Primarily the one thing that people almost unanimously wanted to keep was the fiscal policies of the Right.
The two things that people really voted in Labor for were these - to repudiate the progressive industrial relations laws that were introduced under the Work Choices policies and return to a more union oriented model. Secondly people wanted "change". People stopped listening to Howard after over a decade in power. Thirdly, people wanted action on climate change. Rightly or wrongly, Kevin Rudd took ownership of that issue (even if his policy was simply the Coalition policy brought forward two years)
People were mostly happy with Howard's economic management, which saw a 20% growth in real wages, no recessions despite the Asian financial crisis and the dotcom bust, budget surpluses in all years but one and massive tax cuts over the years (honestly, it was not that long ago where earning over $60k AU (around $47k US) cost you 45% of your wage in tax). Kevin Rudd sold himself to the public as a "fiscal conservative" and said "me too" on a lot of significant areas to win power.
What we got was pretty much what we asked for, except with less experience and maturity than we were used to from our government. The number of times that the senate has saved the taxpayer from ludicrous schemes over the past twelve months has been ridiculous. The senate may just save us from this piece of lunacy too. The Greens won't vote for it and the coalition have promised not to either.
I never understood the extension that the government is making for hardcore pornography. Now I'm a Christian and am morally against the use of pornography, but I never understood why at the age of 18 I can go and pay for sex in a brothel with as many girls (and I suppose guys) as I want, but then I cannot pay to watch two other people have sex on tv.
It's the same with any right-wing government that is in power.
I do not understand why, but it seems that the press are largely left-wing in most western countries. In the lead up to the last federal election in Australia the current affairs programs (no, not ACA but the REAL current affairs programs like PM and Lateline) seemed to have a new report from the CSIRO or some other organisation every single day on how rapidly global warming was approaching even faster than expected. Of course this played right into the rhetoric of the left-wing opposition of the time. They also gave numerous "experts" great amounts of time talking up how bad inflation was in this country, despite it being lower than in nearly every other western country in the world.
Cut to one year later (after a win by the left-wing government) and the news reports have shifted. We are not hearing at all about inflation (which is running higher now than it was at the time) or how badly the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (i.e. carbon tax) will destroy the economy while it is already vulnerable due to international pressure. Instead we are continuously hearing about how the opposition treasurer plagiarised something several years ago. We are hearing all about how wonderful the new Prime Minister is in his handling the economic crisis.
For whatever reason the press seems to be left-wing in what it reports. In some ways it can be good while the government is Right, but when the government is Left it is not a good thing, since the media then becomes a properganda arm of the federal government. I for one would like to see more media scrutiny on the proposed internet filter, the incredibly regressive IR laws that the government is pushing through and the budget blowout (due to poor original policy) that Kevin Rudd's "computers in schools" policy is facing.
That's not to say that the media should always report the negative things that the government is doing, which at the moment includes the positive changes that Gillard is making to schools in holding them accountable in the long term for their quality of teaching. However, the media really should focus on holding whichever government is in power accountable for their actions, while maintaining sufficient scrutiny of the opposition. When they do this, then we have a well functioning democracy.
Then you have no real experience in a large portion of commercial software development houses. A lot of software houses are still maintaining products that were written in the 90s in VB6 because a) the products are mostly mature and work, b) there is years worth of code investment behind them and c) their clients use and love the programs.
The big mistake a lot of developers make is thinking that the technology is what users pay for. That is simply untrue. What users pay for covers so much more than that - familiarity, usability, usefulness and many many other things.
My company still makes more money off its VB6 products than its.NET products and will do so for some time to come.
I've learned how to interact with others while raiding.
I've learned that yelling "GET OUT OF THE FIRE YOU ABSOLUTE %#@^ING MORON" is a very good motivational speech and that "YOU STUPID LOOTWHORE!" is an acceptable way of addressing another individual who happens to have a favourable roll of the dice.
I tried this at work the other day but it didn't work in getting me my promotion. I guess the boss is just an antisocial lootwhore.
Yes, I do think that in order to be religious a person has to be either of lower education (not necessarily of lower intelligence, lower education is enough) or that the person has to cheat to him/herself and create a duality within themselves and refuse their intelligence/education to be involved much when it concerns their religion.
It's amazing, you managed to go a whole post without making any comment relevant to my post.
There are intelligent, well informed people of every mainstream religion, yet in the eyes of the GP it is ok to sledge them as being irrational, stupid and self-delusional.
If a religious person came on here and made the same comments about another religion or atheism then they would be rightly modded flamebait. Yet the moderators appear to have modded the GP insightful because he shares their irrational stereotyping of religious people.
Strange modding something so inflamatory as insightful.
well-educated people who grew up in a secular western society still prefer self-delusion to truth
I've studied various religions, and have discovered that they are all bullshit!
religions is not thinking for oneself
If a Christian, Bhuddist, Muslim or Taoist had have come on here and started saying those same things about atheists they would be rightly modded as flamebait.
A more fair and accurate question would be "When can the world expect an Asian-Aussie Prime Minister?". Unless Obama is all of a sudden a native American.
In Australia the government rightly fears the people. Try to pull this one on us would result in a whole lot of public outcry and would cost the government, whichever side tried to do it, the next election and the power for a very, very long time.
I for one would be bannering buildings with "Keep your hands off my email you dirty damned apes" and other such statements.
Yet Warhammer is still not perfect, and if it is to become a giant it needs to fix a few things, not least of which is the animation glitches. In fact the animation glitches and performance issues are so bad that they can be quite jarring and disconnect your feeling of immersion.
I love Warhammer so far and thought that it had a great launch, but to retain customers they will have to polish the rough edges.
I could play poker all night for 20$ and not wake up smelling of smoke and beer.
You're doing it wrong.
Re:Are Quests in MMOGs doable?
on
Quests
·
· Score: 1
You still did not address my point. I am not a hardcore player, I would probably be an "average" wow player at somewhere around 20h per week (which is only around three hours every night and then half a day on the weekend - around the same amount that "normal" people watch tv).
But what of the school students who want to play only for a few hours while they're at school, but want to play for many, many more on their school holidays. You cannot consider someone hardcore because they want to spend 90h this month playing a game instead of 80.
Re:Are Quests in MMOGs doable?
on
Quests
·
· Score: 1
Again the problem becomes where do you draw the line? What about school holidays/work holidays when people want to play more for a month or two?
Call me a right winger, but I want to damn well choose how much I play and when I play it.
Re:Are Quests in MMOGs doable?
on
Quests
·
· Score: 1
Ok so there are huge problems with this.
To do a multi-person dungeon in WoW which lasts for an hour, despite the easy to use looking for group system and having large guilds and friends list to draw upon, it STILL takes a good 20 minutes to build a group and get to the dungeon itself.
Given a time limit too small and the "overhead time" becomes frustrating and makes the game unplayable. So one has to determine how much time is the right amount of time. The average WoW player plays for 20h per week (according to figures that I have heard). So do you cap it at 20 hours? This would still leave people like my friends at a huge disadvantage, who will play for maybe 10 or at most 15 hours per week.
What is casual to one is hardcore to another, and what is healthy for one is unhealthy for another. If you had to "buy hours" instead, you would just promote loot whoring and ninjaing. No restriction system can work.
The best way to promote the game for casuals is to remove attunements and lower gear requirements for each of the raids, and give people easier access to the gear they need to be able to raid effectively. Note that this is happening in WoW already, and it is very easy to find a Kara PUG (finding a good one on the other hand may take some time).
WoW is about as casual friendly as an MMO can be while still appealing to the hardcore (although "hardcore" is a misnomer in the case of hunters who are quite amusing with their 1 button spam).
The point is that it's not about the numbers, but about societal acceptance. To gain that societal acceptance requires some transparency to beliefs, which is why many view the Freemasons as a cult too.
The real difference between a religion and a cult is the availability of materials and the acceptability into mainstream culture. Cults center around an individual or small group of individuals.
The dictionary defines a cult as "a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader." If you look at any of the major religions, they have at least gained orthodoxy in at least some societies. Cults by their nature exist on the margins. Almost all religions started off as a cult, but adapted to become mainstream enough to gain acceptance by their society - whether by the sword or other means.
I never said that he did have to file a patent, the point I was making was that if he doesn't file a patent and a patent troll goes after him later, the patent may save his company from a lawsuit.
Just because he morally disagrees with patents on IP does not mean that he should not persue this legal avenue to protect his company and his job. Until the law is changed, you have to work within its limits or face potential consequences. Even when you are in the right court cases are costly and bad for business.
The law is the law, even if you disagree with it. There are several reasons why you should listen to your boss - your job, his job and the prevention of possible law suits in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you are wrong on several points.
Primarily the one thing that people almost unanimously wanted to keep was the fiscal policies of the Right.
The two things that people really voted in Labor for were these - to repudiate the progressive industrial relations laws that were introduced under the Work Choices policies and return to a more union oriented model. Secondly people wanted "change". People stopped listening to Howard after over a decade in power. Thirdly, people wanted action on climate change. Rightly or wrongly, Kevin Rudd took ownership of that issue (even if his policy was simply the Coalition policy brought forward two years)
People were mostly happy with Howard's economic management, which saw a 20% growth in real wages, no recessions despite the Asian financial crisis and the dotcom bust, budget surpluses in all years but one and massive tax cuts over the years (honestly, it was not that long ago where earning over $60k AU (around $47k US) cost you 45% of your wage in tax). Kevin Rudd sold himself to the public as a "fiscal conservative" and said "me too" on a lot of significant areas to win power.
What we got was pretty much what we asked for, except with less experience and maturity than we were used to from our government. The number of times that the senate has saved the taxpayer from ludicrous schemes over the past twelve months has been ridiculous. The senate may just save us from this piece of lunacy too. The Greens won't vote for it and the coalition have promised not to either.
I never understood the extension that the government is making for hardcore pornography. Now I'm a Christian and am morally against the use of pornography, but I never understood why at the age of 18 I can go and pay for sex in a brothel with as many girls (and I suppose guys) as I want, but then I cannot pay to watch two other people have sex on tv.
It's the same with any right-wing government that is in power.
I do not understand why, but it seems that the press are largely left-wing in most western countries. In the lead up to the last federal election in Australia the current affairs programs (no, not ACA but the REAL current affairs programs like PM and Lateline) seemed to have a new report from the CSIRO or some other organisation every single day on how rapidly global warming was approaching even faster than expected. Of course this played right into the rhetoric of the left-wing opposition of the time. They also gave numerous "experts" great amounts of time talking up how bad inflation was in this country, despite it being lower than in nearly every other western country in the world.
Cut to one year later (after a win by the left-wing government) and the news reports have shifted. We are not hearing at all about inflation (which is running higher now than it was at the time) or how badly the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (i.e. carbon tax) will destroy the economy while it is already vulnerable due to international pressure. Instead we are continuously hearing about how the opposition treasurer plagiarised something several years ago. We are hearing all about how wonderful the new Prime Minister is in his handling the economic crisis.
For whatever reason the press seems to be left-wing in what it reports. In some ways it can be good while the government is Right, but when the government is Left it is not a good thing, since the media then becomes a properganda arm of the federal government. I for one would like to see more media scrutiny on the proposed internet filter, the incredibly regressive IR laws that the government is pushing through and the budget blowout (due to poor original policy) that Kevin Rudd's "computers in schools" policy is facing.
That's not to say that the media should always report the negative things that the government is doing, which at the moment includes the positive changes that Gillard is making to schools in holding them accountable in the long term for their quality of teaching. However, the media really should focus on holding whichever government is in power accountable for their actions, while maintaining sufficient scrutiny of the opposition. When they do this, then we have a well functioning democracy.
Then you have no real experience in a large portion of commercial software development houses. A lot of software houses are still maintaining products that were written in the 90s in VB6 because a) the products are mostly mature and work, b) there is years worth of code investment behind them and c) their clients use and love the programs.
.NET products and will do so for some time to come.
The big mistake a lot of developers make is thinking that the technology is what users pay for. That is simply untrue. What users pay for covers so much more than that - familiarity, usability, usefulness and many many other things.
My company still makes more money off its VB6 products than its
Raiding is a very social activity.
I've learned how to interact with others while raiding.
I've learned that yelling "GET OUT OF THE FIRE YOU ABSOLUTE %#@^ING MORON" is a very good motivational speech and that "YOU STUPID LOOTWHORE!" is an acceptable way of addressing another individual who happens to have a favourable roll of the dice.
I tried this at work the other day but it didn't work in getting me my promotion. I guess the boss is just an antisocial lootwhore.
Great, another post that's better interpretted by a compiler than the human brain.
Would you like some toast?
An interesting analogy given that iiNet is often referred to as iiBorg given their corporate policy of assimilating smaller ISPs.
Oh, I'm sorry, I was mistaken. This guy and this guy were either uneducated or unintelligent. Looks like poor education and intelligence stretches beyond the sciences and into popular culture too.
It's amazing, you managed to go a whole post without making any comment relevant to my post.
There are intelligent, well informed people of every mainstream religion, yet in the eyes of the GP it is ok to sledge them as being irrational, stupid and self-delusional.
If a religious person came on here and made the same comments about another religion or atheism then they would be rightly modded flamebait. Yet the moderators appear to have modded the GP insightful because he shares their irrational stereotyping of religious people.
If a Christian, Bhuddist, Muslim or Taoist had have come on here and started saying those same things about atheists they would be rightly modded as flamebait.
Come on you can do better than that - plate, brick, tile, decorated tile, clip, cylinder, cylinder plate or special?
A more fair and accurate question would be "When can the world expect an Asian-Aussie Prime Minister?". Unless Obama is all of a sudden a native American.
In Australia the government rightly fears the people. Try to pull this one on us would result in a whole lot of public outcry and would cost the government, whichever side tried to do it, the next election and the power for a very, very long time.
I for one would be bannering buildings with "Keep your hands off my email you dirty damned apes" and other such statements.
Yet Warhammer is still not perfect, and if it is to become a giant it needs to fix a few things, not least of which is the animation glitches. In fact the animation glitches and performance issues are so bad that they can be quite jarring and disconnect your feeling of immersion.
I love Warhammer so far and thought that it had a great launch, but to retain customers they will have to polish the rough edges.
You're doing it wrong.
You still did not address my point. I am not a hardcore player, I would probably be an "average" wow player at somewhere around 20h per week (which is only around three hours every night and then half a day on the weekend - around the same amount that "normal" people watch tv).
But what of the school students who want to play only for a few hours while they're at school, but want to play for many, many more on their school holidays. You cannot consider someone hardcore because they want to spend 90h this month playing a game instead of 80.
Again the problem becomes where do you draw the line? What about school holidays/work holidays when people want to play more for a month or two?
Call me a right winger, but I want to damn well choose how much I play and when I play it.
Ok so there are huge problems with this.
To do a multi-person dungeon in WoW which lasts for an hour, despite the easy to use looking for group system and having large guilds and friends list to draw upon, it STILL takes a good 20 minutes to build a group and get to the dungeon itself.
Given a time limit too small and the "overhead time" becomes frustrating and makes the game unplayable. So one has to determine how much time is the right amount of time. The average WoW player plays for 20h per week (according to figures that I have heard). So do you cap it at 20 hours? This would still leave people like my friends at a huge disadvantage, who will play for maybe 10 or at most 15 hours per week.
What is casual to one is hardcore to another, and what is healthy for one is unhealthy for another. If you had to "buy hours" instead, you would just promote loot whoring and ninjaing. No restriction system can work.
The best way to promote the game for casuals is to remove attunements and lower gear requirements for each of the raids, and give people easier access to the gear they need to be able to raid effectively. Note that this is happening in WoW already, and it is very easy to find a Kara PUG (finding a good one on the other hand may take some time).
WoW is about as casual friendly as an MMO can be while still appealing to the hardcore (although "hardcore" is a misnomer in the case of hunters who are quite amusing with their 1 button spam).
Too lazy to copy paste...
The point is that it's not about the numbers, but about societal acceptance. To gain that societal acceptance requires some transparency to beliefs, which is why many view the Freemasons as a cult too.
No, you were modded down because you were wrong.
The real difference between a religion and a cult is the availability of materials and the acceptability into mainstream culture. Cults center around an individual or small group of individuals.
The dictionary defines a cult as "a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader." If you look at any of the major religions, they have at least gained orthodoxy in at least some societies. Cults by their nature exist on the margins. Almost all religions started off as a cult, but adapted to become mainstream enough to gain acceptance by their society - whether by the sword or other means.
I never said that he did have to file a patent, the point I was making was that if he doesn't file a patent and a patent troll goes after him later, the patent may save his company from a lawsuit.
Just because he morally disagrees with patents on IP does not mean that he should not persue this legal avenue to protect his company and his job. Until the law is changed, you have to work within its limits or face potential consequences. Even when you are in the right court cases are costly and bad for business.
The law is the law, even if you disagree with it. There are several reasons why you should listen to your boss - your job, his job and the prevention of possible law suits in the future.
Perhaps a light spanking is in order.
TOO HARD.