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!

Upcoming Changes To 'Ask Slashdot'

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the step-the-first dept. 230

We're pleased to announce that changes are coming to the Ask Slashdot section. Ask Slashdot is a place to get your technical questions answered, show off your big brain by helping others, debate products and practices, and occasionally talk directly to companies about their offerings. Over the years, we've posted more than 7700 questions, on everything from workplace relations to home networking to evading censorship from unfriendly regimes. Starting tomorrow, you'll see that some Ask Slashdot questions have their own sponsors; the sponsors don't pick the questions, but experts from each sponsor will stick around for the discussion. Next up: we're making it easier for you to submit questions. Our goal is to make Ask Slashdot your "go-to" place for answers to your pressing nerd questions. So please post your questions, put on your answering hats, and come along for the ride.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I for one welcome this change with open hands (1, Interesting)

InsightIn140Bytes (2522112) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289772)

I work for a public relations company that deals with large clients (can't say who) and I welcome this change. It should bring more interesting discussions to Slashdot. Those "omg astroturfer" guys heads are going to implode. :)

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289792)

So this is slashdot bowing to its corporate overlords, then? How long have you been working to slip that one through, eh?

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (4, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289812)

My upcoming sarcastic comments aside, I actually kinda agree. Most (not all but most) ask slashdot questions have been along the lines of "I can't use google or afford a consultant, please do my job for me". This might bring some interesting discussion... as long as the "sponsors" are labeled and the questions don't become obvious marketting.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (3, Funny)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289934)

I want to ask slashdot what kind of clothes I should wear.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289986)

I hear there's a hot new fashion line [] coming out this spring.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

six025 (714064) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290150)

I want to ask slashdot what kind of clothes I should wear.

Nike has an extensive range of comfortable footwear and clothing for all basement dwelling geeks. For the active geek, Nike's offers footwear specific to activities such as Sneaker Net, and non-stick clothing suitable for Dumpster Diving.

Nike. Just. Don't. ;-)

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (5, Funny)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291002)

I have a Nike T-shirt (St Louis Cardinals logo on it). Paid seventy five cents for it at a garage sale five years ago.

Anyone who pays full price for fashion is no nerd. In fact, if you care about fashion at all you probably aren't a nerd. If you just want to meet women, ask women what to wear.

This advice comes from personal experience. After my divorce I couldn't get as much as a dinner date for 3 years, until one night in a bar a woman suggested I cut my beard into a goatee. So I did an informal survey of women 18 to eighty seven, and seventeen of eighteen respondants said "goatee" (the eighteenth was standing next to her boyfriend, who was wearing a full beard).

The dry spell ended almost immediately. I guess women don't like the RMS look.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (4, Funny)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290550)

Yes, and does anyone know where I can get cheap replica handbags?

Here's my major question: (1, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290094)

When are you guys going to fix the extremely broken, gamed, and unworking moderation system?

Let's face it, Slashdot moderation has severe holes in it, as analyzed over here [] . There are exploits with a desperate need for fixes - people with multiple accounts made solely to harvest mod points via the random lottery, the ability to go back weeks into a commenter's history to stage assault raids on their karma, and of course a moderation system that encourages people who play by the rules NOT to moderate because they're then forbidden to comment anywhere in the thread.

Re:Here's my major question: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290192)

Hey look - the slashdot overlords WERE watching. They shit-tanked a real question rather than let it interfere with the corporate astroturfing that they're trying to turn Ask Slashdot into!

Re:Here's my major question: (2)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290768)

Astroturfing doesn't mean what you think it means. A discussion with identified corporate sponsors certainly doesn't fit the definition.

Re:Here's my major question: (4, Funny)

nitehawk214 (222219) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290886)

When are you guys going to fix the extremely broken, gamed, and unworking moderation system?

You got modded down. Looks like the moderation system works to me!

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (5, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290110)

"Dear Slashdot readers, Why does Linux suck so much?"
(sponsored by Microsoft).

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1, Flamebait)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289828)

I fail to see how trying to link everything back to MS and Facebook makes for "more interesting discussions".

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (4, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289878)

I work for a public relations company that deals with large clients (can't say who) and I welcome this change. It should bring more interesting discussions to Slashdot. Those "omg astroturfer" guys heads are going to implode. :)

The questions is if we'll see more experts or more sales staff. I've seen some attempts at this before and the results have sounded more like a sales pitch than anything resembling a real discussion of pros and cons. Then again, many of the questions have been utterly lame in the past so I don't expect it to get much worse than it is. It's been on my "maybe" list of categories to block before, if it does then it's a checkbox away from being gone anyway.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (4, Insightful)

InsightIn140Bytes (2522112) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289902)

On the other hand, when the tech guys from those companies do come on slashdot (admitting it, i'm sure lots of them browser anyway), the bitching they get is something unbelievable.

For good example, see this story [] about MS open source programmers asking Slashdot's opinions on how to improve their Python IDE. It's full of hate, stupid comments and crap.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

Stumbles (602007) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289974)

Well the guy did say spare no punches as such he got what he asked for and gets no sympathy from me. To expect a paid employee to ask Slashdot for their help is kind of stupid. The guy should have gone to any of the python forums or irc channels.

As for your fist statement; that may well be true on Slashdot as it can get way more rowdy than I have seen in other forums.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

bruce_the_loon (856617) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290214)

Why is asking here different from asking on IRC or the Python forums? At least here, the people who don't agree with the party line can air their comments.

Either he should be asking questions on a public forum or he shouldn't. Once he made the decision to go to the public forums, he is perfectly entitled to ask on Slashdot as much as on the Python forums. And I guess he'd get the vitriol on either of them.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290724)

...he is perfectly entitled to ask on Slashdot as much as on the Python forums. And I guess he'd get the vitriol on either of them.

Both of those statements are true, but where there are appropriate forums for specific topics, it is a good policy to use them. A generalised question like "what do you guys reckon is the best smartphone for non-urban use at the moment?" might generate useful responses, but picky details on coding have a habit of degenerating into redundant or off-topic rambling or flamewars, since many readers seem to have a problem with sticking to the topic.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290176)

No, you are wrong. Call yourself an expert? I have 50 years of Javascript experience, two monitors and a low 6-figure Slashdot user ID.

That will be my reply if I feel like trolling. Actually it wont, but I imagine a lot of posts along those lines.

Modding the expert down will also happen more often than not.

"You must be new here" will make a great comeback.

It'll be fun until it's cancelled.

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290620)

I am a student who likes <i>x</i> what major should I take?
I work in a business <i>x</i> and I need to do <i>y</i> what open source <i>/cheap</i> tools are available to me?
I see product <i>x</i> is in violation of the GPL. How can I make these evil evil people pay?
My boss declared <i>A policy I do not like</i> how can I fight him to the bitter end and not end fired (the bitter end)?
Why is life difficult and who should I vote for to make it easy?

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (2)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290718)

Is it true that the refreshing taste of Coca Cola is a great thirst-quencher on a hot day?

Re:I for one welcome this change with open hands (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290778)

We know one of those clients is Microsoft; no need to be coy. We've been having interesting discussions for a while now; this appears to be "slashvertisement" which few here who are not being paid to direct the discussion would support. This is supposed to be an intelligent community-driven news site.

Slashdot editors: if you need to do a funding drive a la Wikipedia, you will find strong community support. You should be doing everything you can to promote that sense of shared community, and find ways to reward us for showing up. Nothing will kill this site faster than inviting corporate interests to the discussion; the anti-corporate bias on this site extends to you, too.

And I was worried (5, Funny)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289788)

I feel silly for getting concerned when that pulse stuff started showing up in the sidebar. Clearly things are heading in a good direction :)

For the first question I’d like to know how my organization can best leverage Oracle’s EJB technology to obtain the rapid and simplified development of distributed, transactional, secure and portable applications that we are looking for in our growing business.

Re:And I was worried (4, Funny)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289834)

Jesus; I got Bingo just reading the question.

Re:And I was worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289896)

Then you're using the easy bingo cards for kids. Now get off my lawn.

Re:And I was worried (1)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289914)

The hard ones require you to spend more time listening to people who use excessive buzzwords .. which isn't good for anyone ;p

Re:And I was worried (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289874)

You'd best start synergizing as soon as possible or your cloud initiative will fail to leverage your business intelligence paradigm and we all know what happens then,

But, whatever you do, don't panic. Oracle professional services, in conjunction with the talent acquired in the Sun buyout, is standing by and ready to address your every business need.

Re:And I was worried (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289994)

Hi, and thanks for your input!

Blue-skying this kind of methodographical paradigmitricism is really how this agilified industry really stays one step ahead of the curve. I really think we should interoperlesce our independemutual idearification thought-shower processes to better extramanipulify our squazzoreadibility enfungusifierated lolipopsiclewafer technology.

Let me know what you think!

Re:And I was worried (1)

Moryath (553296) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290130)

I think that brainless MBA down the hallway from me just jizzed his pants because he read your post and thought those were actual buzzwords.

Re:And I was worried (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290734)

I think that brainless MBA down the hallway from me just jizzed his pants because he read your post and thought those were actual buzzwords.

Is there a "Poe's Law" for business jargon?

Re:And I was worried (0)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290712)


Re:And I was worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290114)

What sidebar? You mean that empty space on the right?
Well, that's your own fault, isn't it? ;)

P.S.: I think you won the buzzword bingo with your second sentence...

December 7, 1941 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289798)

It was 70 years ago today that Japan, without declaring war prior, attacked Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

Re:December 7, 1941 (1)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289842)

They sent a war declaration it arrived later than the bombing, it was intended to arrive at approximately the same time as the attack.

Re:December 7, 1941 (2)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289988)

So the moral of the story, the story being Pearl Harbour, is don't trust FedEx?

Re:December 7, 1941 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289856)

How long ago was it since the U.S., without declaring war, attacked Baghdad?

Re:December 7, 1941 (4, Funny)

Nick Fel (1320709) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289864)

And 70 years later we have sponsors on Slashdot. Did we really win the war? Did we?

Re:December 7, 1941 (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289996)

It was 70 years ago today that Japan, without declaring war prior, attacked Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

I'm sorry, we can't accept that answer. Please state your question in the form of a question.

Re:December 7, 1941 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290438)

> It was 70 years ago today that Japan, without declaring war prior, attacked Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

I will forget Pearl harbour before I forget Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I'll forget the 9/11 before I forget Bhagdad/Iraq (because there were no WMD, and there's also Afghanistan).

Are you an enemy of the USA?

Because if you are from the US and talks about such events, you might as well shoot yourself in the foot. To put things in their real perspective, this is like cat shit. Do like the cat and put a ton of sand over that.

If someone spits on you and you kill him and his family, don't expect us to see your acts as glorious or justified. You were provoked, ok, but then you went crazy and fu** up the entire history fo your own country (and of the world, too).

Or, alternatively, keep on talking about it. I do need a reminder, twice a year, about how unhealthy is to get closer to the US.

Do me favor and put a troll label on this post. I don't care and everyone knows it doesn' matter considering the issues involved.

Re:December 7, 1941 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290992)

from my personal page on wikipee

Anticipating warThe attack on Pearl Harbor was intended to neutralize the U.S. Pacific Fleet, and hence protect Japan's advance into Malaya and the Dutch East Indies, where she sought access to natural resources such as oil and rubber. War between Japan and the United States had been a possibility each nation had been aware of (and developed contingency plans for) since the 1920s, though tensions did not begin to grow seriously until Japan's 1931 invasion of Manchuria. Over the next decade, Japan continued to expand into China, leading to all-out war in 1937. Japan spent considerable effort trying to isolate China and achieve sufficient resource independence to attain victory on the mainland; the "Southern Operation" was designed to assist these efforts.[13]

From December 1937 events such as the Japanese attack on the USS Panay and the Nanking Massacre (more than 200,000 killed in indiscriminate massacres) swung public opinion in the West sharply against Japan and increased their fear of Japanese expansion,[14] which prompted the United States, the United Kingdom, and France to provide loan assistance for war supply contracts to the Republic of China.

In 1940, Japan invaded French Indochina in an effort to control supplies reaching China. The United States halted shipments of airplanes, parts, machine tools, and aviation gasoline, which was perceived by Japan as an unfriendly act.[nb 3] The U.S. did not stop oil exports to Japan at that time in part because prevailing sentiment in Washington was that such an action would be an extreme step, given Japanese dependence on U.S. oil,[16][17] and likely to be considered a provocation by Japan.

Early in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt moved the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii from its previous base in San Diego and ordered a military buildup in the Philippines in the hope of discouraging Japanese aggression in the Far East. Because the Japanese high command was (mistakenly)[18] certain any attack on the British Southeast Asian colonies would bring the U.S. into the war,[18] a devastating preventive strike appeared to be the only way[18] to avoid U.S. naval interference. An invasion of the Philippines was also considered to be necessary by Japanese war planners. The U.S. War Plan Orange had envisioned defending the Philippines with a 40,000 man elite force. This was opposed by Douglas MacArthur, who felt that he would need a force ten times that size, and was never implemented.[19] By 1941, U.S. planners anticipated abandonment of the Philippines at the outbreak of war and orders to that effect were given in late 1941 to Admiral Thomas Hart, commander of the Asiatic Fleet.[20]

Pearl Harbor on October 30, 1941.The U.S. ceased oil exports to Japan in July 1941, following Japanese expansion into French Indochina after the fall of France, in part because of new American restrictions on domestic oil consumption.[21] This in turn caused the Japanese to proceed with plans to take the Dutch East Indies, an oil-rich territory.[nb 4] The Japanese were faced with the option of either withdrawing from China and losing face or seizing and securing new sources of raw materials in the resource-rich, European-controlled colonies of South East Asia.

Preliminary planning for an attack on Pearl Harbor to protect the move into the "Southern Resource Area" (the Japanese term for the Dutch East Indies and Southeast Asia generally) had begun very early in 1941 under the auspices of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, then commanding Japan's Combined Fleet.[23] He won assent to formal planning and training for an attack from the Imperial Japanese Navy General Staff only after much contention with Naval Headquarters, including a threat to resign his command.[24] Full-scale planning was underway by early spring 1941, primarily by Captain Minoru Genda.[citation needed] Japanese planning staff studied the 1940 British air attack on the Italian fleet at Taranto intensively. It was of great use to them when planning their attack on U.S. naval forces in Pearl Harbor.[nb 5][nb 6]

Over the next several months, pilots trained, equipment was adapted, and intelligence collected. Despite these preparations, the attack plan was not approved by Emperor Hirohito until November 5, after the third of four Imperial Conferences called to consider the matter.[27] Final authorization was not given by the emperor until December 1, after a majority of Japanese leaders advised him the "Hull Note" would "destroy the fruits of the China incident, endanger Manchukuo and undermine Japanese control of Korea."[28]

By late 1941, many observers believed that hostilities between the U.S. and Japan were imminent. A Gallup poll just before the attack on Pearl Harbor found that 52% of Americans expected war with Japan "some time in the near future", while 27% did not.[29] While U.S. Pacific bases and facilities had been placed on alert on multiple occasions, U.S. officials doubted Pearl Harbor would be the first target. They expected the Philippines to be attacked first. This presumption was due to the threat that the air bases throughout the country and the naval base at Manila posed to sea lanes, as well as the shipment of supplies to Japan from territory to the south. [30] They also incorrectly believed that Japan was not capable of mounting more than one major naval operation at a time.[31]

[edit] ObjectivesThe attack had several major aims. First, it intended to destroy important American fleet units, thereby preventing the Pacific Fleet from interfering with Japanese conquest of the Dutch East Indies and Malaya. Second, it was hoped to buy time for Japan to consolidate its position and increase its naval strength before shipbuilding authorized by the 1940 Vinson-Walsh Act erased any chance of victory.[32][33] Finally, it was meant to deliver a severe blow to American morale, one which would discourage Americans from committing to a war extending into the western Pacific Ocean and Dutch East Indies. To maximize the effect on morale, battleships were chosen as the main targets, since they were the prestige ships of any navy at the time. The overall intention was to enable Japan to conquer Southeast Asia without interference.[32]

Striking the Pacific Fleet at anchor in Pearl Harbor carried two distinct disadvantages: the targeted ships would be in very shallow water, so it would be relatively easy to salvage and possibly repair them; and most of the crews would survive the attack, since many would be on shore leave or would be rescued from the harbor. A further important disadvantageâ"this of timing, and known to the Japaneseâ"was the absence from Pearl Harbor of all three of the U.S. Pacific Fleet's aircraft carriers (Enterprise, Lexington, and Saratoga). Ironically, the IJN top command was so imbued with Admiral Mahan's "decisive battle" doctrineâ"especially that of destroying the maximum number of battleshipsâ"that, despite these concerns, Yamamoto decided to press ahead.

Japanese confidence in their ability to achieve a short, victorious war also meant other targets in the harbor, especially the navy yard, oil tank farms, and submarine base, could safely be ignored, sinceâ"by their thinkingâ"the war would be over before the influence of these facilities would be felt.[34]

[edit] Approach and attackSee also: Order of battle of the Attack on Pearl Harbor

Route followed by the Japanese fleet to Pearl Harbor and backOn November 26, 1941, a Japanese task force (the Striking Force) of six aircraft carriers (Akagi, Kaga, SÅryÅ, HiryÅ, ShÅkaku, and Zuikaku) departed northern Japan en route to a position northwest of Hawaii, intending to launch its aircraft to attack Pearl Harbor. In all, 408 aircraft were intended to be used: 360 for the two attack waves, 48 on defensive combat air patrol (CAP), including nine fighters from the first wave.

The first wave was to be the primary attack, while the second wave was to finish whatever tasks remained. The first wave contained the bulk of the weapons to attack capital ships, mainly specially adapted Type 91 aerial torpedoes which were designed with an anti-roll mechanism and a rudder extension that let them operate in shallow water.[35] The aircrews were ordered to select the highest value targets (battleships and aircraft carriers) or, if these were not present, any other high value ships (cruisers and destroyers). Dive bombers were to attack ground targets. Fighters were ordered to strafe and destroy as many parked aircraft as possible to ensure they did not get into the air to counterattack the bombers, especially in the first wave. When the fighters' fuel got low they were to refuel at the aircraft carriers and return to combat. Fighters were to serve CAP duties where needed, especially over US airfields.

Before the attack commenced, two reconnaissance aircraft launched from cruisers were sent to scout over Oahu and report on enemy fleet composition and location. Another four scout planes patrolled the area between the Japanese carrier force (the Kido Butai) and Niihau, in order to prevent the task force from being caught by a surprise counterattack.[36]

[edit] SubmarinesFleet submarines I-16, I-18, I-20, I-22, and I-24 each embarked a Type A midget submarine for transport to the waters off Oahu.[37] The five I-boats left Kure Naval District on November 25, 1941,[38] coming to 10 Nm (19 km) off the mouth of Pearl Harbor[39] and launched their charges, at about 01:00 December 7.[40] At 03:42[41] Hawaiian Time, the minesweeper USS Condor spotted a midget submarine periscope southwest of the Pearl Harbor entrance buoy and alerted the destroyer USS Ward.[42] The midget may have entered Pearl Harbor. However, Ward sank another midget submarine at 06:37[42][nb 7] in the first American shots fired in World War II. A midget on the north side of Ford Island missed the seaplane tender Curtiss with her first torpedo and missed the attacking destroyer Monaghan with her other one before being sunk by Monaghan at 08:43.[42]

A third midget submarine grounded twice, once outside the harbor entrance and again on the east side of Oahu, where it was captured on December 8.[44] Ensign Kazuo Sakamaki swam ashore and was captured, becoming the first Japanese prisoner of war.[nb 8] A fourth had been damaged by a depth charge attack and was abandoned by its crew before it could fire its torpedoes.[45] A United States Naval Institute analysis of photographs from the attack conducted in 1999 indicated a midget may have successfully fired a torpedo into USS West Virginia. Japanese forces received a radio message from a midget submarine at 00:41 December 8 claiming damage to one or more large war vessels inside Pearl Harbor.[46] The submarine's final disposition has been unknown,[47] but she did not return to her "mother" sub.[48] On December 7, 2009 the Los Angeles Times reported that there is circumstantial evidence that three pieces of a submarine discovered three miles south of Pearl Harbor between 1994 and 2001 could be that of the missing submarine. The publication also reported that there is strong circumstantial evidence that the submarine fired two torpedoes at Battleship Row. The debris was dumped outside the harbor as part of an effort to conceal the West Loch Disaster, a 1944 ammunition explosion that destroyed six tank landing ships preparing for Operation Forager, the invasion of the Marianas.[49]

[edit] Japanese declaration of warSee also: Japanese declaration of war on the United States and the British Empire
The attack took place before any formal declaration of war was made by Japan, but this was not Admiral Yamamoto's intention. He originally stipulated that the attack should not commence until thirty minutes after Japan had informed the United States that peace negotiations were at an end.[50][51] The Japanese tried to uphold the conventions of war while still achieving surprise, but the attack began before the notice could be delivered. Tokyo transmitted the 5,000-word notification (commonly called the "14-Part Message") in two blocks to the Japanese Embassy in Washington, but transcribing the message took too long for the Japanese Ambassador to deliver it in time. (In fact, U.S. code breakers had already deciphered and translated most of the message hours before he was scheduled to deliver it.)[52] The final part of the "14 Part Message" is sometimes described as a declaration of war. While it neither declared war nor severed diplomatic relations, it was viewed by a number of senior U.S Government and military officials as a very strong indicator that negotiations were likely to be terminated [53]and that war might break out at any moment.[54] A declaration of war was printed on the front page of Japan's newspapers in the evening edition of December 8,[55] but not delivered to the U.S. government until the day after the attack.

For decades, conventional wisdom held that Japan attacked without any official warning of a break in relations only because of accidents and bumbling that delayed the delivery of a document to Washington hinting at war. In 1999, however, Takeo Iguchi, a professor of law and international relations at the International Christian University in Tokyo, discovered documents that pointed to a vigorous debate inside the government over how, and indeed whether, to notify Washington of Japan's intention to break off negotiations and start a war, including a December 7 entry in the war diary saying, "our deceptive diplomacy is steadily proceeding toward success." Of this, Iguchi said, "The diary shows that the army and navy did not want to give any proper declaration of war, or indeed prior notice even of the termination of negotiations ... [a]nd they clearly prevailed."[56]

[edit] First wave composition
The Japanese attacked in two waves. The first wave was detected by U.S. Army radar at 136 nautical miles (252 km), but was misidentified as USAAF bombers arriving from mainland U.S.A.
A. Ford Island NAS B. Hickam Field C. Bellows Field D. Wheeler Field
E. Kaneohe NAS F. Ewa MCAS R-1. Opana Radar Station R-2. Kawailoa RS R-3. Kaaawa RS
G. Haleiwa H. Kahuku I. Wahiawa J. Kaneohe K. Honolulu
0. B-17s from mainland 1. First strike group 1-1. Level bombers 1-2. Torpedo bombers 1-3. Dive bombers 2. Second strike group 2-1. Level bombers 2-1F. Fighters 2-2. Dive bombers
A. Wake Island B. Midway Islands C. Johnston Island D. Hawaii
D-1. Oahu 1. USS Lexington 2. USS Enterprise 3. First Air Fleet
    49 feet (14.9 m)
    Army base
    Navy base
Attacked targets:
1: USS California
2: USS Maryland
3: USS Oklahoma
4: USS Tennessee
5: USS West Virginia
6: USS Arizona
7: USS Nevada
8: USS Pennsylvania
9: Ford Island NAS
10: Hickam field
Ignored infrastructure targets:
A: Oil storage tanks
B:CINCPAC headquarters building
C: Submarine base
D: Navy YardThe first attack wave of 183 planes was launched north of Oahu, commanded by Captain Mitsuo Fuchida. It included:[nb 9]

â-1st Group (targets: battleships and aircraft carriers)[58]
â-50 Nakajima B5N Kate bombers armed with 800 kg (1760 lb) armor piercing bombs, organized in four sections
â-40 B5N bombers armed with Type 91 torpedoes, also in four sections
â-2nd Group â" (targets: Ford Island and Wheeler Field)
â-54 Aichi D3A Val dive bombers armed with 550 lb (249 kg) general purpose bombs
â-3rd Group â" (targets: aircraft at Ford Island, Hickam Field, Wheeler Field, Barberâ(TM)s Point, Kaneohe)
â-45 Mitsubishi A6M Zeke fighters for air control and strafing[57]
Six planes failed to launch due to technical difficulties.[36]

A destroyed Vindicator at Ewa field, the victim of one of the smaller attacks on the approach to Pearl Harbor.As the first wave approached Oahu a U.S. Army SCR-270 radar at Opana Point near the island's northern tip (a post not yet operational, having been in training mode for months) detected them and called in a warning. Radar had been in use in a training mode by the U.S Army Hawaiian Department for some time but was not fully operational. [59] Although the operators, Privates George Elliot Jr. and Joseph Lockard,[60] reported a target, a newly assigned officer at the thinly manned Intercept Center, Lieutenant Kermit A. Tyler, presumed the scheduled arrival of six B-17 bombers was the source. The direction from which the aircraft were coming was close (only a few degrees separated the two inbound courses),[61] while the operators had never seen a formation as large on radar;[62] they neglected to tell Tyler of its size,[63] while Tyler, for security reasons, could not tell them the B-17s were due[63] (even though it was widely known).[63]

Several U.S. aircraft were shot down as the first wave approached land, and one at least radioed a somewhat incoherent warning. Other warnings from ships off the harbor entrance were still being processed or awaiting confirmation when the attacking planes began bombing and strafing. Nevertheless it is not clear any warnings would have had much effect even if they had been interpreted correctly and much more promptly. The results the Japanese achieved in the Philippines were essentially the same as at Pearl Harbor, though MacArthur had almost nine hours warning that the Japanese had already attacked at Pearl.

The air portion of the attack on Pearl Harbor began at 7:48 a.m. Hawaiian Time[64] (3:18 a.m. December 8 Japanese Standard Time, as kept by ships of the Kido Butai),[65] with the attack on Kaneohe. A total of 353[10] Japanese planes in two waves reached Oahu. Slow, vulnerable torpedo bombers led the first wave, exploiting the first moments of surprise to attack the most important ships present (the battleships), while dive bombers attacked U.S. air bases across Oahu, starting with Hickam Field, the largest, and Wheeler Field, the main U.S. Army Air Force fighter base. The 171 planes in the second wave attacked the Air Corps' Bellows Field near Kaneohe on the windward side of the island, and Ford Island. The only aerial opposition came from a handful of P-36 Hawks, P-40 Warhawks and some SBD Dauntless dive bombers from the carrier USS Enterprise.[nb 10]

Men aboard U.S. ships awoke to the sounds of alarms, bombs exploding, and gunfire, prompting bleary-eyed men into dressing as they ran to General Quarters stations. (The famous message, "Air raid Pearl Harbor. This is not drill.",[nb 11] was sent from the headquarters of Patrol Wing Two, the first senior Hawaiian command to respond.) The defenders were very unprepared. Ammunition lockers were locked, aircraft parked wingtip to wingtip in the open to deter sabotage,[66] guns unmanned (none of the Navy's 5"/38s, only a quarter of its machine guns, and only four of 31 Army batteries got in action).[66] Despite this low alert status, many American military personnel responded effectively during the battle.[nb 12] Ensign Joe Taussig, Jr., the only commissioned officer aboard USS Nevada, got the ship underway during the attack but lost a leg. The ship was beached in the harbor by the Senior Quartermaster.[67] One of the destroyers, USS Aylwin, got underway with only four officers aboard, all ensigns, none with more than a year's sea duty; she operated at sea for 36 hours before her commanding officer managed to get back aboard.[68] Captain Mervyn Bennion, commanding USS West Virginia led his men until he was cut down by fragments from a bomb which hit USS Tennessee, moored alongside.

[edit] Second wave compositionThe second wave consisted of 171 planes: 54 B5Ns, 81 D3As, and 36 A6Ms, commanded by Lieutenant-Commander Shigekazu Shimazaki.[57] Four planes failed to launch because of technical difficulties.[36] This wave and its targets comprised:[57]

â-1st Group â" 54 B5Ns armed with 550 lb (249 kg) and 132 lb (60 kg) general purpose bombs[58]
â-27 B5Ns â" aircraft and hangars on Kaneohe, Ford Island, and Barbers Point
â-27 B5Ns â" hangars and aircraft on Hickam Field
â-2nd Group (targets: aircraft carriers and cruisers)
â-81 D3As armed with 550 lb (249 kg) general purpose bombs, in four sections
â-3rd Group â" (targets: aircraft at Ford Island, Hickam Field, Wheeler Field, Barberâ(TM)s Point, Kaneohe)
â-36 A6Ms for defense and strafing
The second wave was divided into three groups. One was tasked to attack KÄneÊohe, the rest Pearl Harbor proper. The separate sections arrived at the attack point almost simultaneously, from several directions.

Ninety minutes after it began, the attack was over. 2,386 Americans died (55 were civilians, most killed by unexploded American anti-aircraft shells landing in civilian areas), a further 1,139 wounded. Eighteen ships were sunk or run aground, including five battleships.[nb 13][4]

USS Arizona (BB-39) during the attackOf the American fatalities, nearly half of the total (1,177) were due to the explosion of Arizona's forward magazine after it was hit by a modified 40 cm (16 in.) shell.[nb 14]

Already damaged by a torpedo and on fire amidships, Nevada attempted to exit the harbor. She was targeted by many Japanese bombers as she got under way and sustained more hits from 250 lb (113 kg) bombs which started further fires. She was deliberately beached to avoid blocking the harbor entrance.

California was hit by two bombs and two torpedoes. The crew might have kept her afloat, but were ordered to abandon ship just as they were raising power for the pumps. Burning oil from Arizona and West Virginia drifted down on her, and probably made the situation look worse than it was. The disarmed target ship Utah was holed twice by torpedoes. West Virginia was hit by seven torpedoes, the seventh tearing away her rudder. Oklahoma was hit by four torpedoes, the last two above her belt armor, which caused her to capsize. Maryland was hit by two of the converted 40 cm shells, but neither caused serious damage.

Although the Japanese concentrated on battleships (the largest vessels present), they did not ignore other targets. The light cruiser Helena was torpedoed, and the concussion from the blast capsized the neighboring minelayer Oglala. Two destroyers in dry dock, Cassin and Downes were destroyed when bombs penetrated their fuel bunkers. The leaking fuel caught fire; flooding the dry dock in an effort to fight fire made the burning oil rise, and both were burned out. Cassin slipped from her keel blocks and rolled against Downes. The light cruiser Raleigh was holed by a torpedo. The light cruiser Honolulu was damaged but remained in service. The repair vessel Vestal, moored alongside Arizona, was heavily damaged and beached. The seaplane tender Curtiss was also damaged. The destroyer Shaw was badly damaged when two bombs penetrated her forward magazine.[69]

Of the 402[10] American aircraft in Hawaii, 188 were destroyed and 159 damaged,[10] 155 of them on the ground. Almost none was actually ready to take off to defend the base. Eight Army Air Corps pilots managed to get airborne during the battle[70] and six were credited with downing at least one Japanese aircraft during the attack, 1st Lt. Lewis M. Sanders, 2nd Lt. Philip M. Rasmussen, 2nd Lt. Kenneth M. Taylor, 2nd Lt. George S. Welch, 2nd Lt. Harry W. Brown, and 2nd Lt. Gordon H. Sterling Jr. Sterling was shot down and killed by friendly fire returning from the fight.[71] Of 33 PBYs in Hawaii, 24 were destroyed, and six others damaged beyond repair. (The three on patrol returned undamaged.) Friendly fire brought down some U.S. planes on top of that, including five from an inbound flight from Enterprise. Japanese attacks on barracks killed additional personnel.

Fifty-five Japanese airmen and nine submariners were killed in the action, and one was captured. Of Japan's 414[57] available planes, 29 were lost during the battle[72] (nine in the first attack wave, 20 in the second),[nb 15] with another 74 damaged by antiaircraft fire from the ground.

[edit] Possible third waveSeveral Japanese junior officers, including Mitsuo Fuchida and Minoru Genda, the chief architect of the attack, urged Nagumo to carry out a third strike in order to destroy as much of Pearl Harbor's fuel and torpedo[nb 16] storage, maintenance, and dry dock facilities as possible.[73] Military historians have suggested the destruction of these would have hampered the U.S. Pacific Fleet far more seriously than loss of its battleships.[74] If they had been wiped out, "serious [American] operations in the Pacific would have been postponed for more than a year";[75] according to American Admiral Chester Nimitz, later Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, "it would have prolonged the war another two years."[76] Nagumo, however, decided to withdraw for several reasons:

â-American anti-aircraft performance had improved considerably during the second strike, and two thirds of Japan's losses were incurred during the second wave.[77] Nagumo felt if he launched a third strike, he would be risking three quarters of the Combined Fleet's strength to wipe out the remaining targets (which included the facilities) while suffering higher aircraft losses.[77]
â-The location of the American carriers remained unknown. In addition, the admiral was concerned his force was now within range of American land-based bombers.[77] Nagumo was uncertain whether the U.S. had enough surviving planes remaining on Hawaii to launch an attack against his carriers.[78]
â-A third wave would have required substantial preparation and turnaround time, and would have meant returning planes would have had to land at night. At the time, only the (British) Royal Navy had developed night carrier techniques, so this was a substantial risk.[79]
â-The task force's fuel situation did not permit him to remain in waters north of Pearl Harbor much longer, since he was at the very limit of logistical support. To do so risked running unacceptably low on fuel, perhaps even having to abandon destroyers en route home.[80]
â-He believed the second strike had essentially satisfied the main objective of his missionâ"the neutralization of the Pacific Fleetâ"and did not wish to risk further losses.[81] Moreover, it was Japanese Navy practice to prefer the conservation of strength over the total destruction of the enemy.[82]
At a conference aboard Yamato the following morning, Yamamoto initially supported Nagumo.[81] In retrospect, sparing the vital dockyards, maintenance shops, and oil depots meant the U.S. could respond relatively quickly to Japanese activities in the Pacific. Yamamoto later regretted Nagumo's decision to withdraw and categorically stated it had been a great mistake not to order a third strike.[83]

My question.... (3, Funny)

buanzo (542591) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289806)

.... Will it blend?

Re:My question.... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290034)

Sponsored by Kitchenaid.

Re:My question.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290752)

that actually made me laugh out loud

Advertisement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289810)

It may be only me that didn't understand that correctly, but there are companies paying slashdot so they can have their emmployees advertising in ask slashdot posts? Taking slashvertisements to a whole new level...

StackOverflow competior? (5, Interesting)

bigsexyjoe (581721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289822)

Slashdot, are you saying that you are trying to emulate the functions of StackOverflow?
What's the deal with the sponsors? Are you saying Oracle (for example) is going to have some expert answer common Java questions in a slashvertisement/tech support type thing?

Re:StackOverflow competior? (1)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289956)


Re:StackOverflow competior? (5, Insightful)

claytongulick (725397) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289964)

No, this appears (on the surface) to be another gasp at squeezing revenue from "the slashdot".

While I don't blame them for wanting to be profitable, I can just site here and think of the high level exec meetings that had subjects like "We need to find creative ways to monetize our user base" and someone said "I know! lets take 'ask slashdot' and make it a revenue opportunity...".

I suspect there was internal resistance to it, but most of that probably faded with CdrTaco leaving.

Slashdot polls have been replaced with Splunk marketing surveys, Ask Slashdot is now a vendor sponsored forum...

I give it two years before slashdot is indistinguishable from the Yahoo! main page.

Typical corporate acquisition stuff. I suspect, based on some other clues, that Geeknet is suffering from decreased revenue pressures. I suspect that ThinkGeek sales have tanked, and no one knows why (and apparently no one realized that pushing cheap, low quality crap with clever marketing at twice the sane price is not a good long term sales strategy). Sourceforge has got to be operating at a loss, and has been hemorrhaging projects as mass defections over to github and others occur.

So I think there's probably a lot of corporate pressure to make slashdot start earning more to make up for shortfalls.

We'll see more of this, it was predictable. The user base will continue to fall off, and soon we'll be getting emails ala Facebook - "We haven't seen you in a while! Do you know what you've been missing!?! Come back and be an awesome geek! Derf derf..."

Sorry if I'm coming across as too cynical here, I'm not against companies earning money. What frustrates my is the overall cluelessness of executives that think the proper path to profitability it to turn this (once great) site into McSlashdot.

Re:StackOverflow competior? (5, Interesting)

claytongulick (725397) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290008)

Sorry to reply to myself, but I'm a big believer in not bitching about a problem without offering a solution.

Slashdot corporate overlords, if you're browsing these posts for reactions to the change, here's a suggestion: consider the metafilter business model.

Put a slashdot poll up and ask the users if they'd be willing to pay $5 per year to get rid of all the ads, and eliminate 90% of the trolls (most trolls aren't willing to pay to troll).

Make karma mean something - those with excellent or above karma get a discounted (or free) rate. Same way we can turn off Ads now.

I know that I, for one, would jump at the chance to help fund slashdot, and to help make it great again.

Re:StackOverflow competior? (2)

Vairon (17314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290368)

They already give certain members an option to disable ads. For people who have the choice there is a small box in the upper right-hand section of Slashdot that says:

Ads Disabled [*]
Thanks again for helping make Slashdot great!

I don't know if it's based on excellent karma, an achievement (days read in a row), low uid or something else.

Re:StackOverflow competior? (1)

JohnnyBGod (1088549) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290856)

I think it's karma.

I would not mind the adds if.. (2)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290842)

Ads are not a terrible thing. Sometimes they are even of value. I always look at the ads in Circuit Cellar magazine, CycleWorld, Motorcyclist, Rider, and other magazines that I read.
The key to have ads that people do not want to block.
No animation or sound and keep them relatively small and I will read them.
If they blink or move then ad blocker goes into full force.

Slashdot actually has a really good community but a tough one to force ads on. The problem would be getting people to white list Slashdot.

Re:StackOverflow competior? (1)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290822)

I've been in similar situations and I think you're almost spot on, except for this:

I give it two years before slashdot is indistinguishable from the Yahoo! main page.

There's clearly no significant ongoing investment in Slashdot, they wouldn't have the budget for a redesign. It looks more like they are slashing the budget, not increasing it. That may be the reason why CmdrTaco left, by choice or otherwise. I would expect Slashdot to stay almost identical to how it is now from a technology perspective, with a few minor tweaks to "monetize" the site. Any big changes will be things they can do without expensive development projects.

They aren't concerned with ruining Ask Slashdot because the tech-savvy people do Reddit AMAs now instead.

Remember when Netscape 4 was cancelled? They released several new versions with no user-visible changes except for that stupid "Shop" button on the toolbar. Imagine the same thing, but with a website.

huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289846)

Wait, what do you mean "the sponsors don't pick the questions"? So the sponsor will be automatically randomly assigned to a question, or is someone at Slashdot matching up sponsors to stories?

It doesn't seem particularly useful that, for example, experts from a networking company would give insights into to a question regarding workplace relations...

Re:huh? (1)

JonySuede (1908576) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290102)

well, the network expert can tell you that your workplace relations problems are cause by the lack of a quality crossbar in the switching fabric. For 10000$ he can sell you a switch with a crossbar in the fabric that can handle your n^2 communications link that are the source of your workplace relation problems.

Interesting (5, Insightful)

lazarus (2879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289848)

I've been here for a long time. It used to be that I would very rarely if ever read comments submitted by other Slashdotters as I was far more interested in TFA. But as time has gone on I find I am more interested in what others here have to say. Everybody has the same news stories now and it is the insights and comments from the people in this community that are the real value.

Not certain how you're planning to define "sponsors", but if you're planning to accept money from people who would like to mine this community for information I would caution you to tread carefully. You may be trying this on the wrong group of people...

Hope it boots!

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290070)

Hear Hear.

It's been more and more apparent in the past few years that it's the communal commentariat that is providing more value that the professional media release / gadget review writers are necessarily giving.

Diversity in action?

And /. as part of my (balanced?) daily info diet seems to work, precisely because of the varied opinions it tries to carry.

Keep it up.

Re:Interesting (5, Insightful)

pecosdave (536896) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290182)

My experience tells me /. IS the community.

The consensus on /. is what the tech industry is going to do, like it or not. We are the ones who are driving out DRM, slowly. We are the ones who made sure SCO failed. We predicted Microsoft 's decline in dominance unless they stop acting like assholes.

We predict and drive the tech sector, /. is the helm and our excellent but not completely flawless mod system keeps the GNAA from driving.

Just like everything else in the tech sector /. will be subject to the judgment of /. It will either work well or the consensus will stop it. I hope it works well, I want the folks who run the joint to make a few bucks, but if it doesn't there will be no choice but to stop or fail.

Yes, I think /. has a lot in common with Anonymous only less coordinated, a mass of individuals working separately toward the same goals motivated by the rational consensus reached here.

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290934)

You drive the tech sector? The same idiots who said the iPhone and iPad would fail?

Re:Interesting (1)

bzipitidoo (647217) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290236)

And I am wondering whether this change to Ask Slashdot goes far enough. If the comments here are that good, perhaps a wiki format with restrictions on who can make edits would be better?

Many of the sorts of things I ask search engines often return hits from Slashdot. On a few occasions I've found my own comments in which I asked the same thing I searched! For instance, I'd still like a mechless car radio that can play Ogg Vorbis files from an SD card or USB stick. And which has Radio Data System, and without costing over $150. No such thing seems to exist, with or without RDS, at any price, at least, not in the US. When I've searched for this, some of the hits are my own comments here on Slashdot. Guess no one else wants that. Have to go the docking route, or use the audio in jack.

DIGG exodus: Now in Slasdot Flavour (3, Interesting)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290488)

What I worry about is how much manipulation these sponsors will demand.
About a year ago, did the same and re worked the site.
The sponsors started to control content and people noticed.
Within 4 months, most users left for another site.

Now, Digg is a shadow of its former self and is spammed regularly.
Comments are few and hollow a-la "I agree" or "me too".
Content is still controlled to this day.

IOW: Digg is now a Web 2.0 billboard.

I don't want a repeat.

wtf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289858)

If this is the place to come for answers, this post was a terrible invitation; it explained absolutely nothing about what is going on.

What? (1)

Lando (9348) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289876)

Sponsors? What the heck? I come to slashdot to get answers not marketing BS. Now you are going to give some company "authority?" I guess I can say goodbye to getting answers on slashdot. This is not a fricken help site, why are you trying to change that? I come here to be informed about Stuff that matters not whatever marketing wants to shove down my throat. We already have a lot of non-nerdy types here, so what you want to do is water that down and become more common denominator? I guess I'll be pulling out my copy of slashcode soon.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289950)

Really? You come here for answers?!?

Re:What? (1)

Kozz (7764) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289984)

Sponsors? What the heck? I come to slashdot to get answers not marketing BS. Now you are going to give some company "authority?" I guess I can say goodbye to getting answers on slashdot.

I was thinking much the same thing... The only way to do this "right", I think, would be to allow the "expert" to be introduced (who/what/where) and then allow them to answer questions (where relevant) with the best responses possible -- something as helpful as you might find from an excellent daily /. discussion contributor. However, the moment that the person starts plugging their company or product where it's not completely appropriate, expect shit to blow up, and people will be pissed. And then they won't come back. Be careful, Slashdot!

Re:What? (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290014)

I think the biggest thing /. is missing is that people knowledgeable in the sectors relevant to the discussion are already here, posting under personal accounts.

The "sponsors" we see won't be engineers or experts. Those guys are already here, posting because it's their passion.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290138)

You've got questions, we've got answers. The answers are unrelated to the questions, but they're sponsored answers. WOOT!

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290166)

I come to slashdot to get answers not marketing BS.

Me too. If not answers, at least an honest discussion, not tainted by marketing dollars. Where there was at least an honest effort (whether it works well or not is another question) to elevate posts on their merits, not the depth of the poster's pocketbook. This will be good for the /. owners, because they'll make a buck, but unless someone can prove to me that wealth = expertise (or 'karma'..) then as far as I'm concerned this move just sucks; and my estimation of the value of /. just went down quite a lot.

Re:What? (2)

PerlJedi (2406408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290362)

I come to slashdot to get answers not marketing BS. Now you are going to give some company "authority?"

I think an importantent distinguishing difference here will be that the "experts" the sponsor is providing have no special powers over the conversation. The sponsor will not be able to censor what the average slashdot user has to say. I believe that the average slashdot reader will not be fooled by a companies marketing BS, which will in the end force the sponsor to actaully engage in a serious manner with our readers lest they themselves be made a fool of.

Think of it this way: When a company sponsor's a question, and provides someone they classify as an "expert" to take part in the conversation, you will have the opportunity to get real answers to your real questions.

Re:What? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290480)

It could be interresting; have sponsors from competing companies discuss with a healthy dose or /. "error correction" and see how it turns out.
About as much fun as an Apple fanboy arguing with a Microsoft fanboy.

Serious Questions (3, Insightful)

Troke (1612099) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289882)

Right now any company can make an account and answer questions, how will the new change be different besides the financial support to slashdot. Will they be allowed moderation points? Say in which comments float to the top? Actually get to pose the questions (how awesome is adobe reader on a scale from 9-10) I would love to have specifics on this agreement as Slashdot has become a wonderful place for me to come and see unbiased information from the technical community and I would hate to see bias creep into the discussion because of this.

Re:Serious Questions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289918)

A company could perform a grassroots campaign on slashdot (or any other site) without this. Perhaps easier even, due to people not having their guards up. Personally I think it'd be nice if large corporations could actually fish for input from their technical userbase. It's not like increased communication would be bad.

Re:Serious Questions (2)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289942)

No spin doctor can make microsoft popular here.

Re:Serious Questions (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290082)

Maybe not, but many people begrudgingly have to use their products. All you'd need to do is sneak in stuff like "hey, this sucks right? But I bought this service/software/whatever and it worked nicely. It was the least painless solution to this specific problem that I could find."

You'd think that the developers of a product would know it's strengths versus it's competitors, so creating a plausible scenario shouldn't prove too difficult.

Re:Serious Questions (2)

bzipitidoo (647217) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290424)

You're right, no amount of mere spin could fool us into forgetting all the evil Microsoft has done. OOXML. DRM, especially Vista's DRM. Trying to squash Ogg Vorbis. IE. J. The Microsoft Tax. But I also remember that MS has sometimes done good. MSDOS 5 and 6 were good. Microsoft could rehabilitate themselves. All they have to do is change their attitudes and business methods. (I know, ha ha ha.) Stop trying to monopolize everything. Stop trying to destroy competition with unfair practices. Stop trying to lock in everyone.

Re:Serious Questions (1)

whereiswaldo (459052) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290968)

Personally I think it'd be nice if large corporations could actually fish for input from their technical userbase. It's not like increased communication would be bad.

Considering the dollars that companies spend lobbying the government, being more in touch with people beforehand couldn't hurt either.

Re:Serious Questions (5, Informative)

PerlJedi (2406408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290464)

The sponsor will not be given any special treatment with regards to comment score and moderation. The "expert" the sponsor will be providing to take part in the conversation will have an account which is "badged", meaning that it will be visually apparent when the a comment was posted by the sponsor. Beyond the visual treatment that will make clear which comments are made by a representative of the sponsor, they will have no special power. They will not be able to hide comments they don't like, or highlight those they do.

We want to offer a sponsor the chance to have a serious conversation with our audience, but we are not going to be giving them a soap box to stand on. If they want to engage with our audience, they will need to understand that means taking the good with the bad.

Re:Serious Questions (0)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290974)


You're joking, right?

How to hide all Ask Slashdot posts (2)

fair use (948368) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289888)

I was ready to hide all Ask Slashdot posts anyway because they provide very little value (mostly because the questions are not that interesting to me). Now I'm more motivated to do that...

Go to Options -> Exclusions and you can hide all Ask Slashdot posts.

Very useful! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289910)

Specially the part regarding "evading censorship from unfriendly regimes".

Come to think it must be hard to live in a country with an "unfriendly regime". Not that my government is exactly friendly to us, either. But at least it doesn't hate us...

So VIRAL ADVERTISEMENT in the comments too? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289916)

"Sponsors"... "answering"... yeah... riiiight.
I've shortly seen the "viral advertising" business from the inside, and this smells more like it, than Charlie Sheen reeks of booze.

Considering how many "articles" here are actually disguised *advertisements*,
and counting the reduction of comments stories here get (I remember times when 600+ comments in the first 24 hours were normal.),
I'd say we only need Netcraft to confirm that Slashdot is indeed dead and done. ^^

Can we start with my question? (0)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289946)

How does a geeky pimple faced youngster living in his mother's basement get laid? I'm just kidding. I'm not young.

Better change the slogan soon then! (3, Insightful)

adosch (1397357) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289948)

I mostly visit slashdot as an avenue for tech/science/nerd news, and an occasional giggle at flame wars. The growing trend of 'Ask Slashdot' posts I've never had a problem with; what is a problem is the growing rate of redundancy/frequency in question posts versus actual news, no one moderating the train wreck of flame wars and the shear lack of aptitude from the question poser in terms of topic worth.

'Ask Slashdot' used to be an infrequent-but-jolt-of-freshness into daily reading, now it's just being used WAY to often with poor content abandonment IMHO. I see more posts saying "Didn't we just discuss this last week?" followed by a link to a slashdot URL showing the evidence.

All cynicism aside, I'm not for it and I'm sure as hell hoping the next administrative post to slashdot isn't "We're changing our slogan to 'Slashdot: Regurgitated Tech Commentary and Questions. No News. Stuff that doesn't matter".

Everything changes but... (2)

Kushy (225928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289958)

I really miss Taco.... Who thought this was a good idea?

R.I.P. CmdrTaco (5, Insightful)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289978)

He saw the writing on the wall and got out while the getting was good

Re:R.I.P. CmdrTaco (1)

bwintx (813768) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290044)

+1 -- exactly what I thought when I read TFS.

Re:R.I.P. CmdrTaco (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290160)

He only got out when it was good if it was back during the Internet stock bubble when VA stock price was retardedly high. I never found out if he was able to cash any of the options before the crash. Once that opportunity passed, it's never mattered what happened here.

Re:R.I.P. CmdrTaco (1)

vikingpower (768921) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290624)

Mod parent up. Peace be on Taco's ashes.

Re:R.I.P. CmdrTaco (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290834)

By the way, did you know that you can post and read these discussions from Taco Bell? Head down to your local Taco Bell restaurant for wild December deals and more.

Ask Slashdot: Which is the best operating system? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38289990)

... Sponsored by Microsoft ...

Well OK, perhaps even Microsoft know better than to turn up here for that one ;)

Bullshit. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290022)

Another way of saying "we're going to have even more Slashvertisments in the future, straight from the companies who can't possibly do any wrong."

I can see the line-up already:

- Is Carrier IQ software capable of tracking my usage? Answer by the creator of Carrier IQ and an Apple representative
- what's the best database to use for a personal website? Answer by a MySQL rep from Oracle
- what are the benefits of a Slashdot subscription? Answer by some BoingBoing reject editor

Fuck you, Soulskill. Money grubbing twat.

Does this mean the Apple turfers will be labeled? (4, Funny)

pecosdave (536896) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290024)

They weren't hard to identify anyways, but an official label on those accounts would help.

Re:Does this mean the Apple turfers will be labele (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38290890)

You can tell an Apple astroturfer from an Apple fanboy? I can't.

Ok, got a question (1)

Joe U (443617) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290028)

I'm looking for a good ad-blocker, one that specifically filters technology advertising on message board sites. Difficulty: Must work with Chrome, IE 9 and Opera.

Any suggestions?

Clarification: Any suggestions that do not involve switching my OS.

News for nerds, stuff that matters (1)

vikingpower (768921) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290290)

This is opening the gate to the PR people from the major "tech" companies, who - which is a well-known fact - are not nerds. Also, the "mattering" level of the "Ask Slashdot" discussions will decrease. Aggregate judgment: this leads /. away from its self-professed core competence of "News for nerds, stuff that matters". Bad idea, /. !!

Copy-Paste Google News Headlines (1)

retroworks (652802) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290398)

Will this important function, having geek words in articles appear on Google News and then submitting them over to Slashdot, be kept intact?

Best Part - Experts Exchange killer? (2)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290568)

"you'll see that some Ask Slashdot questions have their own sponsors; the sponsors don't pick the questions, but experts from each sponsor will stick around for the discussion"

So, this could become a free version of Experts Exchange? I don't know if this is a good thing or not. If the quality of answers is high, specifically if the sponsors are tech companies, then this is good for users. However, Experts Exchange is pay for a reason, and that's to ensure very high quality. So if the quality is low, this will just become the geek version of Yahoo Answers.

I think Slashdot should possibly test an alternate Karma system just for answers. Just because someone is +5 Funny doesn't make them an expert.

Part of Slashcode? (1)

Sez Zero (586611) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290776)

Is this new functionality going to be available as a part of slashcode [] ?

Uh-oh (3, Interesting)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290784)

Meta posts worry me. I'm always afraid we might manage to slashdot slashdot.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?