I think the problem is that (and I may be wrong) any new system that researchers come up with isn't allowed to ask the user for more information. This would make if very hard for any system to be acurate if it is based soley on what dvds you rented and how you rated them. If I liked Die Hard 4, for example, did I like it because of Bruce Willis, the "I'm a Mac" guy, the special effects, the plot, or some other reason that even I don't know? Personally, I know that I have rated something like 900 movies on the netflix site and nearly all the recommendations are things I've no interest in or they simply say, "Sorry we have no recommendations for you at this time." I would like to think that if they could ask me why I rated one movie a 4 and another a 1 then they might have more accurate recommendations. Even if they just had a drop down menu with something like, "I liked this movie because of a) the starts, b) the plot, c) the genre and so on" it would make recommendations a lot easier.
I get PCGamer and CGW (or Games for Windows Magazine as it is now called) and I used to get Computer Games Magazine. Why? Because you can get subscriptions to these and many other magazines on ebay for incredibly low prices. I think I got 4 years of PCGamer for $10. That's like 21 cents an issue. Sure they aren't the cd or dvd versions but still, at that price it is a no brainer.
I kind of thing that the name pretty much says it all "free 411." I don't really see what kind of trade secrets google could get from them that wouldn't be obvious.
He doesn't. His wife does. In his book he talks about how when his son was born he and his wife decided someone would stay home. He was making less money so he stayed home. Apparently his wife is part of a rather well respected Florida law firm and so she probably makes quite a bit of money.
All this is coming about because Jack's kid is now a teenager (15 or so I think) and so Jack has a lot more free time. If he actually had to earn a living as a lawyer then I'm sure he wouldn't be spending nearly so much time with this.
Sadly it doesn't matter. All it takes is 2 minutes to look up his name on google to realize how out there and uncredible he is and yet he still gets on TV and people who don't know anything about videogames see him. Will those people take the 2 minutes to look him up on google? In most cases they won't. After all, he's on tv so he must be credible!
Sounds like Tom Mabe http://www.tommabe.com/ He has a couple cds of pranking telemarketers. I know he has one call about a rug cleaning company and him asking about getting blood out of the carpet.
In the humanities grad school departments are full of citizens of the USA. In my department there are as many people from Europe as there are from Asia and combined they make up less than 10% of the department's graduate students. There are just as many from Korea as there are from China (one each at the moment I think) and there aren't any from India. In my Master's program at a different school the only international graduate students I ran into were from Canada and that was mainly because the school was something like 3 hours away from the Canadian border.
Just because there are a lot of non-US citizens in some departments doesn't mean that there are in every department. Now why certain departments are more likely to have international students than others is a different question.
I'm no lawyer but I"m just repeating what every court including ones in Indiana, St. Louis, California, Oklahoma, and Minesota have said regarding videogames and the first amendment.
I'm curious why you think laws are needed. Are children really any worse than they were say 100 years ago?
Every time these stories about videogame laws come up someone asks what is wrong with having laws like this.
Here are the problems: The first amendment guarantees freedom of expression. That freedom applies to all media. To override the First Amendment would take a lot of evidence.
In the USA no other medium has its ratings enforced by the government. Not the music industry, not the comic book industry, not the internet, not tv, and not the film industry. The MPAA ratings are self-enforced. If someone under 17 isn't allowed into an R-rated movie without an adult it is because the movie industry is inforcing those rules, not the government.
Therefore, if the videogame industry were to be singled out as the only medium to have its ratings enforced by the government there would have to be a mountain of evidence suggesting that violent videogames were harmful to minors. No such mountain exists. As such, these laws are misguided at best and hollow attempts on the part of politicians to appear "pro-family" at worst.
That is true only if we study MMOs which isn't necessarily the case. I study players of FPS games for example. There are also millions of casual gamers too as well as Madden fans and Japanese RPG fans and lots of other segments.
Even if we stick with MMOs I think a study of the people who have stuck with Star Wars Galaxies or Dark Age of Camelot would be interesting if only to find out why they still play those games (which I admit I have never played myself. I just know that they aren't all that popular in comparison to WOW or the popular Korean MMOs.).
I was just thinking the same thing. Missing rich white men has become the online equivalent of missing white blond girls. Sadly people go missing every day. It would be nice if everyone who went missing would get the same attention.
And then ten years later you decide that person has outlived his usefulness so you start a war with them and supposrt someone that hates him. The cycle continues...
I think it depends on the subject. I teach cultural studies and while i don't use powerpoint all that much I do use tech to show clips that illustrate points or look something up on the internet.
I think it depends on the subject. I teach discussion heavy classes where we talk about the issues. So I put the powerpoints online so that students can spend more time thinking about the issues and less about trying to write stuff down.
Unless you live in a valley between mountains I would be willing to bet that with a better antenna, a rotor, and a booster and get more channels than you know about. I grew up in a rural area that still doesn't offer cable or broadband and we had a good antenna, a rotor, and a booster and could get channels from Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Dayton, and Louisville (get a map and you could probably figure out the general area where my parents still live). We had reception on channels 2-14 and multiple uhf channels.
I'm in the humanities so things may be different in the hard sciences.
In order to get your article published you have to subscribe to the journal and in most cases the society that the produces the journal. When you get published you don't get paid and the publishers take the copyright. Because they take the copyright when you want to revise the paper, turn it into a book, or even pass it out to use in your own class you have to get permission. Now they always give permission but they are under no legal obligation to do so. They own the article outright. Then the journals turn around and sell access to their articles to a database company like ebsco or someone else. That database company then charges universities for access to those articles.
As academics part of what we get paid for is to publish. So the university pays us to publish and then turns around and has pay someone else to get access to those very same articles that they paid to have written in the first place. Sure they get access to lots of other articles written by people from other universities but the fact is they are paying twice for these articles. I'm sure there are lots of other businesses that wish they had the same business model.
To top it off, as I said earlier, a lot of these journals are the official publications of academic societies. These societies are organized by academics in the field for academics in that field. It is supposed to help with the advancement and promotion of that area of study. So why are they taking the copyrights of their members? Sadly, most academics don't know or care about intellectual property and so the few times I've asked that very question I've been met with "I don't know" or the editor of the journal trying to defend profiting off our backs.
"It doesn't take much channel surfing to see that a good deal more than 1 in 5 people are non-white."
Really? I must be getting different channels. With the exception of BET and sports there are very very few people that aren't white on my tv and almost none of them are the stars of the shows that they are on.
I would think that a contract would be more likely to get one sued because of a negative review because if someone went to the trouble of making up a contract for a review then I would be surprised if the contract made some stipulations about the content of the review.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the problem is that (and I may be wrong) any new system that researchers come up with isn't allowed to ask the user for more information. This would make if very hard for any system to be acurate if it is based soley on what dvds you rented and how you rated them.
If I liked Die Hard 4, for example, did I like it because of Bruce Willis, the "I'm a Mac" guy, the special effects, the plot, or some other reason that even I don't know?
Personally, I know that I have rated something like 900 movies on the netflix site and nearly all the recommendations are things I've no interest in or they simply say, "Sorry we have no recommendations for you at this time."
I would like to think that if they could ask me why I rated one movie a 4 and another a 1 then they might have more accurate recommendations. Even if they just had a drop down menu with something like, "I liked this movie because of a) the starts, b) the plot, c) the genre and so on" it would make recommendations a lot easier.
I get PCGamer and CGW (or Games for Windows Magazine as it is now called) and I used to get Computer Games Magazine. Why? Because you can get subscriptions to these and many other magazines on ebay for incredibly low prices. I think I got 4 years of PCGamer for $10. That's like 21 cents an issue. Sure they aren't the cd or dvd versions but still, at that price it is a no brainer.
Dedicated to what? It seems like that is the question.
I kind of thing that the name pretty much says it all "free 411." I don't really see what kind of trade secrets google could get from them that wouldn't be obvious.
He doesn't. His wife does. In his book he talks about how when his son was born he and his wife decided someone would stay home. He was making less money so he stayed home. Apparently his wife is part of a rather well respected Florida law firm and so she probably makes quite a bit of money.
All this is coming about because Jack's kid is now a teenager (15 or so I think) and so Jack has a lot more free time. If he actually had to earn a living as a lawyer then I'm sure he wouldn't be spending nearly so much time with this.
Sadly it doesn't matter. All it takes is 2 minutes to look up his name on google to realize how out there and uncredible he is and yet he still gets on TV and people who don't know anything about videogames see him. Will those people take the 2 minutes to look him up on google? In most cases they won't. After all, he's on tv so he must be credible!
You can predict anything you want. You don't need a fancy computer to do that. Just flip a coin.
Making accurate predictions is something else all together.
Sounds like Tom Mabe http://www.tommabe.com/
He has a couple cds of pranking telemarketers. I know he has one call about a rug cleaning company and him asking about getting blood out of the carpet.
They have been doing this since at least 2004. That's when I saw a flyer for a Halo tournament being held by the local Christian Student Fellowship.
Tell all of that to my employer who refuses to give us dental insurance.
In the humanities grad school departments are full of citizens of the USA. In my department there are as many people from Europe as there are from Asia and combined they make up less than 10% of the department's graduate students. There are just as many from Korea as there are from China (one each at the moment I think) and there aren't any from India. In my Master's program at a different school the only international graduate students I ran into were from Canada and that was mainly because the school was something like 3 hours away from the Canadian border.
Just because there are a lot of non-US citizens in some departments doesn't mean that there are in every department. Now why certain departments are more likely to have international students than others is a different question.
I'm no lawyer but I"m just repeating what every court including ones in Indiana, St. Louis, California, Oklahoma, and Minesota have said regarding videogames and the first amendment.
I'm curious why you think laws are needed. Are children really any worse than they were say 100 years ago?
Every time these stories about videogame laws come up someone asks what is wrong with having laws like this.
Here are the problems:
The first amendment guarantees freedom of expression. That freedom applies to all media. To override the First Amendment would take a lot of evidence.
In the USA no other medium has its ratings enforced by the government. Not the music industry, not the comic book industry, not the internet, not tv, and not the film industry. The MPAA ratings are self-enforced. If someone under 17 isn't allowed into an R-rated movie without an adult it is because the movie industry is inforcing those rules, not the government.
Therefore, if the videogame industry were to be singled out as the only medium to have its ratings enforced by the government there would have to be a mountain of evidence suggesting that violent videogames were harmful to minors. No such mountain exists. As such, these laws are misguided at best and hollow attempts on the part of politicians to appear "pro-family" at worst.
That is true only if we study MMOs which isn't necessarily the case. I study players of FPS games for example. There are also millions of casual gamers too as well as Madden fans and Japanese RPG fans and lots of other segments.
Even if we stick with MMOs I think a study of the people who have stuck with Star Wars Galaxies or Dark Age of Camelot would be interesting if only to find out why they still play those games (which I admit I have never played myself. I just know that they aren't all that popular in comparison to WOW or the popular Korean MMOs.).
I was just thinking the same thing. Missing rich white men has become the online equivalent of missing white blond girls. Sadly people go missing every day. It would be nice if everyone who went missing would get the same attention.
And then ten years later you decide that person has outlived his usefulness so you start a war with them and supposrt someone that hates him. The cycle continues...
If you are living before September 20, 2005, I guess. Versions released since then have been ad free. http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2005/09/20/
Isn't this exactly what webtv or msnt or whatever it is now called was made for? http://www.msntv.com/pc/
I think it depends on the subject. I teach cultural studies and while i don't use powerpoint all that much I do use tech to show clips that illustrate points or look something up on the internet.
I think it depends on the subject. I teach discussion heavy classes where we talk about the issues. So I put the powerpoints online so that students can spend more time thinking about the issues and less about trying to write stuff down.
Unless you live in a valley between mountains I would be willing to bet that with a better antenna, a rotor, and a booster and get more channels than you know about. I grew up in a rural area that still doesn't offer cable or broadband and we had a good antenna, a rotor, and a booster and could get channels from Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Dayton, and Louisville (get a map and you could probably figure out the general area where my parents still live). We had reception on channels 2-14 and multiple uhf channels.
So did we but we always got it from the bank not the phone company.
(Where I grew up we weren't served by ATT or the baby bells but a local phone company. I'm not sure if they ever had time and/or temp.)
I'm in the humanities so things may be different in the hard sciences.
In order to get your article published you have to subscribe to the journal and in most cases the society that the produces the journal. When you get published you don't get paid and the publishers take the copyright. Because they take the copyright when you want to revise the paper, turn it into a book, or even pass it out to use in your own class you have to get permission. Now they always give permission but they are under no legal obligation to do so. They own the article outright.
Then the journals turn around and sell access to their articles to a database company like ebsco or someone else. That database company then charges universities for access to those articles.
As academics part of what we get paid for is to publish. So the university pays us to publish and then turns around and has pay someone else to get access to those very same articles that they paid to have written in the first place. Sure they get access to lots of other articles written by people from other universities but the fact is they are paying twice for these articles. I'm sure there are lots of other businesses that wish they had the same business model.
To top it off, as I said earlier, a lot of these journals are the official publications of academic societies. These societies are organized by academics in the field for academics in that field. It is supposed to help with the advancement and promotion of that area of study. So why are they taking the copyrights of their members? Sadly, most academics don't know or care about intellectual property and so the few times I've asked that very question I've been met with "I don't know" or the editor of the journal trying to defend profiting off our backs.
"It doesn't take much channel surfing to see that a good deal more than 1 in 5 people are non-white."
Really? I must be getting different channels. With the exception of BET and sports there are very very few people that aren't white on my tv and almost none of them are the stars of the shows that they are on.
I would think that a contract would be more likely to get one sued because of a negative review because if someone went to the trouble of making up a contract for a review then I would be surprised if the contract made some stipulations about the content of the review.