Soviet Russia, taking a sufficiently large bribe and getting caught would get you shot, even in late 80s.

FTFY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37255966)

Leaked online chats between the co-owners of the world's largest pharmacy spam operation reveal the extent to which officials in Russia sell political protection, and control criminals by initiating or stalling law enforcement investigations.

There are two sides involved in these crimes. One answers to voters.

Interesting that the pharmacy guys write of charities as a conduit for pay-offs. In the US we have 'non-profits' that serve that same purpose. One day there will be a similar leak from the US involving pay-offs laundered through some non-profit hospital.

I thought (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256054)

I thought this was how business was done in Russia. According to Misha Glenny, who knows as well as anyone, they always have to bribe the mafia and protection to actually get anything done as well.

Re:I thought (1)

ge7 (2194648) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256090)

It is. It's how every legit business is run there too. And in America.

the solution is obvious. (2)

nimbius (983462) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256104)

socialize healthcare in the worlds largest economy, The United States. With no need for a competitive alternative market for healthcare, pharmacy spam will die overnight.
now you might say "but athletic shoe spam will surely overtake the market after this" and yes, I can solve this problem as well.
Include with each pair of new athletic shoes a picture of the representative atheletes average home, as well as that of an employee of the shoe manufacturer.

now I know some worry that perhaps the markets would shift to peddling pornography in greater fervour then?
This is excellent! as we find now the market saturated with nudity and sexual content the likes of which Extremist religious terrorism could never triumph against.
Genitalia is relegated to being simply another mundane element of the human physiology, and we can return to doing more interesting things as a society like finding cool bozons and curing diseases and exploring space.

dont forget me come november. I'm running with taco as my vice president, you know.

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256236)

socialize healthcare in the worlds largest economy, The United States. With no need for a competitive alternative market for healthcare, pharmacy spam will die overnight

Yes and no - Some PharmaSpam exists because of male unwillingness to go to the doctor - You may be embarassed to go to your doc and ask for a viagra prescription, but might be willing to buy it anonymously online.

...and besides which, poor sick KIDS aren't enough of a motivator for the USA to provide universal healthcare. What makes you think reduction of spam will be?

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

Ruzty (46204) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256384)

There's also the large market for prescription opiate addicts who need a source for their pills.

Re:the solution is obvious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37257010)

They can buy their heroin on the black market like everyone else.

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#37262832)

Where the hell do you think that spam COMES FROM?!?

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#37259294)

I think part of the GP's "socialize healthcare" likely involves ending the war on drugs not provided by Big Pharma.

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256392)

"Do it for the kids" ... the greatest threat to liberty in the world.

Re:the solution is obvious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256432)

No truer words were ever spoken.

Re:the solution is obvious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37258344)

Actually with all the healthcare programs in the US the poor kids are fine, it's the lower middle class kids and adults that are in trouble.

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#37259266)

...and besides which, poor sick KIDS aren't enough of a motivator for the USA to provide universal healthcare. What makes you think reduction of spam will be?

Because government employees/politicians all already have government-funded healthcare -- but this doesn't protect them against spam.

Re:the solution is obvious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263120)

What kind of a MAN is embarrassed to do anything? If I want Viagra, I'll go to the doctor and demand it, because, god damn it, I can't get it up and well, that just aint good enough. Or I could just go to the fucking gym and get my blood flowing again, or perhaps a female that--heaven forbid--turns me on! Just man up! If your woman isn't doing it for you just tell her! If you can't tell her then you have more problems than Viagra can fix.

Re:the solution is obvious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256914)

Congratulations! You've solved the drama [xkcd.com] !

Re:the solution is obvious. (1)

balaband (1286038) | more than 2 years ago | (#37262356)

And, of course, free V!4gr4 and C!4lis for everyone, drop down Rolex prices and set car insurance for all to 20$?

Brilliant!

USA has this problem too (1)

ZeroSerenity (923363) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256198)

We just happen to call it lobbying.
Not that it's any different than a bribe.

I like the Russian model of graft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256258)

Cuts out the various middlemen like lobbyists, think tanks, PACs, etc. and gets the money from the crooks directly to the crooked politicians. It's much more efficient, though it lacks the patina of the West's "legal" forms of influence peddling.

US,Oracle-Sun, EU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256260)

Not fundamentally much different than the Americans lobbying the Europeans here:

OracleSun [slashdot.org]

I guess (1)

SlippyToad (240532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256434)

If people were serious about stopping cybercrime, they'd blackhole nations that couldn't control their cybercrime problem.

I bet that would solve a lot of issues real damn quick.

Re:I guess (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256788)

If people were serious about stopping cybercrime, they'd blackhole nations that couldn't control their cybercrime problem.

You are conveniently overlooking the fact that there is no universal, international definition of "cybercrime". Some countries have no problem with spam, or kiddie porn, or selling drugs online. You can't just run around imposing your own notion of justice on other countries.

Re:I guess (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256818)

Yet they can run around imposing their own notions of proper behavior upon the rest of us?

How even-handed of you.

Sorry, but there's no justice in how you want to do things either.

Re:I guess (1)

Fjandr (66656) | more than 2 years ago | (#37258174)

Blackholing something actually isn't an imposition. It's exactly the opposite.

yuo fadil 1t (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256486)

200 running NT person. Ask your please moDerate invited back again.

Re:yuo fadil 1t (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#37258766)

Aww, look at the baby AI learning to speak, isn't it cute? Can you say 'Natalie Portman,' baby AI?

You mean people accept Russia network traffic? (1)

Indy1 (99447) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256546)

I thought by now that anyone with a clue firewalled anything and everything from Russia with a vengeance. Honestly, what worthwhile network traffic comes from there? Its nothing but bot nets, spams, and Mob networks (RBN, anyone?).

Re:You mean people accept Russia network traffic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37256668)

Erm, traffic requesting web pages, I guess, same as everyone else?

Re:You mean people accept Russia network traffic? (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#37259352)

I thought by now that anyone with a clue firewalled anything and everything from Russia with a vengeance. Honestly, what worthwhile network traffic comes from there? Its nothing but bot nets, spams, and Mob networks (RBN, anyone?).

This wouldn't do a thing... there's a reason these guys call their operations things like "Canadian Pharmacy". Usually the websites are hosted in China, the site domains are hosted all over the world, and the spams are sent via botnet.

As for "what worthwhile network traffic comes from there?" Well, a lot of people have friends/family in Russia, there are universities in Russia, many megacorps have offices in Russia, and any kickbacks from the Russian government via moneygram have to get to you somehow....

Re:You mean people accept Russia network traffic? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37260544)

There's about 40 million Internet users in Russia - most of which are also customers of various online services, stores etc.

Re:You mean people accept Russia network traffic? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37262416)

Unfortunately, some of us have to do this little thing called 'work', which involves collaborating with people around the world, including Russia.

Obligatory (0)

metrometro (1092237) | more than 2 years ago | (#37256986)

In Soviet Russia, volleyball serves you!

(note, you may need to RTFA).

And now, for your state-mandated joke break (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37257250)

In Soviet Russia, spammers enrich YOU!

It's only a bribe in Russia (2)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 2 years ago | (#37257350)

In Russia it's called a bribe, in the U.S. it's called "lobbying".

Re:It's only a bribe in Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37269520)

Polonium can turn up in a coffee dispenser at any time these days.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...