I was just about to post exactly that. I noticed that the TTC here in Toronto used to have nice "stand right, walk left" notices on all the escalators in stations, but they removed them all a while ago. I hope this wasn't because they were worried about people hurting themselves... People still generally follow this rule though, but you do still get the occasional asshat.
I don't think that it's justified personally, however I do think that it's understandable, especially given how this was actually initially a victory which turned into a defeat. That's even more disheartening to me than not even getting that far in the first place.
You certainly raise a valid point, however that wasn't the point you originally made. I do agree with you that the legal and religious definitions should be separated, however as it stands now, the same word is used for both.
In that case, I will say that I misunderstood the intention of your original point. I agree that the government should not interfere with the religious definition of marriage. However, the issue here is that the religious community is attempting to interfere with the legal definition of marriage, even if you prefer to call it "legal union" instead.
Oh I'm not saying it's not wrong, or that I agree with it, or that it isn't another form of hate crime. I'm just saying I don't consider it "violent oppression". I think it's more of a rebellion against the groups that have kept equal marriage rights down for so long.
Actually, I think I would view that as "violent rebellion" and not oppression. The gays are the ones being oppressed by Proposition 8. They're not trying to force people who don't agree with gay marriage to actually be gay themselves. The anti-gay community on the other hand is trying to deny them equal rights to marriage under the law. You know, the law that's supposed to keep church and state separate and all that good stuff. After being denied equal rights for so long, only to win a decisive victory, then have it taken away so quickly, I would call that rebellion. And I'll put my name on that publicly.
I felt it at my work in the downtown core as well. It was a small rumble here, though. I doubt it caused any real damage, although given the fact that the G20 is in town, an earthquake was not my first instinct when I felt it...
Simple: They don't call it "rape" and "murder". Their culture considers male behaviour of that kind normal, especially when it comes to wives. I don't condemn them for it, but I wholeheartedly disagree with it.
That works for books because they are physical objects. We're dealing with digital data. There is no such thing as "lending" in the digital world, something that book publishers will now have to deal with since e-books are becoming popular. They got a free ride so far while the music and film industry had to grapple with this concept, and they still haven't figured it out.
Re:Employee monitoring is not really new
on
Employee Monitoring
·
· Score: 1
There you go using logic again. We don't take kindly to logic 'round these parts...
But Slashdot also has meta-moderation whereby your own comment ratings themselves are also voted on, double blind of course. This helps ensure that people don't abuse their moderation privileges.
Will somebody mod this motherfucker up? This is the first post I've seen so far that actually hit the nail on the head. Movies and games are two very different experiences. You cannot just take a game and translate it into a film. Games simply do not have the kind of story structure and depth to make a good film. If they do, for example something like Heavy Rain, they actually tend to resemble movies more than games in the first place. A pure game (i.e. totally gameplay oriented design, such as Doom) does not, has never, and will never make for a good film.
Interesting you should mention #3. That's pretty much where I sit. I look at the flash card as format shifting. I can adjust the speed of the game, save anywhere in realtime (very handy when so many damn DS games don't have a quick save option for a ten minute subway ride), add cheat codes easily, and I have all my games in one spot instead of having to carry around multiple carts. It's just clearly a superior format.
This is essentially what I was thinking of as a solution to this problem. Obviously, we cannot turn back the technological clock, and people will never ever ever stop sharing digital content. It's just human nature. In addition, duplication of content once it's created is so trivial and cheap it's basically a non-issue. However, the initial production of that content is what takes time and resources. So it seems to me that this is the actual problem we need to solve, not how to "protect" that content once it's created and loose in the wild.
Perhaps I should have phrased that a bit different. I understand why it's a threat to institutionalized religion. I was referring more to people's personal beliefs.
That actually makes a lot of sense and is quite interesting. It seems we've gone from science being perverted for greed to science being perverted for religion.
Okay, we deviated from the actual discussion of the article a bit there. If you read the post I was replying to, you would see we're talking about who believes in ID and what purpose it serves. The quote from the Center for Science and Culture advocates ID as an alternative to evolution, i.e. science. As for 2000 years, that was just a rough number clearly pulled from my ass. I wasn't being authoritative there; the important part was the point about it being written by men as opposed to handed down from on high.
Even aside from religious beliefs, it is very difficult for many people to believe that the world and people as they are came about because of chance. Just look at the number of references in popular culture to fate and "the meaning of life". Going back even as far as the Greeks, it was a major theme of their literature and plays. The notion that natural selection determines that outcome of the universe is, to many people, a profoundly unsettling explanation. None of this should be taken as a challenge to natural selection or a defense of ID. However, your assertion that nobody actually believes in ID is naive.
They're welcome to believe whatever they want, but that doesn't make it true. Nor does it make it okay to teach in a science class. That's the problem with ID; it's being pushed as legitimate science when it isn't. Nobody is denying that there are some things that science just can't currently explain, and possibly never will be able to. Some of these things, like the nature of the afterlife, are clearly within the realm of the divine. ID and Creationism are attempting to attribute to the divine that which has already been explained by science. ID's purpose is to sneak religion into science class where it doesn't belong.
I never understood why evolution is such a threat to religion. How does us evolving from apes say anything about the existence of God? What does it even have to do with it? Hell, if I was God, evolution and natural selection actually seems like a pretty damn good way to design an ecosystem! It's resilient and adaptive and I don't have to micromanage it. It's only a problem if you believe in an absolute literal interpretation of the Bible. You know, that book that was written down by men 2000 years ago and translated and re-transcribed God only knows how many times (pun intended).
One of the good things with epub format is there is no standard drm layer
There, fixed that for you.
Seriously though, what's wrong with plain old PDF? I know EPUB is good for text, but poorly suited for things demanding a specialized layout like comics, but PDF handles that just fine. If you can plug in any DRM layer you want (or none; that's my preference), then what else do you need? Not having a standardized DRM would be good because it will immediately be cracked and then your standard is effectively dead. Well, dead if you want to actually use it with DRM, but what publisher in their right mind would want that...
Yeah, I used to think that was a good thing about Facebook. Really though, it pretty much just puts me in contact with people I didn't want to see anymore in the first place. If I haven't seen you in 15+ years and didn't go out of my way to look you up, why do I care what your dog had for breakfast? Maybe I just hate people...
Longer answer: There's no such thing as a truly original song. Every single piece of music ever written is inspired by the music that came before it. Every single person on the planet has heard music in their lifetime, and if they sit down to try and write a song, they are naturally going to do something based on what they've already heard. As far as I'm concerned, that case was a load of bullshit, but we can't apply common sense to the legal system. It would cause the space-time continuum to collapse. Really, I saw it on an episode of Star Trek once.
Slashdot Mirror
I was just about to post exactly that. I noticed that the TTC here in Toronto used to have nice "stand right, walk left" notices on all the escalators in stations, but they removed them all a while ago. I hope this wasn't because they were worried about people hurting themselves... People still generally follow this rule though, but you do still get the occasional asshat.
I don't think that it's justified personally, however I do think that it's understandable, especially given how this was actually initially a victory which turned into a defeat. That's even more disheartening to me than not even getting that far in the first place.
You certainly raise a valid point, however that wasn't the point you originally made. I do agree with you that the legal and religious definitions should be separated, however as it stands now, the same word is used for both.
In that case, I will say that I misunderstood the intention of your original point. I agree that the government should not interfere with the religious definition of marriage. However, the issue here is that the religious community is attempting to interfere with the legal definition of marriage, even if you prefer to call it "legal union" instead.
Oh I'm not saying it's not wrong, or that I agree with it, or that it isn't another form of hate crime. I'm just saying I don't consider it "violent oppression". I think it's more of a rebellion against the groups that have kept equal marriage rights down for so long.
You seem to be unclear on the fact that marriage is a legal union, as well as a religious one. That's why government is involved in marriage.
Actually, I think I would view that as "violent rebellion" and not oppression. The gays are the ones being oppressed by Proposition 8. They're not trying to force people who don't agree with gay marriage to actually be gay themselves. The anti-gay community on the other hand is trying to deny them equal rights to marriage under the law. You know, the law that's supposed to keep church and state separate and all that good stuff. After being denied equal rights for so long, only to win a decisive victory, then have it taken away so quickly, I would call that rebellion. And I'll put my name on that publicly.
I felt it at my work in the downtown core as well. It was a small rumble here, though. I doubt it caused any real damage, although given the fact that the G20 is in town, an earthquake was not my first instinct when I felt it...
I don't think anybody understands SOAP.
Simple: They don't call it "rape" and "murder". Their culture considers male behaviour of that kind normal, especially when it comes to wives. I don't condemn them for it, but I wholeheartedly disagree with it.
I find it funny that this is modded Funny. Also depressing.
That works for books because they are physical objects. We're dealing with digital data. There is no such thing as "lending" in the digital world, something that book publishers will now have to deal with since e-books are becoming popular. They got a free ride so far while the music and film industry had to grapple with this concept, and they still haven't figured it out.
There you go using logic again. We don't take kindly to logic 'round these parts...
But Slashdot also has meta-moderation whereby your own comment ratings themselves are also voted on, double blind of course. This helps ensure that people don't abuse their moderation privileges.
Will somebody mod this motherfucker up? This is the first post I've seen so far that actually hit the nail on the head. Movies and games are two very different experiences. You cannot just take a game and translate it into a film. Games simply do not have the kind of story structure and depth to make a good film. If they do, for example something like Heavy Rain, they actually tend to resemble movies more than games in the first place. A pure game (i.e. totally gameplay oriented design, such as Doom) does not, has never, and will never make for a good film.
Interesting you should mention #3. That's pretty much where I sit. I look at the flash card as format shifting. I can adjust the speed of the game, save anywhere in realtime (very handy when so many damn DS games don't have a quick save option for a ten minute subway ride), add cheat codes easily, and I have all my games in one spot instead of having to carry around multiple carts. It's just clearly a superior format.
This is essentially what I was thinking of as a solution to this problem. Obviously, we cannot turn back the technological clock, and people will never ever ever stop sharing digital content. It's just human nature. In addition, duplication of content once it's created is so trivial and cheap it's basically a non-issue. However, the initial production of that content is what takes time and resources. So it seems to me that this is the actual problem we need to solve, not how to "protect" that content once it's created and loose in the wild.
Yeah, but does that necessarily reflect his own personal beliefs? That's just his current estate being dicks.
Perhaps I should have phrased that a bit different. I understand why it's a threat to institutionalized religion. I was referring more to people's personal beliefs.
That actually makes a lot of sense and is quite interesting. It seems we've gone from science being perverted for greed to science being perverted for religion.
Okay, we deviated from the actual discussion of the article a bit there. If you read the post I was replying to, you would see we're talking about who believes in ID and what purpose it serves. The quote from the Center for Science and Culture advocates ID as an alternative to evolution, i.e. science. As for 2000 years, that was just a rough number clearly pulled from my ass. I wasn't being authoritative there; the important part was the point about it being written by men as opposed to handed down from on high.
Even aside from religious beliefs, it is very difficult for many people to believe that the world and people as they are came about because of chance. Just look at the number of references in popular culture to fate and "the meaning of life". Going back even as far as the Greeks, it was a major theme of their literature and plays. The notion that natural selection determines that outcome of the universe is, to many people, a profoundly unsettling explanation. None of this should be taken as a challenge to natural selection or a defense of ID. However, your assertion that nobody actually believes in ID is naive.
They're welcome to believe whatever they want, but that doesn't make it true. Nor does it make it okay to teach in a science class. That's the problem with ID; it's being pushed as legitimate science when it isn't. Nobody is denying that there are some things that science just can't currently explain, and possibly never will be able to. Some of these things, like the nature of the afterlife, are clearly within the realm of the divine. ID and Creationism are attempting to attribute to the divine that which has already been explained by science. ID's purpose is to sneak religion into science class where it doesn't belong.
I never understood why evolution is such a threat to religion. How does us evolving from apes say anything about the existence of God? What does it even have to do with it? Hell, if I was God, evolution and natural selection actually seems like a pretty damn good way to design an ecosystem! It's resilient and adaptive and I don't have to micromanage it. It's only a problem if you believe in an absolute literal interpretation of the Bible. You know, that book that was written down by men 2000 years ago and translated and re-transcribed God only knows how many times (pun intended).
One of the good things with epub format is there is no standard drm layer
There, fixed that for you.
Seriously though, what's wrong with plain old PDF? I know EPUB is good for text, but poorly suited for things demanding a specialized layout like comics, but PDF handles that just fine. If you can plug in any DRM layer you want (or none; that's my preference), then what else do you need? Not having a standardized DRM would be good because it will immediately be cracked and then your standard is effectively dead. Well, dead if you want to actually use it with DRM, but what publisher in their right mind would want that...
Woooooooooooooosh...
Yeah, I used to think that was a good thing about Facebook. Really though, it pretty much just puts me in contact with people I didn't want to see anymore in the first place. If I haven't seen you in 15+ years and didn't go out of my way to look you up, why do I care what your dog had for breakfast? Maybe I just hate people...
Short answer: You can't.
Longer answer: There's no such thing as a truly original song. Every single piece of music ever written is inspired by the music that came before it. Every single person on the planet has heard music in their lifetime, and if they sit down to try and write a song, they are naturally going to do something based on what they've already heard. As far as I'm concerned, that case was a load of bullshit, but we can't apply common sense to the legal system. It would cause the space-time continuum to collapse. Really, I saw it on an episode of Star Trek once.