●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook
Forgot your password?
Close
wnewsdaystalestupid
sightfulinterestingmaybe
cflamebaittrollredundantoverrated
vefunnyunderrated
podupeerror
×
19679180
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay March 11, 2011 @06:13PM
I am in Atlanta for PyCon, and you're on Slashdot reading about it. So there. Neener neener neener.
1310253
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay October 17, 2008 @12:50PM
I seriously believe that someone is trying to sabotage Slashdot by making
it decreasingly pleasant.
Exhibit A: the new-and-busted discussion system. I actually like it more
than the old way for reading comments, but for writing
comments it's almost maliciously bad. The new system's preview button is
much slower than the old way, and the mandatory waiting time
between posting comments is a lot longer than it used to be. The net result
is that whenever you're eventually allowed to click the "Submit" button, if
your comment doesn't go through immediately, you're stuck staring at a pink
error message until the countdown is finished. The only thing keeping this
tolerable is that you can middle-click on "Reply to This" to open the
old-style comment form in a new window, but I don't know if this workaround
is going to be left in place long-term.
Exhibit B: Idle. This is truly the worst interface I've ever seen on
Slashdot, from the painful color scheme to the tiny fonts to the difference
between the markup used in comments between Idle and the rest of Slashdot.
For example, the <quote> tags are treated like <p> in Idle, so
there's no visible difference between text you're quoting and your own
words. I don't even mind the content so much because it can be an amusing
diversion, but wow, the implementation is just terrible.
No, I contend that the new changes are deliberately designed to drive
away readership. I don't think that the Slashdot admins are incompetent, so
I'm convinced that this is on purpose.
576540
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay March 17, 2008 @09:45AM
You are probably out of compliance with your software licences.
501964
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay February 03, 2008 @09:31AM
This isn't tech-related in the least, but my family just got back from staying at the Ramada Inn in Kearney, Nebraska. It wasn't pretty.
Not that Kearney is a likely destination for Slashdotters, but for those who might find yourselves there: you've been warned.
472990
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
sday January 17, 2008 @12:05PM
Refactoring relationships
Right now, relationships are embedded into the comments section of story
pages with tags like:
<span class="zooicon"><a href="//science.slashdot.org/zoo.pl?op=check&uid=198669"><img src="//images.slashdot.org/fof.gif" alt="Friend of a Friend" title="Friend of a Friend"></a></span>
This is ugly for a few reasons. First, it's a mess. Second, it means
that every visitor has to have their own custom-rendered comments sections
so you can't apply aggressive caching to the page-generation code. I would
replace this with per-user CSS.
First, create a CSS file for each user like this:
/* Default class */
a.relationship {
background: url(neutral.gif);
width: 12px;
height: 12px;
display: inline-block;
text-decoration: none;
}
/* User-specific values start here: */
/* Friends */
a.user3352,a.user42 { background: url(friend.gif); }
/* Foes */
a.user666 { background: url(foe.gif); }
Next, replace the HTML in the comments section with generic relationship
information such as:
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="relationships.css">
[...]
<p>by neutral (1234) <a href="bar" class="user1234 relationship"> </a> on 2008-01-20</p>
<p>by Just Some Guy (3352) <a href="bar" class="user3352 relationship"> </a> on 2008-01-20</p>
<p>by foe (666) <a href="bar" class="user666 relationship"> </a> on 2008-01-20</p>
All "a" tags with the "relationship" class get the default CSS values. If
there is also a corresponding "user*" selector in the visitor's stylesheet,
then the values in that selector override the defaults. For a sad user with
no friends, this means that everyone gets the neutral.gif icon. As that
user accumulates more specific relationships, those CSS definitions are
applied instead.
This benefits Slashdot because suddenly they don't have to generate a
brand new comments section for every visitor. The per-user CSS would also be
extremely simple to generate. In any case, it would be no more difficult
than the current method of embedding all that information directly into the
comments section.
Finally, those CSS files could also be cached very easily. Since they
would only change whenever a user's relationships are modified, Slashdot
would no longer have to query that information every single time it creates
a page.
There are two drawbacks to this idea. First, there are no more alt
attributes on images, so users don't see a "Friend" popup if they hover over
the relationship button. If that's a problem, replace the icons with little
smiley or frowny faces as appropriate. Second, it would take slightly more
work to support putting users in multiple categories at the same time
("Friend" + "Freak"). The fix is to create a whole set of graphics like
"friend_freak.gif" and "foe_friendoffriend.gif" and corresponding CSS
classes. There aren't that many categories, though, so it would require
only minimal extra work to cover every possible combination.
How 'bout it, Taco - could you use something like that? Less code, less
bandwidth, and less processing should be pretty easily reachable goals.
466608
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay January 14, 2008 @10:21AM
UbuntuDupe screwed up an Ubuntu installation almost two years ago. He still hasn't gotten over it.
UD, let me give you some free advice: move on. Really. You don't even have to admit that you were wrong. Just stop yapping about it and move on.
Do you notice that every time you bring this up, everyone opposes you? It's not because we don't like you, but because even if you were in the right (which you weren't), after two years we simply don't want to hear it anymore. Stop embarrassing yourself and let it die already, OK?
453884
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay January 07, 2008 @10:11AM
Fark: Is read by your boss.
Slashdot: Is read by the weird guy in the server room.
Fark: Tries to be corporate friendly.
Slashdot: Links to Tubgirl.
Fark: Garfield.
Slashdot: Doonesbury.
Quit whining about "oh noes this is not teh NSFW!" If you want Fark, read Fark. This is Slashdot.
380917
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
sday November 15, 2007 @11:50AM
I'd always liked his posts, but I can't condone terrorism or people who support it.
1662107
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay April 07, 2006 @09:33AM
Within a five minute period yesterday,
5 of my comments got modded down with "-1: Troll". They were in different stories about completely different topics, but they were my most recent posts at that time.
I noticed that I've been building up a nice little list of liberal extremist freaks lately. It seems pretty clear to me that one of them happened upon some mod points and decided to spend them by modding me into oblivion.
I'm kind of flattered in a way, because they must have felt that I'm pretty important to spend their points against me. Even better, though, is this reminder that the favored tool of the liberal is silence. It's not enough to ignore opposing viewpoints, since someone else may hear them and be influenced. No, their response to someone who doesn't buy into their propaganda is to steal their voice.
On Slashdot, at least, they're limited to moderation. That's a lot better than in reality, when they'd probably scream "racist!", or "sexist!", or "capitalist!" in hopes that I'd run for shelter. That's not quite as funny.
1605745
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
sday March 03, 2005 @07:24PM
I think I may have to take a break from Slashdot.
Why? Is is because it's eating into my work? Nah - I have plenty of long compiles that allow me to waste a few minutes here and there. Is it because I'm actually building a "Freaks" list? No way! The fact that some people find my honest opinions too insulting to bear is kind of amusing.
No, it's because I've started Acting My Age and becoming way, way too serious.
I am not at all like my Slashdot persona. I mean, my opinions and beliefs are the same - I've never once misrepresented those - but my personality is completely different. I'm a nice guy who likes to laugh, enjoy life, and have fun. I'm almost never this intense or serious in day-to-day life, but put me in front of a comment box and I go uber-professional and detail-oriented. Those are OK traits, sure, and it's nice to know that I'm capable of logical and serious discussion, but that's still not who I am.
I even get along brilliantly with people I disagree with. Although I'm a very staunch conservative, one of my long-time good friends is a deliberately homeless tree-hugger (I mean it - literally!) who's typically into paganism, environmentalism, socialism, and a lot of other isms that I don't really want any part of. We get along great, though, and although we disagree on pretty much everything we always have a fun time in the process. Not here, though. Oh, no. For some reason, I seem to lose the ability to parse gentle sarcasm when I come here and just have to respond in a pedantically exact manner.
So, why is that? I kind of blame Slashdot itself, and its "coverage" of the 2004 elections in particular. Despite our differences, we used to all pretty much get along before then. Now our little green corner of the 'net is hyper-politicized and angry, and you can't ask for a recommendation of a nice IDE drive without being lectured about the evils of magnetoresistive manufacturers and their harm to the third-world environment.
I'll make you a promise: if you promise to lighten up and begin enjoying the humor inherent in a population of nearly a million crotchety geeks from across the world, I'll do the same. In fact, as a token of good faith, I'll be the first to try. On the other hand, if I can't pull it off, then I'm out of here. Seriously. I enjoy life too much to be sucked down into a swirling pit of Seriousness and Thoughtful Deliberation.
Let's have fun again, shall we? Wish me luck.
1581557
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay September 27, 2004 @09:09AM
I use my "Foes" list to manage the people who've established a pattern of saying things far beyond my threshold of tolerable stupidity. It's not that I dislike these people personally but that they detract from intelligent conversation to the point that they make themselves a nuisance. I'm not going to spend mod points to silence them, because that goes against my principals (and because I'd rather reward good conversation than attempt to "punish" the bad), but I personally have no interest in what they have to say and don't want to be bothered with it.
So, I think it's only fair to tell people why I've added them to the list. I'm not going to bother with prior entries, but I will be explaining all new ones.
The first recent addition is killjoe. I've disagreed with some of his postings, but this quote is what pushed him from "people I sometimes disagree with" to "people I don't want to listen to":
As for me I think the days of the peaceful liberals are over. It's time we adopted the republitard tactics. Yes that means dragging them behind cars and crucifiying them alongside the highways.
As far as I'm concerned, people who make comments like that are ineligible for civil conversation.
1577611
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
esday December 31, 2003 @02:36PM
Want to post anonymously but verifiably? That is, do you want to be able to say things that you don't want traceable back to yourself, but you dowant interested parties to be able to verify that multiple posts originate from the same person?
Right now, Anonymous Coward (AC) posts are stored without any identifying information. This means that while you may divulge some important information, another person can reply to your post, claiming to be you, and contradict your statements. Example:
You: I have proof that my company is making toxic waste.
Reply from twit: And no matter what you hear, I was not fired from my last job for making false accusations!
With common software, this is almost trivially easy. The idea is to post as an AC but always sign your messages with the same GPG ID. The advantage is that you can still be an AC when it's important, but interested observers can verify whether other a given set of posts come from you.
If you want do this, here's how:
(一)Generate a GPG key.
(二)Submit your key to a public keyserver.
(三)Write your Slashdot text in an external editor.
(四)Sign the post with your "anonymous" key.
(五)Use <ecode> tags to encapsulate your signed message.
(六)For added obscurity, add "no-version" to you gpg.conf file. If you're using GPG on Linux, that string may not narrow the field of candidates too much. If you hand-compiled it on your TI-85 calculator, and you've explained to your boss in great detail how cool it is to run crypto on your calculator, then it may reveal more information than you want.
(七)Be sure to click the "Post Anonymously" checkbox!
Now people interested in such things can verify that all of your posts originate from the same person, even though they can't determine who that person is.
This isn't exactly a brilliant invention on my part; all of the pieces already existed in usable form. However, I've never seen anyone actually dothis, and I thought it might be a useful idea for someone.
Caveats:
●Assume that your IP is logged by Slashdot and the public keyserver and available to whomever you're trying to hide from by posting as an Anonymous Coward.
●Be darn sure that you remember to check the "Post Anonymously" box or your cover is definitely blown in a big way; the people you're hiding from can now trace a whole batch of incriminating posts back to you. For example, when I first tested the idea, I made that mistake and forever ruined a key with a clever name (IMHO).
●This method can't prove that a post did not come from you. In the example above where an anonymous twit is trying to negate your statements, your best course of action is to post a signed reply to him stating that the reply post was not from you.
A Note To Slashdot Editors
I'm not writing this to be a pain in the butt, honest - this seems like a legitimate need that I think needed to be addressed. This specific implemention relies on the idea of <ecode> tags keeping the contents in pristine condition. Ifpeople start using this, please don't change ecode's functionality so that old signed posts are broken.
A giant extra helping of karma to the authors if you add code to detect signed messages, keep a list of key IDs that've been used, assign a serial number to each one, and print that serial number in the message header of each signed message. Then, casual visitors could see that a string of messages were all signed by "Slashdot authed AC #243", although responsibilty for actual verification would still lie with interested end-users.
1509895
journal
Journal
by
Just Some Guy
ay July 11, 2003 @03:21PM
Would-be moderators, get this through your head: "Overrated" should almost never be used! If you think that something moderated as "Funny" isn't very humorous, then accept that other people enjoyed it and move on. If something is marked "Insightful" but you don't agree with it, then move on. Get the point?
Ialways kill "Overrated" in meta-moderation. Always. Keep that in mind, would you?
« Newer
Older »
Write in Journal
Slashdot Top Deals
●kirk+slashdot@strauser.com
http://strauser.com/
●Free Software for everybody, rah-rah. @kstrauser [twitter.com] on Twitter. LinkedIn [linkedin.com]. Stack Overflow [stackoverflow.com].
GPG key: 19CF F48E 5C06 16B4 4A15 1E80 54D9 906A 294B 7FF3
●
Member of the 1100 Digit (binary) UID Club
●
Years Read
●
Days Metamoderated in a Row
●
Re:Fear uncle Charlie
●
It's up to us
(Score:3, Insightful)
●
Re:Good for them
●
Re:Meanwhile, on Slashdot...
●
This is bound to work!
●
PyCon 2011
●
I think they're trying to kill Slashdot.
●
Fun with software licences
●
Avoid the Ramada
●
Tuning Slashdot, part 1: Relationship CSS
●
hazydave
●
Animats
●
Lumpy
●
SanityInAnarchy
●
drinkypoo
●
binspam (submissions)
●
misleading (stories)
●
dupe (stories)
●
interesting (submissions)
●
offtopic (submissions)
●
Amino Harnesses Health Industry Data for Consumers
●
FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations On 3-2 Vote
●
WSJ says RadioShack is preparing for bankruptcy
●
SCO On The Ropes
●
SCO No Mo'
Slashdot
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...