Each nit-picking details decrases the ability for ma and pa kettle to pound out their own web page.
This is 2004, not 1996. Most amateur web "designers" today and even many (more than you would imagine) professionals (those who are paid) never look at the HTML. "Ma and pa" are using FrontPage or some other WYSIWYG application to create web pages. It is the job of Microsoft and other software companies to make their web page-creating apps generate markup that complies with the new rules.
I hadn't looked at that site in a while. I just did and found this example about Saturday Mthiyane, a child in South Africa who lived with monkeys:
Saturday's feral characteristics
Saturday exhibited characteristics in common with many other feral children. "He was very violent during his first days here. He used to break things in the kitchen, get in and out through windows. He didn't play with other kids and instead he used to beat them. He liked uncooked red meat", said Ethel Mthiyane. "He didn't like blankets. He wanted to sleep naked and he hated clothing."
Ten years later
Saturday is one of the few modern children to have been followed up. When the Johannesburg Mail and Guardian visited the school ten years later, they found that Saturday was still unable to speak. He had been taught to walk, but was still refusing to eat cooked food, preferring raw vegetables instead; bananas remained his favourite fruit.
If you take a look at how modern human bodies are constructed, the fact that we're bipedial by nature (as opposed to nurture) is pretty obvious.
The observed characteristics of feral children raised by animals evidences that walking upright is a behavior learned from example; it's by nurture. It appears that babies learn to walk your walk in the same manner that they learn to talk your talk (language and accent).
It's different in earlier Mozilla/Netscape browsers. Read about it here.
It's supposed to be a parody of the Biblical book of Revelation. The problem is that they've got things backwards. The "unbelievers" are those who do follow the beast, not those who don't. In Revelation, "the beast" is not something good. It represents the AntiChrist and Satanic power.
If you're using Mozilla or Firefox, click here: about:mozilla
And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.
I've looked up HR 4200 (search results are temporary; don't bother linking), National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. There are four versions of the bill, three of which have Section 1404. Here is the full text:
SEC. 1404. LICENSING REQUIREMENT FOR EXPORT OF MILITARILY CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES.
(a) LICENSING REQUIREMENT- The President shall require a license under the Export Administration Regulations of the Department of Commerce (15 C.F.R. part 730 et seq.) or the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 C.F.R. part 120 et seq.), as the case may be, for the export of goods or technologies included on the Militarily Critical Technologies List.
(b) DEFINITION- In this section, the term `Militarily Critical Technologies List' means the list required to be developed by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to section 5(d)(2) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2404(d)(2)), as such list was effect on January 20, 2004, and includes any goods or technologies that have been added to the list after that date.
Yeah, so what? That doesn't tell me anything. Where does say anything about computers? And where is the complete list of countries have the export restrictions mentioned in the article? How do I look this up?
I haven't heard that, but I think another good example is "Blue Interlude (The Bittersweet Saga of Sugar Cane and Sweetie Pie)" by the Wynton Marsalis Septet. There's a short intro at the beginning where Marsalis introduces the sounds of the characters so you can follow the story better.
Once the author introduced "sausage" into the discourse by this community reading his article, the fact that we see it repeated is only validation of Zipf's point. Slashdot is creating a "song" from this story, and sausage has become part of its "key."
Humor me for a minute. Trolls and offtopic posts (and opposing views that introduce counter-evidence and new concepts) are modded down because they threaten to make the song atonal (or polytonal), or "incomprehensible," as the article says. If you're a musician, you know that excessive accidentals make the specified key pointless and virtually nonexistent. It's frustrating to play, and sometimes not pleasing to listen to.
As it is you are attempting to make a claim as being true just because you believe it to be.
I am attempting to defend Digital Praise's policy of making video games that are not "flooded" with sexual content. It is a Christian company making video games for Christian gamers. I gave you the Christian viewpoint. This is what we believe. Digital Praise is not making games for the atheist/pagan market, so it is not in their interest to pander to those philosophies.
There are people out there that could say that their belief structure says that promiscuity is "right" and that monogamy is "wrong". So what, exactly, makes the Christian standpoint the right one?
The question was about why Christian video games should avoid simulated sexual behavior. I gave you the Christian viewpoint.
I remember that the Crusades were carried out by authoritarian theocracies that forced religion upon their people. The leaders lined people up, had them walk through the water of large baptistries, and - abracadabra - they were "Christians." Utter foolishness! These were the people that also thought they could make their enemies convert to Christianity by the threat of the sword. That's not agreeing to converting; that's saving your skin.
No, becoming a Christian must be a personal decision. One must confess and repent of his sins, and he must put his personal trust in the Son of God as his Lord and Savior. Becoming a Christian means having a profound change of heart that reorients your inclination from evil to good.
In a theocracy, there is no room for choice. You become a "Christian" because you're born where people expect and demand you to be a Christian. So, there is no change of heart, no active following of Christ's teachings, and no rebirth - birth of the spirit.
I do not believe the Crusaders were Christian. Allow me to present one of many contrasts. Jesus Christ taught in the synagogues. He said that He had been sent to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15:24). The resurrected Christ told His disciples to be witnesses for Him in Jerusalem (Acts 1:8) So what did the ever-so-devout Crusaders do when they went to Jerusalem? They burned down the synagogue with thousands of "the lost sheep" inside. The Jews all burned to death. It was a huge inferno; a 9/11 on steroids (comparing body counts). Yeah, great "witnessing" there, Christians. And there's no case for self-defense either (although there can be in the beginning of the Crusades, but that's only pertaining to the Muslim invaders).
The evidence says they weren't Christians. A ricer can put a Jaguar hood ornament on his 1984 Honda Accord, but it's still a crappy Accord. He can slap a V-Tec or a TYPE-R sticker on it, too. That doesn't change anything inside. Same thing for religious dunking. They can plaster emblems of the Cross on everything they own. Don't mean a thing if they don't really know the King (Rev. 17:13).
The sexual revolution, over all, has been a horrible tragedy. It's been a series of horrible tragedies, afflicting family after family. Too much to even describe here. The '60s nearly destroyed this nation, and we're still greatly hurting from it, socially, spiritually, financially, etc.
Thank you, please come again:)
Appropriate signoff for your fast food philosophy. You know nothing about life. You choose flings over marriage? You will die a bitter death. You will never know love.
- most games today actively promote violent and/or sexual behaviour;
- any kind of violent and sexual behaviour is a bad thing.
Starting with the second point, I think that we can all agree that this is utter nonsense.
The only sexual behavior that is not bad behavior is that which occurs privately within the exclusive bounds of a faithful, marital relationship between one man and one woman. Even if a game were to depict this good sexual behavior, that very depiction of it would be wrong. No sexual activity, good or bad, real-life or fictional, is to be put on display for the world. Marital sex is a private matter between the participants sharing their bodies and souls, one with another, as one flesh.
You might argue that it should be okay to watch "marital" sex between artificial "people." But this is laughably a moot point when it comes to computer games (except possibly for the Sims). When we have a game with a Mr. and Mrs. Anderson getting frisky in the master bedroom, then we can address this issue further.
What makes good sex good is its exclusive and secret nature. The husband is the only one (ideally) who has ever seen or ever will see his wife's nakedness. The wife is the only one (ideally) who has ever seen or ever will see her husband's nakedness. Their bodies are a special secret they guard for themselves. Anybody else can have a sexual experience, but not with the individuals who are committed to each other in matrimony. Each side feels special and unique that with over 6,000,000,000 people in the world, they have chosen and continue to chose each other - and no other - to share their sexuality.
The man can say, "She wants to have sex with me and no one else!" The woman can say, "He wants to have sex with me and no one else!" Man: "My body is ALL for YOU!" Woman: "My body is ALL for YOU!" You can imagine what that does to the hormones! And the mutual love. A third person, whether a participant or spectator, contaminates the marital purity and spoils the "one flesh" sexual intimacy.
From the Christian standpoint, the only sexual behavior (whether a real act or a fictional depiction) that you should ever see is your own sexual behavior with your spouse.
Qualification: The above applies mainly to gratuitous depictions of sexual behavior. Pictures, diagrams, and other media presentations that are created for medical or academic purposes that benefit humanity are acceptable as long as the media are used only for their intended, noble purposes.
Slashdot Mirror
This is 2004, not 1996. Most amateur web "designers" today and even many (more than you would imagine) professionals (those who are paid) never look at the HTML. "Ma and pa" are using FrontPage or some other WYSIWYG application to create web pages. It is the job of Microsoft and other software companies to make their web page-creating apps generate markup that complies with the new rules.
Look who's believing in fairy tales.
The observed characteristics of feral children raised by animals evidences that walking upright is a behavior learned from example; it's by nurture. It appears that babies learn to walk your walk in the same manner that they learn to talk your talk (language and accent).
Two newsletters: Mozilla Links Newsletter for general users and Mozilla Developer Links for developers.
We can use this one: IE topic icon
Your picture is an earlier stage of mine. The fact stands: A tiny clump of a few hundred cells does a person make.
Don't confuse embryos with stem cells. I don't know what, besides a baby, you think this might become.
Read this story and watch the accompanying slideshow. The article basically shows that babies in the womb are as active as those outside the womb.
Actually, it does.
It's supposed to be a parody of the Biblical book of Revelation. The problem is that they've got things backwards. The "unbelievers" are those who do follow the beast, not those who don't. In Revelation, "the beast" is not something good. It represents the AntiChrist and Satanic power.
Terrorists and illegal squatters should not expect privacy from the authorities. One invasion invites the other.
That's why I telnet to port 80.
Hmm the blob is still there in Mozilla Flamegopher. Try a rodent version. ;)
Yes, he did.
I haven't heard that, but I think another good example is "Blue Interlude (The Bittersweet Saga of Sugar Cane and Sweetie Pie)" by the Wynton Marsalis Septet. There's a short intro at the beginning where Marsalis introduces the sounds of the characters so you can follow the story better.
Humor me for a minute. Trolls and offtopic posts (and opposing views that introduce counter-evidence and new concepts) are modded down because they threaten to make the song atonal (or polytonal), or "incomprehensible," as the article says. If you're a musician, you know that excessive accidentals make the specified key pointless and virtually nonexistent. It's frustrating to play, and sometimes not pleasing to listen to.
I am attempting to defend Digital Praise's policy of making video games that are not "flooded" with sexual content. It is a Christian company making video games for Christian gamers. I gave you the Christian viewpoint. This is what we believe. Digital Praise is not making games for the atheist/pagan market, so it is not in their interest to pander to those philosophies.
The question was about why Christian video games should avoid simulated sexual behavior. I gave you the Christian viewpoint.
Sorry for the brevity of the last comment. It sums up what I believe would happen to him if he continues on his current path. A warning sign is love.
No, becoming a Christian must be a personal decision. One must confess and repent of his sins, and he must put his personal trust in the Son of God as his Lord and Savior. Becoming a Christian means having a profound change of heart that reorients your inclination from evil to good.
In a theocracy, there is no room for choice. You become a "Christian" because you're born where people expect and demand you to be a Christian. So, there is no change of heart, no active following of Christ's teachings, and no rebirth - birth of the spirit.
I do not believe the Crusaders were Christian. Allow me to present one of many contrasts. Jesus Christ taught in the synagogues. He said that He had been sent to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15:24). The resurrected Christ told His disciples to be witnesses for Him in Jerusalem (Acts 1:8) So what did the ever-so-devout Crusaders do when they went to Jerusalem? They burned down the synagogue with thousands of "the lost sheep" inside. The Jews all burned to death. It was a huge inferno; a 9/11 on steroids (comparing body counts). Yeah, great "witnessing" there, Christians. And there's no case for self-defense either (although there can be in the beginning of the Crusades, but that's only pertaining to the Muslim invaders).
The evidence says they weren't Christians. A ricer can put a Jaguar hood ornament on his 1984 Honda Accord, but it's still a crappy Accord. He can slap a V-Tec or a TYPE-R sticker on it, too. That doesn't change anything inside. Same thing for religious dunking. They can plaster emblems of the Cross on everything they own. Don't mean a thing if they don't really know the King (Rev. 17:13).
Thank you, please come again :)
Appropriate signoff for your fast food philosophy. You know nothing about life. You choose flings over marriage? You will die a bitter death. You will never know love.
- most games today actively promote violent and/or sexual behaviour;
- any kind of violent and sexual behaviour is a bad thing.
Starting with the second point, I think that we can all agree that this is utter nonsense.
The only sexual behavior that is not bad behavior is that which occurs privately within the exclusive bounds of a faithful, marital relationship between one man and one woman. Even if a game were to depict this good sexual behavior, that very depiction of it would be wrong. No sexual activity, good or bad, real-life or fictional, is to be put on display for the world. Marital sex is a private matter between the participants sharing their bodies and souls, one with another, as one flesh.
You might argue that it should be okay to watch "marital" sex between artificial "people." But this is laughably a moot point when it comes to computer games (except possibly for the Sims). When we have a game with a Mr. and Mrs. Anderson getting frisky in the master bedroom, then we can address this issue further.
What makes good sex good is its exclusive and secret nature. The husband is the only one (ideally) who has ever seen or ever will see his wife's nakedness. The wife is the only one (ideally) who has ever seen or ever will see her husband's nakedness. Their bodies are a special secret they guard for themselves. Anybody else can have a sexual experience, but not with the individuals who are committed to each other in matrimony. Each side feels special and unique that with over 6,000,000,000 people in the world, they have chosen and continue to chose each other - and no other - to share their sexuality.
The man can say, "She wants to have sex with me and no one else!" The woman can say, "He wants to have sex with me and no one else!" Man: "My body is ALL for YOU!" Woman: "My body is ALL for YOU!" You can imagine what that does to the hormones! And the mutual love. A third person, whether a participant or spectator, contaminates the marital purity and spoils the "one flesh" sexual intimacy.
From the Christian standpoint, the only sexual behavior (whether a real act or a fictional depiction) that you should ever see is your own sexual behavior with your spouse.
Qualification: The above applies mainly to gratuitous depictions of sexual behavior. Pictures, diagrams, and other media presentations that are created for medical or academic purposes that benefit humanity are acceptable as long as the media are used only for their intended, noble purposes.