×

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!

Comments

top

Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

s.petry Re:Wait for it.... (326 comments)

If you were really from the city you would not claim "I'm from the city" but would claim "I'm from Hamtramk" or "I'm from Dearborn". What you wrote instead equates to completely false claims.

yesterday
top

Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

s.petry Re:Wait for it.... (326 comments)

Nope, it's not just about the 'white' racist white people. I grew up in Ferndale and Madison Heights and have no issues with race. There are certain areas you learn not to visit if you are white, just like black people learn where not to go.

The Detroit area has a lot of bigots and racism, but it's not just white bigots and racists. If you have doubts and are black, go driving around in Livonia. If you are white, cruise around in Centerline. These are just 2 examples, but there are plenty to be found.

You claim to be white and from "the city" but don't actually mention a city which to me indicates that you are just a poser. Driving main roads into the "Joe" or Cobo Hall does not make you "from the city".

yesterday
top

Americans Uncomfortable With Possibility of Ubiquitous Drones, Designer Babies

s.petry Re:Personal Drones (153 comments)

Wiki does a horrible job of explaining this fallacy, and only gives one use case and definition. I'd recommend a college Logic book which explains the fallacy very well in numerous ways. My old text book spends a chapter on this one because it's not a simple fallacy.

To your second point, it's not a humor deficiency. People were showing different ways of defining this fallacy. Some of them correct, others not. A fallacy is a logic error, it does not prove true or false. It can surely help to demonstrate the logical errors made in statements, but the reason for calling out fallacies in debate is to reduce an argument to it's simplest terms and invalidate irrational/illogical statements.

Example: "The sky is blue you ass!" may contain an ad hominem and may contain a true statement. I have given no proof as to the color or whether or not you are an "ass". I just presented a fallacy hoping that people believe me.

In Logic we would break that into two statements and choose what's relevant to our debate. If we were trying to determine people's opinion of you, we would keep the later calling sky color a fallacy (it could fit quite a few). If we were debating the color of the sky the former would stay and the later would be called fallacy (most likely ad hominem).

2 days ago
top

Americans Uncomfortable With Possibility of Ubiquitous Drones, Designer Babies

s.petry Re:Personal Drones (153 comments)

Learn Latin you imperitus fool!!

2 days ago
top

Americans Uncomfortable With Possibility of Ubiquitous Drones, Designer Babies

s.petry Re:Personal Drones (153 comments)

Certification has the same issue as gun licensing, which is not an issue for gun shops as much as it's a concern for being tracked and tagged as a gun owner by the Government.

Make it part of public schools where everyone is a potential gun owner and I'd agree easily.

The common misnomer of the 2nd amendment is that a person owns a gun for self protection. The real purpose of the amendment is so that citizens in mass can revolt against corrupt government. (I don't mean to imply you made this misnomer, just preventing some trolling).

If everyone was a potential gun owner and trained to operate weapons, we are not worse off. Corrupt politicians certainly would not like it, but as far as I'm concerned they should be on trial and/or in jail anyway.

2 days ago
top

Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

s.petry Re:do they have a progressive view? (326 comments)

And then there is reality! Having driven from Michigan to Texas numerous times, living in Texas for 4 years I found plenty of Rock, Hip/Hop, Rap, and yes lots of "Country" music stations.

If you switched to AM radio for some dumb ass reason when crossing into a different state that's your own damn fault! I can find Christian stations both AM and FM in Detroit just as easy as search for them down "South". Plenty of music stations no matter where in the country I have been.

Claiming Michigan is some blessed region of non-biased people is laughable. If you are white simply drive anywhere in or near Detroit, Flint or Pontiac with your windows open so people can see you. Hell, the majority of Wayne county is not very safe for "Whitey". If you are black, head to Grosse Pointe and wave at a nice police officer who will beat you bloody for being in the wrong city, before hauling your ass to jail. For that matter, head a few counties out of Detroit and see how you are treated. Mackinac Island is a great place to be if you are black too, no really! Livonia is a self proclaimed "Whitest City in America".

No wonder you post anonymously, it takes a certain kind of coward to make up that much bullshit!

2 days ago
top

Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

s.petry Re:Wait for it.... (326 comments)

Nope, not especially Oakland. Madison Heights, Royal Oak, Ferndale, bleh! Really it depends on where in Oakland County you are, but don't lump in cities like I just mentioned. Safer than Detroit for sure, but Baghdad is safer than Detroit.

Long long ago the line was 8mile, and today it's around 12 mile to be "good area" which rules out lots of Oakland County cities.

2 days ago
top

Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

s.petry Re:Wait for it.... (326 comments)

I moved from there 3 years ago and still keep tabs (I have relatives from Detroit out to Flint and Pontiac). GM called me when they started pulling their IT back into Detroit and I laughed at their offer.

You hint at it, but I'll state it plainly. Claiming there is a "Boom" in Detroit is horribly distorting reality. In reality, the numbers went up because IT jobs were brought back from overseas, not because there is some magical "new" businesses. Next year these numbers will show very little change, and the next. Sure, there is some trickle effect but it's not a "boom". It's a one time relocation.

Michigan's tax laws pushed the majority of businesses away long ago. Tax rates are too high for any industrial work to move back, and large commercial companies will avoid Michigan for the same reason. Granholm ran around trying to peddle companies to move in for 1-3 years tax free. Companies would talk to her, but looking at a 20-28% tax when your free time ends is simply too much. Especially when you can cross the border into Ohio and pay 1/2 that rate.

Where I don't agree with you is that the city has been corrupt for 100+ years. Prior to Young the city was on par with any other big city in the US. Young was horribly corrupt and should have been in jail, just like Killpatrick.

2 days ago
top

Click Like? You May Have Given Up the Right To Sue

s.petry Re:If only (214 comments)

Have you read the tax law? Our Tax code should be a few hundred pages at most! The majority of the 74,000 pages we have today are not because the US is so complicated. It's so that certain people get the loopholes that they want and lobby to get. Lobby has become a legal synonym to Bribery today.

2 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Voluntary? (391 comments)

Apologies, lying may have been too strong a term. Misleading, dishonest, and distorting would be more accurate. I make that claim based on your statements which I had quoted and what you previously wrote. Such as making an issue of the duration of time he was in Hong Kong and implying he was acting nefariously by "passing through repressive countries" and his itinerary was "circuitous". The last part quoted is an absolute fairy tale, his itinerary was linear and off the cuff after the leaks were made public.

You have an implication in your statements that Snowden was not selective in his initial location when the leaks occurred, or that he chose the location for nefarious reasons. You further imply that he had a desire to be in Russia, and had a choice in the matter after the leaks were made public.

There is no reading things into your post, you wrote similar posts twice. You distorted the timelines and at least implied fabricated motives more than once. You then claimed someone else was ignorant (indirectly and correctly I'll add) which at least implies that you have better facts. In reality your facts were just as distorted as the person you were responding to.

If you did not intend to distort both motives and timelines, correct yourself and move on. I'm good with that. I do get tired of people making up information to base an opinion upon, and touting both both as factual. Because of that I am not always patient in my responses and occasionally am very blunt. As stated, claiming you were lying may have been a bit heavy and I could have chosen different words. You did however write at least one untrue statement, so I'm not completely out of bounds.

2 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Voluntary? (391 comments)

You claim someone else needs to read that itinerary, but make an absolutely false claims and ignore your own itinerary. Did you read what you linked to?

He passed through two incredibly repressive countries in his travels, for the most circuitous itinerary ever.

Hong Kong -> Russia is "passing through two incredibly repressive countries? I guess you and I have different definitions of "passing through", and in English we would not say he passed through any of them. He was intentionally in Hong Kong, and had no other choice but to end up in Moscow.

I have no idea why you are fabricating why he was in those locations. Snowden and Greenwald issued statements on this long ago, it does not take some magic itinerary from the BBC to figure out. Read fucking history instead of telling fairy tales! You screaming "FOURTEEN DAYS" is just asinine if you actually used historical data instead of telling lies.

Snowden was in Hong Kong because it was one of few places he felt was a secure location to be located when the leaks were made public. Snowden was not sure how most other Governments would react to the leaks, let alone if any would offer him protection (Including Russia). Snowden only went to Moscow after his passports were cancelled in the US, he was labelled a traitor and felt there was no way he could receive a fair trial, and other asylum options he had hoped for were closed. Investigating asylum options is exactly the reason he remained in Hong Kong for "FOURTEEN DAYS". He landed in Moscow and lived at the airport because he still had not requested asylum in Russia. Snowden only applied for asylum at the point he legally had to do so, or be turned over to the US.

If you remember, the US pressured other governments to illegally force diplomatic aircraft to land so that they could search for Snowden. In other words, even if Venezuela or another South American country offered him asylum he had almost no chance of getting there. Interesting that your magical timeline does not mention those things. Almost as interesting as you fabricating information and telling stories.. almost.

2 days ago
top

Click Like? You May Have Given Up the Right To Sue

s.petry Re:Possibly Worse Than That (214 comments)

But today's body of law is so great that I'm not sure it's possible for a person to read it all within a single lifetime, let alone piece together all of the cross links and understand everything that applies to you.

2,567 hours just to read the US Federal Tax law, which is 120% of a work year if your full time job was to read that Law. And just think of your joy when you find out next year laws are changed (not amended) and grows at a frightening rate. 26,300 pages in 1984, to 54,846 by 2003, to 67,204 in 2007, and 73,954 today. Reference.

2 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Old proverb (391 comments)

Spending 2 minutes reading Feinstein's Wiki page discounts any possible claim you have of "extraordinary". You could not possibly be claiming that everything I stated was dependent on Feinstein explicitly stating one sentence in one way, because that would be idiocy.

Here are One, two, three references, all of politicians calling for the death of Snowden (and one of those contains 6 references).

I can not find the exact quote from Feinstein either, but this is not uncommon nor does it make my statement wrong. Feinstein called Snowden a traitor, which has a punishment of the death penalty. If Feinstein was not a supporter of the death penalty I may cut some slack. Her Wiki page speaks for her very well.

Feinstein is a supporter of capital punishment.

Even assuming she did not state "kill him" directly, there is a very obvious indirect statement by her calling him a traitor (on numerous occasions).

2 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Useful Idiot (391 comments)

Also, compare how the main Russian media speak about Putin with how Fox News speaks about Obama.

There is no difference, sorry. Obama is not talked poorly about in US media. Anyone that talks negatively tends to be labelled a racist almost immediately.

In the last week the only things I have heard regarding President Obama in broadcast media are that he talked to Putin about the Ukraine, and that he's coming to town for a yet another fund raiser. I can not possibly watch all 3 major stations all the time (obviously) but do try and rotate stations. It's possible someone did question or talk poorly about him and I didn't watch during that time, but I have severe doubts.

2 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Useful Idiot (391 comments)

Who are these three people?

Last I checked, Google is not broken. Start with Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner, then see who's on the boards of every media company in the US. This is really not hard to figure out, if you care to look. If you don't care about the facts at least have the decency not to muddy the waters for people that do.

Do you really think Fox News calls up the White House to ask them how President Obama would like their broadcast today to go?

Are you falsely trying to claim that the only possible way to organize a message is by one person disseminating information? Perhaps you are trying to claim that "Don't talk about Gitmo in a negative way, or ignore Gitmo completely." could not possibly be directed, and the only way to direct a message is revoke individually? Either way, your false assumption is just that. False.

2 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Useful Idiot (391 comments)

While I see your point I don't fully agree. How different do you believe the US is from Russia?

US media is controlled primarily by 3 people, each work closely with the US government for what to show, when to show it, and how to frame stories. Most people here will tell you that you have to find 3rd party information for real "News" because it does not exist on TV, and has become extremely rare in Print or Radio.

Third party "News" sites are not blocked in Russia, just like they are not blocked here in the US. Russians have access to Youtube, Google, AOL, and hell even Alex Jones can be read in Russia just like you can here.

How the media is controlled is in Russia and the US is surely different. "That" media is controlled is no different. You just don't want to admit how you are just as uninformed as a Russian citizen if you rely on broadcast media for "News" in the US. Before you go down path to poor logic, 80% control versus 90% control is only a difference of scale. No matter where you try to put the scale, freedom only occurs at 0% control.

Quite frankly, we could make the same comparison to other allegedly "Free" countries like Germany and the UK and we would find the same situation. Der Spiegel is to Germans as the BBC is to Brits, just as Fox is to Americans. Reality is a bitch!

3 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Old proverb (391 comments)

BS? Diane Feinstein said "Snowden should be killed", as did at least a dozen other politicians and heads of 3 letter agencies. His trial would have been any different than any other whistle blower trial? Meaning they would be fair and impartial in both verdict and penalties. Was media blocked from broadcasting slander or printing libel statements against him so he had a chance of getting a fair trial? (Claiming a person is guilty and treasonous when the person has never been in court is slander and/or libel, go check a law book).

Those allegations are all based on verifiable facts. Facts are not BS, unless you are delusional. You on the other hand, are handing out an opinion without any factual basis. Your circular logic about him running would be laughable if it was not so pathetic and popular as propaganda.

3 days ago
top

Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance

s.petry Re:Old proverb (391 comments)

It loses a bit in the translation but essentially it says "When you're living with wolves, you better learn fast how to howl, lest they might think you're a sheep".

And when you voluntarily move in with those wolves, that's your own damn fault.

This distorts reality quite a bit. Snowden appealed to Russia as a last resort for asylum, it was not his first choice. When he made his appeal his choices were either: 1) Face death (numerous people called for him to die) or life in prison returning to the US. or 2) Attempt to have a life in a different country.

Some freedom is better than no freedom at that point.

3 days ago
top

Study Finds US Is an Oligarchy, Not a Democracy

s.petry Re:"little influence" (804 comments)

Currently it's lost in the US also, but revolutions do happen. It can happen in Russia the same as it could in the US. I believe (or like to believe) that most people prefer a peaceful change as opposed to a violent revolution. At a point however, all people will fight back.

Plato's "The Republic" is an exceptional book for learning human nature and governments. If you can get it in Russia (unedited) start reading and pass out copies to share. Education is how people are woken up to both how to make changes, and more often in recent times viewing the world from a different perspective and determining a change is needed.

3 days ago
top

Study Finds US Is an Oligarchy, Not a Democracy

s.petry Re:Revolt? (804 comments)

Instead of referring to a fiction novel, you could just refer to a book called "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" by Gary Allen which is non-fiction and contains thousands of references. I realize that the title contains the word "Conspiracy" and people have been brain washed into believing "conspiracy == false|insane|crazy", but it's an exceptional book that woke many of us up in the 1970s. I don't know about any of the re-released versions, so suggest you start with the first book. You can read the book for free here.

4 days ago

Submissions

top

Slashdot Beta Woes

s.petry s.petry writes  |  about 2 months ago

s.petry (762400) writes "What is a Slashdot and why the Beta might destroy it?

Slashdot has been around, well, a very long time. Longer than any of it's competators, but not as long as IIRC. Slashdot was a very much one of the first true social media web sites.

On Slashdot, you could create a handle or ID. Something personal, but not too personal, unless you wanted it to be. But it was not required either. We know each other by our handles, we have watched each other grow as people. We may have even taken pot shots at each other in threads. Unless of course you are anonymous, but often we can guess who that really is.

One of Slashdot's first motto's was "News for Nerds" that Matters. I have no idea when that was removed. I have not always scoured the boards here daily, life can get too busy for that. That excuses my ignorance in a way. I guess someone thought it politically incorrect, but most of us "Nerds" enjoyed it. We are proud of who we are, and what we know. Often we use that pride and knowledge to make someone else look bad. That is how we get our digs in, and we enjoy that part of us too. We don't punch people, we belittle them. It's who we are!

What made Slashdot unique were a few things. What you will note here is "who" has been responsible for the success of Slashdot. Hint, it has never been a just the company taking care of the servers and software.

— First, the user base submitted stories that "they" thought mattered. It was not a corporate feed. Sure, stories were submitted about companies. The latest break through from AMD and Intel, various stories regarding the graphic card wars, my compiler is better than your compiler, and yes your scripting language stinks! Microsoft IIS has brought us all a few laughs and lots of flame wars to boot. Still, we not only read about the products but get to my second point.

— User comments. This is the primary why we have been coming here for as long as we have, many of us for decades. We provide alternative opinions or back what was given in the article. This aspect not only makes the "News" interesting, but often leads to other news and information sharing. It's not always positive, but this is the nature of allowing commentary. It also brings out the third point.

— Moderation. Moderation has been done by the community for a very long time. It took lots of trial and error to get a working system. As with any public system it's imperfect, but it's been successful. People can choose to view poorly modded comments, but don't have to. As with posting anonymous versus with our own handle it's an option that allows us to personalize the way we see and read what's on the site. And as a reward for submitting something worth reading, you might get a mod point of your own to use as a reward for someone else.

Why we dislike Beta and what is being pushed, and why this will result in the end of an era if it becomes forced on the community.

1. Bulky graphics. We get that Dice and Slashdot need revenue. I have Karma good enough to disable advertisements, but have never kept this setting on. I realize that Slashdot/Dice make money with this. That said, the ads sit away from my news and out of the way. I can get there if I want it (but nobody has ever gotten a penny from me clicking an ad... nobody!), but it's not forced into my face or news feed.

2. Low text area. I like having enough on my screen to keep me busy without constant scrolling. Slashdot currently has the correct ratio of text to screen. This ratio has never been complained about, yet Beta reduces the usable text area by at least 1/2 and no option for changing the behavior. I hate reading Slashdot on mobile devices because I can't stand scrolling constantly.

3. JavaScript. We all know the risks of JS, and many of us disable it. We also have an option of reading in Lync or non-standard browsers that many of us toy with for both personal and professional reasons. This flexibility is gone in Beta, and we are forced to allow JS to run. If you don't know the risks of allowing JS to run, you probably don't read much on Slashdot. Those that allow JS do so accepting the risk (which is admittedly low on a well known site).

4. Ordering/Sorting/Referencing. Each entry currently gets tagged with a unique thread ID. This allows linking to the exact post in a thread, not just the top of the thread. In Beta this is gone. It could be that the site decided to simply hide the post ID or it was removed. Either way, going to specific posts is something that is used very commonly by the community.

5. Eye candy. Most of us are not here for "eye candy" and many have allergic reactions to eye candy. Slashdot has a good mix currently. It's not as simple as the site starting with a r-e-d-i-t, which is good. That site has a reputation that keeps many of us away, and their format matches my attitude of them (s-i-m-p-l-e-t-o-n). At the same time, it's not like watching some other "news" sites with so much scrolling crap I can't read an article without getting a headache. The wasted space in beta for big bulky borders, sure smells like eye candy. Nothing buzzes or scrolls yet, but we can sense what's coming in a patch later.

The thing is, the community cares about Slashdot. We come here because we care. We submit stories because of that, we vote because of that, we moderate because of that, and we comment because of that. At the same time we realize that without the community Slashdot loses most of its value. We respect that we don't host the servers, backup the databases, or patch the servers. Slashdot/Dice provide the services needed for Slashdot.

It's a give give relationship, and we each get something in return. Slashdot gets tons of Search hits and lots of web traffic. We get a place to learn, teach, and occasionally vent.

Look, if you want to change default color scheme or make pre-made palettes for us to choose from, we would probably be okay with that. If you want to take away our ability to block ads by Karma, or move the ads to the left side of my browser window, I would be okay with those things too.

If you want to make drastic changes to how the site works, this is a different story all together. The reason so many are against Beta is that it breaks some of the fundamental parts of what makes Slashdot work.

User input until recently has not been acknowledged. The acknowledgment we have received is not from the people that are making the decision to push Beta live. We told people Beta was broken, what it lacked, and we were rather surprised to get a warning that Beta would be live despite what we told people. People are already making plans to leave, which means that Slashdot could fade away very soon.

Whether this was the goal for Dice or not remains to be seen. If it is, it's been nice knowing you but I won't be back. A partnership only works when there is mutual respect between the parties. A word of caution, us Nerds have good memories and lots of knowledge. The loss of Slashdot impacts all of Dice holdings, not just Slashdot. I boycott everything a company holds, not just the product group that did me wrong.

If that was not the goal of Dice, you should quickly begin communicating with the user base. What are the plans are to fix what Beta has broken? Why is Beta being pushed live with things broken? A "Sorry we have not been communicating!", and perhaps even a "Thank you" to the user base for helping make Slashdot a success for so many years."
top

Limiting debate in science, is it still science?

s.petry s.petry writes  |  about 7 months ago

s.petry (762400) writes "We knew that this was coming, but I'm sure many of us thought that science would be immune to censorship. Perhaps not. I was not surprised that it happened on Boing Boing, but on a "science" site I never expected it (at least not this quickly).

These decisions may smack some as subjective or even malicious. After all comments are arguably the digital age response to print's "letter to the editor" — and they often contain criticisms of the article ranging from grammatical erorrs to factual oversights. Some may view the decision to ban comments as a form of censorship, a means for writers to escape any sort of visible accountability among their audience.

While that statement does not get to the meaty subject of real trolling and sock puppets, it does beg a very important set of questions. Especially when the reason for Popular Science from them claims:

And because comments sections tend to be a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them, the cynical work of undermining bedrock scientific doctrine is now being done beneath our own stories, within a website devoted to championing science.

As the article points out, Science is not about doctrine. Science is about methods of proof. Science also requires collaboration and gets much better when numerous minds work on and debate the Science.

Is censorship the right direction, or is finding more intelligent ways of reducing sock puppets and trolls through moderation?"

Link to Original Source

Journals

s.petry has no journal entries.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...