When you ask someone to perform a task related to X, and an area normally involving things completely unrelated to X lights up like the fourth of July?
"I'm not sure what you are complaining about here... this is normal for many regulated industries, for a particular definition of "local"."
He's referring to the local chapter of the union. If you live in area X and you need a certain type of work done, you have to either get nonunion labor or get one from the local union chapter. The guy in the next town over in a different chapter is not an option.
"Well, if you won't deal with them, why should they deal with you?"
It's a union solidarity thing he's talking about here. Where if you don't use a union guy from the local chapter for job X, unions for jobs X, Y and Z will ban their members from working for you. I'm sorry you tried to hire a contractor from the next city over, in return you can't get a plumber or electrician to work for you at all.
"Do you want employers and employees to be forced to accept any particular worker? What exactly are you proposing?"
You don't get the concept of a "union shop." It's a shop where the shop unionized and the standard union contract requires that all workers be members of the union in order to be employed. For example, there are ~50 employees at my workplace. If 26 of them vote to unionize, then all 50 are now required to be dues-paying members of the union, as being a member of the union in good standing is now a requirement to be an employee. Many/most of the big unions have a similar clause that they ensure is part of the new contract, because it guarantees them higher dues than would be otherwise garnered.
I have a feeling you're from a country that wisely decided to neuter union powers early on, rather than allow the pathology that comes with an organization that produces nothing, holds significant political influence, and ultimately controls the livelyhoods of a large number of people.
There's quite a few nifty things put out in the PSP scene, probably in part because every PSP to date has been hacked for homebrew, but most of them don't support booting ISOs because they're mostly userland hacks and not kernel mode hacks.
In any situation in which you aren't paying for it or viewing advertising, in what way are you supporting the aforementioned scum?
For example, you download a video/image/whatever from a randomP2P system, in what way does doing so support anyone in any way? Specifically, if it supports child pornographers, why doesn't it support musicians/moviemakers?
We have a vendor that "behind closed doors" uses "does he belong to the right variety of Christianity" as a reason to put someone on the "short list" for termination. It's not the "reason" they terminate someone, but if you are the right variety of Christian you're quietly given far more leeway.
Alright, tell me how to determine without ever generating a single false negative, whether or not any given piece of video data has been uploaded without the approval of the copyright owner. More specifically, since everything is copyrighted by it's creator by default, show me where in the data itself I can find a marker showing me that this specific clip is approved (or not approved, take your choice) by the copyright owner?
Yes, there are some low-hanging fruit in both directions, but nothing you can apply as absolute certainty in all cases. "Just let us know if you catch anything that violates your copyright and we'll remove it" is the most you can reasonably expect, unless you expect every company that hosts user provided content of any kind to be required to have a legal team identify the legal copyright owner of every individual piece of data ever posted and get signed statements from them that each individual entry is in fact authorized.
To get an idea of exactly how impossible that is, imagine a legal team having to determine who actually authored every single post on/. and get signed statements from them authorizing each individual comment before it appeared on the site, rather than assuming you aren't just copy/pasting someone else's copyrighted text in an unauthorized manner unless advised otherwise and that if you are posting it that you are authorizing it be posted.
Of course, there are other ways that the money could be "inserted at the bottom" aside from unemployment extensions.
To provide a convenient anecdotal example, there's a town not terribly far away from where I work that hires a bunch of people as street sweepers, as in manual street sweepers, not using the street cleaning vehicles. Apparently they came to the conclusion that having enough simple but consistent unskilled labor work like that reduces crime. To the point that they reduced their police budget a little to increase the program because as far as law enforcement goes outside of traffic enforcement (yes, it's hard to argue that you aren't getting your money's worth from a revenue generating department) they were getting more bang for their buck by keeping people employed.
Likewise, I dislike welfare as it exists, and instead think that where's always some kind of public works project that needs doing, or could at least use more laborers. Why not simply employ the "welfare" lot, and tell them that they are cut off if they aren't willing to put their part in? If nothing else, we could always go so far as letting charities apply for "additional prepaid unskilled labor" from the "workfare pool" should they need it.
So, you're saying that if we insert money at the top, it benefits the guys at the bottom because high level executives and such create lots of jobs directly from their personal income?
From my PoV it makes more sense to insert money at the bottom. The guys at the bottom are most likely to spend it, which in turn puts in in corporate coffers, and the corporatations as an entity are the ones creating the jobs, not the executives from their personal wealth.
So, to sum it up, anything with any kind of motion controls automatically doesn't count?
Frankly, Super Mario Galaxy had a control scheme that was perfectly fine. Once you got the feel of it, it was pretty much second nature, aside from flying as Rainbow Mario (which I could never really get the feel for).
Depending on the kinds of game you like, you should try No More Heroes 2, there's a second Zelda for Wii coming out, and a small spread of other stuff that's not in the "casual party game" department. Don't have my library in front of me to name names ATM though.
So, what was that about PS3 homebrew always being illegal because it uses Sony's leaked SDK? Or are you saying that because some of it does, especially right now because there's not a *mature* tool chain yet, that any future homebrew created without using Sony's SDK will somehow also be using Sony's SDK even though it isn't?
You mean like places where the speed limit goes 55->35->15->35->40(this one is a yellow "caution" sign on a curve, BTW)->45 in the span of a single mile? Or even better where the speed limit in one direction is 55, but in the other direction is 40 with multiple intersections between the signs, so that if you're an out-of-towner you might not realize that the speed limit is 55 if you turn right but only 40 if you turn left (or vice versa coming from the other side)?
Both real examples, both within two dozen miles of where I live.
It reminds me more of something like The Incredible Machine with more interactive parts, presented as a programming educational tool.
There was another game that was much more similar to "real" programming called COLOBOTS, which I spent a bored weekend tinkering with once. My big complaint was the limited amount of code storage the little bastards had -- after some early futzing around I'd actually laid out a plan for a (hopefully) decent generic AI for the bots, that would allow them to self identify, coordinate, and more or less play the game themselves. That was when I learned there *was* a limit, and that the language didn't allow the creation of libraries. =p
There's a pretty broad "in between" area though, which is where a pretty large number of people work. Where something might be heavy enough to injure but not so heavy as to break neck/crimp off toes.
I work at a pipe fabrication shop (as the IT guy / part time draftsman / CIC bender programmer / etc). Owner doesn't require hardhats because there's more or less nothing high enough that it could reasonably fall on your head that isn't going to kill you outright but does require steel toes as the opposite is true as far as things falling on your feet.
More specifically, the production of child porn is bad.
I've always wondered on this topic, why the law is the way it is. It seems to me that child porn is evidence of a crime being committed. Why not simply render production, sale, purchase, and distribution illegal but not possession and actually encourage anyone that ends up with it in their possession to provide it to police, in order to help identify and rescue the victims thereof? It just seems like the manpower/funds freed up by doing that might allow some actual good to be done.
Make the economic side of child porn as difficult as possible and see what happens. I know back when it was legal there were only a handful of companies that did it even then, Color Climax being the most notorious. Even they barely sold anything that was entirely kiddy porn because it wouldn't sell, so their more common scenario was to add in an underage actor into an otherwise mostly vanilla scene -- and even that wasn't *that* common.
It makes me think there's not a huge economic incentive to kiddy porn, so the question becomes why does it get created? After all, explicitly filming evidence of your crimes seems like an unbelievably stupid thing to do, then turning around and distributing it on the internet seems even dumber.
Presuming there is in fact significant trading of child pornography on the internet (something that most talking about this topic seem to take as a given), then try to locate a child pornography website on the open web. It's not exactly trivial to do so.
Whereas the "more underground" includes things like P2P (as bad as many P2P files are mislabeled, I'm surprised that child porn marked as something else is as rare as it seems to be) and FreeNet (for whom "there is child pornography on the network and I can't censor it" is one of the primary arguments against, so I assume there must be -- never tried it myself).
Now, make sure no heavy objects are generally above people at all ever in a job that involves loading trucks with an overhead crane, or pulling materials off of a pallet rack with a forklift (these racks usually go 3-5 levels high at several feet of height per level), etc, etc, etc.
In a lot of cases, "Make sure your employees are aware of their environment and know how to GTFO if something starts going wrong" is the best that can be done.
City of Heroes does this, at least as far as visual ads go, though they go out of their way to make them not seem too out of place in the world, and it can be opted-out of, for what it matters.
Larger/heavier vehicles in general present an increased risk for the other party in a car wreck. Some SUVs (especially older models) have a tendency to be weighted like a poorly designed pickup. It's a little less unreasonable than "molested by a stranger", though I agree it is still unreasonable.
I always assumed from the timing of that that was a patent thing. It stopped being called "Nutrasweet" absolutely everywhere at the same time that it could technically be produced off-patent. I had simply figured it was a matter of companies buying it offbrand to save money.
It does surprise me that more hadn't moved to things like Stevia though, especially now that it's not in that weird position of being perfectly legal to sell to anyone as an "herbal dietary supplement" but illegal to sell if you mention that it has a flavor, like it was for so many years.
"Most" children certainly aren't, I don't know if I can give you that for teenagers though. Between my own time as a teenager and having been the "cool uncle", I've spent more time around teenaged girls than I should probably admit to.
Predators? Probably not. Hypersexual in a hot-and-cold sort of way? Most of them, at least around here. There's always that guy or guys that they all flirt with, and least a couple of them have done more than flirt with. Our VFD had one of those guys, one of my best friends since junior high *was* one of those guys, etc, etc.
Games have ratings as well. The difference is we're not making it illegal to show Hostel, and fining the theater if a kid manages to see it.
What they're trying to push is to treat something like CoD: MW2 in the same category as something like pornography, rather than like TV or movies with similar content.
Slashdot Mirror
When you ask someone to perform a task related to X, and an area normally involving things completely unrelated to X lights up like the fourth of July?
"I'm not sure what you are complaining about here... this is normal for many regulated industries, for a particular definition of "local"."
He's referring to the local chapter of the union. If you live in area X and you need a certain type of work done, you have to either get nonunion labor or get one from the local union chapter. The guy in the next town over in a different chapter is not an option.
"Well, if you won't deal with them, why should they deal with you?"
It's a union solidarity thing he's talking about here. Where if you don't use a union guy from the local chapter for job X, unions for jobs X, Y and Z will ban their members from working for you. I'm sorry you tried to hire a contractor from the next city over, in return you can't get a plumber or electrician to work for you at all.
"Do you want employers and employees to be forced to accept any particular worker? What exactly are you proposing?"
You don't get the concept of a "union shop." It's a shop where the shop unionized and the standard union contract requires that all workers be members of the union in order to be employed. For example, there are ~50 employees at my workplace. If 26 of them vote to unionize, then all 50 are now required to be dues-paying members of the union, as being a member of the union in good standing is now a requirement to be an employee. Many/most of the big unions have a similar clause that they ensure is part of the new contract, because it guarantees them higher dues than would be otherwise garnered.
I have a feeling you're from a country that wisely decided to neuter union powers early on, rather than allow the pathology that comes with an organization that produces nothing, holds significant political influence, and ultimately controls the livelyhoods of a large number of people.
There's quite a few nifty things put out in the PSP scene, probably in part because every PSP to date has been hacked for homebrew, but most of them don't support booting ISOs because they're mostly userland hacks and not kernel mode hacks.
In any situation in which you aren't paying for it or viewing advertising, in what way are you supporting the aforementioned scum?
For example, you download a video/image/whatever from a randomP2P system, in what way does doing so support anyone in any way? Specifically, if it supports child pornographers, why doesn't it support musicians/moviemakers?
Yet accused != guilty either.
We have a vendor that "behind closed doors" uses "does he belong to the right variety of Christianity" as a reason to put someone on the "short list" for termination. It's not the "reason" they terminate someone, but if you are the right variety of Christian you're quietly given far more leeway.
Alright, tell me how to determine without ever generating a single false negative, whether or not any given piece of video data has been uploaded without the approval of the copyright owner. More specifically, since everything is copyrighted by it's creator by default, show me where in the data itself I can find a marker showing me that this specific clip is approved (or not approved, take your choice) by the copyright owner?
Yes, there are some low-hanging fruit in both directions, but nothing you can apply as absolute certainty in all cases. "Just let us know if you catch anything that violates your copyright and we'll remove it" is the most you can reasonably expect, unless you expect every company that hosts user provided content of any kind to be required to have a legal team identify the legal copyright owner of every individual piece of data ever posted and get signed statements from them that each individual entry is in fact authorized.
To get an idea of exactly how impossible that is, imagine a legal team having to determine who actually authored every single post on /. and get signed statements from them authorizing each individual comment before it appeared on the site, rather than assuming you aren't just copy/pasting someone else's copyrighted text in an unauthorized manner unless advised otherwise and that if you are posting it that you are authorizing it be posted.
Of course, there are other ways that the money could be "inserted at the bottom" aside from unemployment extensions.
To provide a convenient anecdotal example, there's a town not terribly far away from where I work that hires a bunch of people as street sweepers, as in manual street sweepers, not using the street cleaning vehicles. Apparently they came to the conclusion that having enough simple but consistent unskilled labor work like that reduces crime. To the point that they reduced their police budget a little to increase the program because as far as law enforcement goes outside of traffic enforcement (yes, it's hard to argue that you aren't getting your money's worth from a revenue generating department) they were getting more bang for their buck by keeping people employed.
Likewise, I dislike welfare as it exists, and instead think that where's always some kind of public works project that needs doing, or could at least use more laborers. Why not simply employ the "welfare" lot, and tell them that they are cut off if they aren't willing to put their part in? If nothing else, we could always go so far as letting charities apply for "additional prepaid unskilled labor" from the "workfare pool" should they need it.
So, you're saying that if we insert money at the top, it benefits the guys at the bottom because high level executives and such create lots of jobs directly from their personal income?
From my PoV it makes more sense to insert money at the bottom. The guys at the bottom are most likely to spend it, which in turn puts in in corporate coffers, and the corporatations as an entity are the ones creating the jobs, not the executives from their personal wealth.
So, to sum it up, anything with any kind of motion controls automatically doesn't count?
Frankly, Super Mario Galaxy had a control scheme that was perfectly fine. Once you got the feel of it, it was pretty much second nature, aside from flying as Rainbow Mario (which I could never really get the feel for).
Depending on the kinds of game you like, you should try No More Heroes 2, there's a second Zelda for Wii coming out, and a small spread of other stuff that's not in the "casual party game" department. Don't have my library in front of me to name names ATM though.
How does an animal not have at least a glimmer of Free Will? They can certainly at least feign it pretty well.
You mean it doesn't? AHH, I has been teh lied to!
Doesn't it spin the other direction, though?
http://www.ps3-hacks.com/2010/09/08/open-source-ps3-tool-chain-released/
So, what was that about PS3 homebrew always being illegal because it uses Sony's leaked SDK? Or are you saying that because some of it does, especially right now because there's not a *mature* tool chain yet, that any future homebrew created without using Sony's SDK will somehow also be using Sony's SDK even though it isn't?
You mean like places where the speed limit goes 55->35->15->35->40(this one is a yellow "caution" sign on a curve, BTW)->45 in the span of a single mile? Or even better where the speed limit in one direction is 55, but in the other direction is 40 with multiple intersections between the signs, so that if you're an out-of-towner you might not realize that the speed limit is 55 if you turn right but only 40 if you turn left (or vice versa coming from the other side)?
Both real examples, both within two dozen miles of where I live.
It reminds me more of something like The Incredible Machine with more interactive parts, presented as a programming educational tool.
There was another game that was much more similar to "real" programming called COLOBOTS, which I spent a bored weekend tinkering with once. My big complaint was the limited amount of code storage the little bastards had -- after some early futzing around I'd actually laid out a plan for a (hopefully) decent generic AI for the bots, that would allow them to self identify, coordinate, and more or less play the game themselves. That was when I learned there *was* a limit, and that the language didn't allow the creation of libraries. =p
There's a pretty broad "in between" area though, which is where a pretty large number of people work. Where something might be heavy enough to injure but not so heavy as to break neck/crimp off toes.
I work at a pipe fabrication shop (as the IT guy / part time draftsman / CIC bender programmer / etc). Owner doesn't require hardhats because there's more or less nothing high enough that it could reasonably fall on your head that isn't going to kill you outright but does require steel toes as the opposite is true as far as things falling on your feet.
More specifically, the production of child porn is bad.
I've always wondered on this topic, why the law is the way it is. It seems to me that child porn is evidence of a crime being committed. Why not simply render production, sale, purchase, and distribution illegal but not possession and actually encourage anyone that ends up with it in their possession to provide it to police, in order to help identify and rescue the victims thereof? It just seems like the manpower/funds freed up by doing that might allow some actual good to be done.
Make the economic side of child porn as difficult as possible and see what happens. I know back when it was legal there were only a handful of companies that did it even then, Color Climax being the most notorious. Even they barely sold anything that was entirely kiddy porn because it wouldn't sell, so their more common scenario was to add in an underage actor into an otherwise mostly vanilla scene -- and even that wasn't *that* common.
It makes me think there's not a huge economic incentive to kiddy porn, so the question becomes why does it get created? After all, explicitly filming evidence of your crimes seems like an unbelievably stupid thing to do, then turning around and distributing it on the internet seems even dumber.
Presuming there is in fact significant trading of child pornography on the internet (something that most talking about this topic seem to take as a given), then try to locate a child pornography website on the open web. It's not exactly trivial to do so.
Whereas the "more underground" includes things like P2P (as bad as many P2P files are mislabeled, I'm surprised that child porn marked as something else is as rare as it seems to be) and FreeNet (for whom "there is child pornography on the network and I can't censor it" is one of the primary arguments against, so I assume there must be -- never tried it myself).
Now, make sure no heavy objects are generally above people at all ever in a job that involves loading trucks with an overhead crane, or pulling materials off of a pallet rack with a forklift (these racks usually go 3-5 levels high at several feet of height per level), etc, etc, etc.
In a lot of cases, "Make sure your employees are aware of their environment and know how to GTFO if something starts going wrong" is the best that can be done.
City of Heroes does this, at least as far as visual ads go, though they go out of their way to make them not seem too out of place in the world, and it can be opted-out of, for what it matters.
Larger/heavier vehicles in general present an increased risk for the other party in a car wreck. Some SUVs (especially older models) have a tendency to be weighted like a poorly designed pickup. It's a little less unreasonable than "molested by a stranger", though I agree it is still unreasonable.
I always assumed from the timing of that that was a patent thing. It stopped being called "Nutrasweet" absolutely everywhere at the same time that it could technically be produced off-patent. I had simply figured it was a matter of companies buying it offbrand to save money.
It does surprise me that more hadn't moved to things like Stevia though, especially now that it's not in that weird position of being perfectly legal to sell to anyone as an "herbal dietary supplement" but illegal to sell if you mention that it has a flavor, like it was for so many years.
"Most" children certainly aren't, I don't know if I can give you that for teenagers though. Between my own time as a teenager and having been the "cool uncle", I've spent more time around teenaged girls than I should probably admit to.
Predators? Probably not.
Hypersexual in a hot-and-cold sort of way? Most of them, at least around here. There's always that guy or guys that they all flirt with, and least a couple of them have done more than flirt with. Our VFD had one of those guys, one of my best friends since junior high *was* one of those guys, etc, etc.
Games have ratings as well. The difference is we're not making it illegal to show Hostel, and fining the theater if a kid manages to see it.
What they're trying to push is to treat something like CoD: MW2 in the same category as something like pornography, rather than like TV or movies with similar content.