From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 16 12:23:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 910CA16A4D4 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 12:23:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (A17-250-248-47.apple.com [17.250.248.47]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B087043D41 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 12:23:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lomion@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin07-en2 [10.13.10.152]) by smtpout.mac.com (8.12.6/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id i0GKN3EU029933; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 12:23:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.147] (bgp585760bgs.jdover01.nj.comcast.net [68.39.198.236]) (authenticated bits=0)i0GKN2gj026810; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 12:23:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6.0.1.1.1.20040116175159.03f4dd48@imap.sfu.ca> References: <20040116160124.GF41788@over-yonder.net> <20040116081448.I78161-100000@moo.sysabend.org> <6.0.1.1.1.20040116175159.03f4dd48@imap.sfu.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v609) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Lawrence Sica Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:22:55 -0500 To: Colin Percival X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.609) cc: chat@freebsd.org cc: "Matthew D. Fuller" Subject: Re: Good BSD/Linux Article (somewhat off-topic) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:23:06 -0000 On Jan 16, 2004, at 12:56 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > At 16:18 16/01/2004, Jamie Bowden wrote: >> I read it from the link off of Daemon News' Daily section. If someone >> wants to /. it, you'll probably need to upgrade your connection for a >> few >> days, and add filters to your mail to screen the nastygrams you'll be >> sure >> to get from the shallow (and usually 14yo) end of the Linux Userbase >> Pool. > > I think the /. effect is overrated these days. Network connections > and > processors have gotten faster much more rapidly than the slashdot > readership has grown; the only time slashdot kills anything now is when > people use excessively dynamic pages. > I have to disagree here. As I have been slashdotted in the recent past. It still has a serious affect. --Larry