Beta
×

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

Workaholism In America Is Hurting the Economy

zijus Re:Sleep Collects Neural Garbage (710 comments)

Hi there. IMO this is to be linked to the cult of "work hard play hard". The problem is... always over-driving one's life, leads faster to problems. Playing too hard also leads to problems. Hopping to balance one's over-work by some over-play is - maybe counter-intuitively for some - not a sollution. In french it is named "sur-régime" : if you always drive a car with the engine spinning well beyond what's necessary, well you may go faster, but you will certainly die earlier. Over-performing, over-working, and so on, has a cost. Ciao.

about 3 months ago
top

UK's FSA Finds No Health Benefits To Organic Food

zijus Confused! (921 comments)

FTA

The review did not look at pesticides or the environmental impact of different farming practices.

Oops ! Isn't it a major point of organic farming. Not only the end product but also procedures and environment ? Many consumers choose organic product not only for it's intrinsic assumed qualities, but out of environments concerns. I'am no pro-organic man, yet that study seams to say little to me.

(...) they report in their analysis that there are higher levels of beneficial nutrients in organic compared to non-organic foods.

Now I am confused. What does this study have to say then!?

Z.

more than 5 years ago
top

The Role of Experts In Wikipedia

zijus Wow : WP threads on /. are getting interesting... (266 comments)

Hi.

A long while ago, I contributed to WP quite a bit. I stopped being subject to WikiStress. I learned one thing at that time : when WP things gets on your nerves, just get a break. Then, one realise that an article is no one's little pet. And now one can come back to an article and forget about it easily. Many people who claim to be specialist or to be especially rightful, should take a WikiBreak... and come back later. No, later than that. Now, contributions starts being good.

I also observed /. threads about WP : They where rather poor, often being aggregation of blatantly incorrect statements. Reason IMHO was that not so many actually contributed to WP, thus ignoring what I now can read in this thread : WP is not a school yard, there are rules, these rules can indeed be gamed, WP is no one pet's toy : being a so called expert does not yield special status, consensus is indeed the driving thing in WP - not The Truth - and so on...

That's a lot of good comments in one single WP /. thread. Pleasantly surprising. I suppose WP is getting actually known by people. Nice!

Z

more than 5 years ago
top

Edit-Approval System Proposed For English-Language Wikipedia

zijus Re:A wikipedia that was "cool like that" (flame) (439 comments)

Hello. Disclaimer: This will probably flagged as flam-ish.

HA HA HA! ( I.e. Laughing Out Loud ). Pardon my French (BTW I am a French man) but Wikipedia-wise you are the exemplification of a wanker. So many of you thinks WP is their-little-pet-project-I-do-what-ever-I-want-out-of-it. Ça fait pitié.. :-)

OK. On a less flamish tone. WP is not and has never been anarchy. There were and are many rules one has to follow in order to contribute. This was and is the project of J Wales. Those signs that are annoying you, are there to remind user that WP is not one-more-my-space-n-co i.e. pure utter jabber-teen-ager-commercial-crap-I-want-you-to-believe. I suggest the following question : Without any attempt at forcing WP users to cite and reference their statements, would you be reading Wikipedia ? My bet is for a plain no. I have already had some conversation about WP-pseudo-freedom here and here. How about plainly ignoring those warnings ? The fact you don't want to accept that you can't write just anything you fancy is your freedom. You are not forced into contributing. Yet, working with WP means you will have to abide by JW rules. Unhappy boy ? Well... fork.

With regards. Z.

more than 5 years ago
top

Aussie Regulator Comes Down On SMS Spam

zijus (Again) pay to receive calls? (76 comments)

Hi. FYI, in Europe we don't pay to receive SMS within a state. So from my point of view, this "SMS spam problem" is a non-problem. Have people sending SMS pay. End of story, move on.

Yet to be honest, this is still a reap off. SMSing in Switzerland costs 0.10euro/SMS. Head of Swiss mobile phone operators society said on radio RSR the cost for providers is actually 0.02Euro/SMS. No one is naive here: if that is the publicly acknowledged cost, that means - rough un-sourced estimate - real cost may well be 0.002Euro/SMS. So that is still a vast reap off. To the extent that European instances recently forced operators to lower their unjustified high prices. Ha! See, let the market be totally free, and feel the citizen be totally fucked. Funny how I can't help thinking of nowadays western economic crash. Let the market do whatever, noooooo worries folks : citizens will anyway pay.

Sidewise, I would accept to have to pay a tinny fee per e-mail I send: like 0.00001Euro. Poof, e-mail spam is dead. End of story, move on. Yes that would mean if I use mailing-list, I would pay for every single recipient: exactly what's required. I mean, I'd have to wonder am I really making sense enough to justify the cost ? Ach nein ! I'd have to admit that vast amount of what I send is rubbish. And... poof: less shite on the net. Exactly what's required. ( And... poof - domino's cascade - every one would dam care not to have zombified PC. )

Z.

more than 5 years ago
top

New Massive Botnet Building On Windows Hole

zijus Re:Idiots : more with less (223 comments)

I concure: I believe I get some security with less - no, lesser than that - instead of more protections.
I run a win XP SP1 at home. Behind a NAT rejecting non solicited traffic.
Apart of that :
- no soft firewall
- no real time virus scanner
- no OS updates ever
but even less than that:
- disabled about 90% of startup process
- disabled about 70% of all startup services
- disabled all automatic updates
- uninstall un-needed stuff
- no toolbar-crapware-[younameit]ware
- aggressively remove crap ( CrapCleaner helps ) The one time I was too aggressive : I broke a soft. Guess what: I downgraded the soft. Worked fine since.
- Being somehow prudent internet surfer: etc/hots + addblock + rip + a few other things giving me a browser doing lesser than usual but well.
I obtain a seemingly clean radar when I scrutinize my box from time to time.
Sometime less is more.

I remember once at a work place : the automatic update on win boxes got the source code repository access screwed. Halted the nigtlies for the company. Since that, I consider automatic updates as viruses: you don't know when and what comes in. Yet it is often allowed and recommended. Mad.

Bye.
Z.

more than 5 years ago

Submissions

zijus hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

zijus has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?