Seriously, just stop. You're out of control, and despite all of the money you're pumping into the "system" you're still hemorrhaging. I'm not saying give away free music, but at this point it's pretty obvious what you're doing isn't working. It's like seeing a person with a lacerated jugular and offering a band-aid. You're losing the battle and being a bad sport in the process. Nobody likes a sore loser, and EVERYBODY hates a sore loser that won't learn from their mistakes.
So stop. Take step back, take your time and get a GOOD look at the land. There's a path to, maybe not victory, but something better than loss ahead of you. You just need to slow down, realize you're being too rash, and take the necessary steps to un-fuck yourselves. You clearly believe you need to get the "phat loot" for whoever it is you represent (despite the fact that you're taking an unfair cut of that). I'm not saying change what you believe, but if you're gonna put up a fight, at least put up an educated one. You need listeners to spend money so you can make money... and in the process somehow you thought treating everyone as guilty before proven innocent was a good battle plan? You don't just need people to give you money, you need people to WILLINGLY give you money. And that means devising a way to make them WANT to spend their money, NOT forcing them to.
I'm not trying to troll... but... is there a psychological exam? Or are we just making sure that the nuts can shoot better? Should I feel comforted that the guy hit everyone he was aiming at? Personally, I'd rather he missed some... oh, I don't know... 50 times or so.
And I'm not trying to bash the CCP idea, I don't rightly know where I stand. Other than for personal target shooting, the majority of my weapons training was of a military type, so the rules were clear. We have guns, they have guns, and we're going to shoot at each other. Not to mention most of the guns I was trained on either shot faster, shot bigger bullets, or shot projectiles that went boom. But, I also learned that just about anybody without a neurological disorder can learn to shoot straight (and probably some of them too).
The idea of making it hard to get and carry a gun isn't to prevent self defense, it's to prevent first time OFFENSE. It's hard to get a gun, so it's more likely that people won't commit that first offense. If they did, then the assumption is that the law enforcement will kick in (assumption vs. reality, I know). I realize that many criminals aren't carrying registered or even legally obtained weapons, and that's where my inability to form a solid conclusion comes to.
I certainly haven't researched everything like I was writing a doctorate thesis, and so I can't feasibly say I know all the angles. I just know that, when I was training, it was one thing to have a gun with live ammo, and another to have a gun with live ammo and be willing to actually do the right thing with it. It's a huge burden to do the right thing, particularly under fire and aiming at another human being. Do you really want to trust everyone who passes the CCP test to brandish a firearm in your vacinity? That's like saying because hunters have to go through classes and get licensed there won't be any hunting accidents...
Anyway, this went off a bit from what I'm replying to. All I ask is that people think about it. Hell, talk to some soldiers and ask them how it was when they were in there first combat experience. Keep in mind, those guys are going under MONTHS of training, not a simple course to see if they can shoot straight.
There can't be a sudden "oh, here's something new" because of how strictly society is coupled with the current internet. It could, however, be part of a gradual evolution with the internet... something which I think we can all agree *has* been happening (think of the internet you were introduced to compared to the internet you know now).
And all of that "it needs to be more secure" sentiment really needs to be seen as "the current hackers are getting bored, let's make it interesting." It's the digital age and necessity is the mother of invention (or so they say, these days it's more like boredom is). You make a more secure internet, there is a plethora of people who are willing to adapt current money making schemes to adapt to said new internet. It's not like those guys are stupid... just morally deficient.
All one can hope to do is create measures to make it more secure with the knowledge that you have a year at best before someone comes along and breaks your security. We live in an age where people are breaking security protocols not because they have an ulterior motive, but because it's there... and it's what they do. Programmers find technology, read about the limits, and immediately find reasons and ways to push those limits in ways that nobody ever thought of before. The most successful programmers are the ones who learned to work with the current system and make it profitable, but the best programmers are the ones who need nothing more than a microwave, pop-tarts, an energy drink, and a fast connection.
A great prank/revenge?!!? Are you fracking kidding me?!?! The tenant was evicted... which TYPICALLY means said tenant didn't own up to their bills or violated some sort of agreement signed when they moved in. I'm sorry, but in no way is stealing a "great prank". Particularly when it involves stealing things like the hot water heater and kitchen sink, things which, without, the home is now completely worthless. You need to seriously rethink what you consider a prank. If it's your buddies calling your girlfriend, you'll pay up in your own hell... but you need to consider the collateral damage. In this case, it's going to cost this lady thousands of dollars. And YOU consider it a good prank? When was the last time you spent thousands of dollars just to pull off a prank (and if you had, where do you work, I could use a job like that)? This isn't funny.... this is the kind of thing that causes fear in our society for people who don't have the means to support themselves. It's the "good" thing to think, "Hey, they're a little down on their luck, let me help". And I really do like to think that way, but it's stories like this that make me think, "They're not down on their luck, they're just out to screw someone."
As for the people who went in and took stuff... c'mon people! Use a little common sense! Should Craig's List require a subpoena? Of course! But that doesn't make what happened any better. You've got one imbecile who's mad because (s)he can't pay their debts, and then a bunch of other people who are just, apparently, waiting to prey on a CLEARLY false opportunity.
If you're the kind of person who reads that add and thinks "the hot water heater MUST be okay to take" then I've got this great bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Think of all the money you can make on tolls! It even has a pedestrian walkway! Real cheap, but act fast, the bids keep coming in!
Seriously... THINK about anything you see on the internet. This is supposed to be such an advanced society what with our acceptance of technology, and all this shows is that we're too stupid to filter out the crap. If anyone here fell for that add, it's a wonder you're not broke for buying EVERYTHING you see on a T.V. commercial.
A good general rule of thumb is if it looks too good to be true, it probably is, and you should do a little research before you sink your time and/or money into it. If you don't believe that, quit your job and go do the "clearly" higher paying job they offer on T.V. to "work from home" and "make millions of dollars". I really expect more from society. I like to think that as information becomes more prevalent, people become more wary... Clearly I'm being too optimistic. Time to call my folks and make sure they're not doing something stupid...
So which came first... the stamp collector or the collectible stamps? I think by the way they're laid out it's pretty obvious these stamps aren't really for mail letters. When was the last time you went to the P.O. and got a book of stamps that came as part of a larger image? The U.S.P.S. has been making stamps for collecting for some time now. I don't think it's the U.S.P.S. promoting a film franchise, but rather using a film franchise to promote postage. I mean, in this day an age with instant messaging, SMS, and email, it's not like postage stamps are flying off the shelves so to speak.
It's pretty shallow to think that "the game" in Ender's Game was about "actively training young killers at an early age". It was about developing the "students" to a higher level. They didn't want killers, they wanted people who could think on a higher level than the "average joe". The point of the book, or book series if you like, I always thought, was to bring people out to think where things COULD be going, now where they *were* going (that's a bit presumptuous) but where they could go.
That being said, it's quite the boast to say "our game is so cool it will guide the world to the view we're striving for". It almost seems to go beyond the point of video games. There are so many discussions regarding the "appropriateness" of video games. Remember, the rating system is by the "ENTERTAINMENT Software Review Board". People focus on this like it's the "EDUCATION Software Review Board". If kids are learning from video games, it's because they're filling a gap in their education that they're not getting somewhere else. It's only education if someone hasn't learned better.
I have nothing against creationism, but I was raised to believe in evolution. I was taught, by my parents, to have faith in science vs... well, it's a bad analogy, but... faith. Science was the focus of my education and understanding, not the church. While I've been playing video games since the Atari 2600 (to age myself), I never developed beliefs based on what I "played".
The problem isn't in what we read, or what we play. The problem is in what we're taught. And too many people don't seem to realize that, while we go to school, the education at school is only as applicable as our parents tell us it is (particularly at a young age).
Spore sounds cool to me... but I don't think it would had I been raised in a strictly church-driven environment. And maybe it shouldn't be considered that a video game has no more influence than a parent. If you want your kid to be raised with beliefs you have, than raise them with those beliefs.
Having been a fan of Orson Scott Card for some years now, and having loved his message but not having always agreed with him, I think there's a bigger role to be played by the families that are now thinking "the TV" or "the X-Cube-Station-2007" than the family that is willing to sit a child down and say "this is how we think". I'm thinking about my future children now, and as-such thinking of how to raise them, and *I* realize how much of a role my thoughts could play in their development.
I don't think anyone can say "this is going to make our children " without thinking about how much of a role a parent has in a child's beliefs. Beliefs that will most likely hold longer than reading a text book.
I'm actually looking into Ubuntu. So far it just seems like the most user friendly "get into Linux" way to go. I'm not saying it's where I'll be in 2 years, but I think it may be a good start. It's well supported (so far anyway), I know people who have / do use it, and from what I gather, the GUI is fairly intuitive for an M$ user. I don't find my job "threatened" per-say, but I do find a lot of opportunity learning to develop in a Linux environment (and oss in general), and I'm one who is slow to change. Ubuntu seems like a fairly small step in, what I consider to be, the right direction. Ubuntu also offers a "run off the CD" option. And since I've got a wife to bring along, it may be the easiest way to go. I don't now, but I hope.
While I respect that, I also see the reason... Servers typically mean a larger client, which typically means more money. Money = good = Dell happy. I imagine if my 2 dell systems cost more than the $5k (U.S.) I spent on them (combined), I'd be getting a bit more customer support too. If they put Linux on their machines, they need to deal with the thousands (or, more likely, millions) of customers who bought one system and demand customer support. Financially it's a nightmare. Putting Linux on their boxes doesn't mean "enterprise" it means supporting the masses that think "Linux will make me look cooler" in a home user support role. I've been through numerous software and hardware scenarios where being a "home user" just isn't lucrative enough for some decent support. But, if you tally up the numbers, who's more likely to give you a bad reputation? Thousands of pissed off (home) consumers or hundreds of happy (enterprise) consumers? Who do *you* think the U.S.'s (notoriously one sided) media is going to showcase?
And then, there's market share. How can a company, who's ultimate responsibility is the dollar, justify offering Linux? Microsoft can say "in the past Y years we sold N copies of Windows" while all Linux can say is "X number of people downloaded our OS" without being able to (financially) justify that they were *all* new users (or at least a majority)? As long as Linux is free it will be hard to say how much of a share they have in the computing world. I pray it's always free, and hearing of institutions going OSS is great (like so many governments) but shy of that, it's hard to put a price on the users who use Linux and will buy a Linux based system. Financially it may add up, but there just aren't enough numbers to prove it.
I'm not a Linux user (yet). I just started looking into a distro to install, and I'm swimming in some unknown waters here. I can kinda sympathize. Not that I'm a huge Dell fan. I bought 2 5 years ago and was never really happy with their customer support, but as a well known, well established PC vendor, they have to have people on hand that can support a Linux environment. They've spent years as an M$ only vendor, so it's not like they have a bunch of Linux guys who can just show up and say "sure, I'll do customer support". They need to know that their support people can handle the calls. Bash Dell all you want (I won't disagree) but they still have to maintain what they sell, and so they need some level of confidence in the people who are supporting their computers. It's not like Windows where you can count on most of the users being no smarter than a tech-support person with a script to read, if they're going to be serious about sending out a box with Linux, they need to be able to support it.
It's much more than "is our hardware supported". They need to be ready for when someone who's never even seen linux calls in and needs some help. Personally I know where to go, but I can just imagine some of the people I know thinking "Linux is the next big thing, I need one of those" and then scratching their head and wondering what they got themselves into. From what I've gathered from my Linux using friends, tech support is going to be a lot more than just "restart".
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, just stop. You're out of control, and despite all of the money you're pumping into the "system" you're still hemorrhaging. I'm not saying give away free music, but at this point it's pretty obvious what you're doing isn't working. It's like seeing a person with a lacerated jugular and offering a band-aid. You're losing the battle and being a bad sport in the process. Nobody likes a sore loser, and EVERYBODY hates a sore loser that won't learn from their mistakes.
So stop. Take step back, take your time and get a GOOD look at the land. There's a path to, maybe not victory, but something better than loss ahead of you. You just need to slow down, realize you're being too rash, and take the necessary steps to un-fuck yourselves. You clearly believe you need to get the "phat loot" for whoever it is you represent (despite the fact that you're taking an unfair cut of that). I'm not saying change what you believe, but if you're gonna put up a fight, at least put up an educated one. You need listeners to spend money so you can make money... and in the process somehow you thought treating everyone as guilty before proven innocent was a good battle plan? You don't just need people to give you money, you need people to WILLINGLY give you money. And that means devising a way to make them WANT to spend their money, NOT forcing them to.
Sincerely
Me
I'm not trying to troll... but... is there a psychological exam? Or are we just making sure that the nuts can shoot better? Should I feel comforted that the guy hit everyone he was aiming at? Personally, I'd rather he missed some... oh, I don't know... 50 times or so.
And I'm not trying to bash the CCP idea, I don't rightly know where I stand. Other than for personal target shooting, the majority of my weapons training was of a military type, so the rules were clear. We have guns, they have guns, and we're going to shoot at each other. Not to mention most of the guns I was trained on either shot faster, shot bigger bullets, or shot projectiles that went boom. But, I also learned that just about anybody without a neurological disorder can learn to shoot straight (and probably some of them too).
The idea of making it hard to get and carry a gun isn't to prevent self defense, it's to prevent first time OFFENSE. It's hard to get a gun, so it's more likely that people won't commit that first offense. If they did, then the assumption is that the law enforcement will kick in (assumption vs. reality, I know). I realize that many criminals aren't carrying registered or even legally obtained weapons, and that's where my inability to form a solid conclusion comes to.
I certainly haven't researched everything like I was writing a doctorate thesis, and so I can't feasibly say I know all the angles. I just know that, when I was training, it was one thing to have a gun with live ammo, and another to have a gun with live ammo and be willing to actually do the right thing with it. It's a huge burden to do the right thing, particularly under fire and aiming at another human being. Do you really want to trust everyone who passes the CCP test to brandish a firearm in your vacinity? That's like saying because hunters have to go through classes and get licensed there won't be any hunting accidents...
Anyway, this went off a bit from what I'm replying to. All I ask is that people think about it. Hell, talk to some soldiers and ask them how it was when they were in there first combat experience. Keep in mind, those guys are going under MONTHS of training, not a simple course to see if they can shoot straight.
There can't be a sudden "oh, here's something new" because of how strictly society is coupled with the current internet. It could, however, be part of a gradual evolution with the internet... something which I think we can all agree *has* been happening (think of the internet you were introduced to compared to the internet you know now).
And all of that "it needs to be more secure" sentiment really needs to be seen as "the current hackers are getting bored, let's make it interesting." It's the digital age and necessity is the mother of invention (or so they say, these days it's more like boredom is). You make a more secure internet, there is a plethora of people who are willing to adapt current money making schemes to adapt to said new internet. It's not like those guys are stupid... just morally deficient.
All one can hope to do is create measures to make it more secure with the knowledge that you have a year at best before someone comes along and breaks your security. We live in an age where people are breaking security protocols not because they have an ulterior motive, but because it's there... and it's what they do. Programmers find technology, read about the limits, and immediately find reasons and ways to push those limits in ways that nobody ever thought of before. The most successful programmers are the ones who learned to work with the current system and make it profitable, but the best programmers are the ones who need nothing more than a microwave, pop-tarts, an energy drink, and a fast connection.
A great prank/revenge?!!? Are you fracking kidding me?!?! The tenant was evicted... which TYPICALLY means said tenant didn't own up to their bills or violated some sort of agreement signed when they moved in. I'm sorry, but in no way is stealing a "great prank". Particularly when it involves stealing things like the hot water heater and kitchen sink, things which, without, the home is now completely worthless. You need to seriously rethink what you consider a prank. If it's your buddies calling your girlfriend, you'll pay up in your own hell... but you need to consider the collateral damage. In this case, it's going to cost this lady thousands of dollars. And YOU consider it a good prank? When was the last time you spent thousands of dollars just to pull off a prank (and if you had, where do you work, I could use a job like that)? This isn't funny.... this is the kind of thing that causes fear in our society for people who don't have the means to support themselves. It's the "good" thing to think, "Hey, they're a little down on their luck, let me help". And I really do like to think that way, but it's stories like this that make me think, "They're not down on their luck, they're just out to screw someone." As for the people who went in and took stuff... c'mon people! Use a little common sense! Should Craig's List require a subpoena? Of course! But that doesn't make what happened any better. You've got one imbecile who's mad because (s)he can't pay their debts, and then a bunch of other people who are just, apparently, waiting to prey on a CLEARLY false opportunity. If you're the kind of person who reads that add and thinks "the hot water heater MUST be okay to take" then I've got this great bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Think of all the money you can make on tolls! It even has a pedestrian walkway! Real cheap, but act fast, the bids keep coming in! Seriously... THINK about anything you see on the internet. This is supposed to be such an advanced society what with our acceptance of technology, and all this shows is that we're too stupid to filter out the crap. If anyone here fell for that add, it's a wonder you're not broke for buying EVERYTHING you see on a T.V. commercial. A good general rule of thumb is if it looks too good to be true, it probably is, and you should do a little research before you sink your time and/or money into it. If you don't believe that, quit your job and go do the "clearly" higher paying job they offer on T.V. to "work from home" and "make millions of dollars". I really expect more from society. I like to think that as information becomes more prevalent, people become more wary... Clearly I'm being too optimistic. Time to call my folks and make sure they're not doing something stupid...
So which came first... the stamp collector or the collectible stamps? I think by the way they're laid out it's pretty obvious these stamps aren't really for mail letters. When was the last time you went to the P.O. and got a book of stamps that came as part of a larger image? The U.S.P.S. has been making stamps for collecting for some time now. I don't think it's the U.S.P.S. promoting a film franchise, but rather using a film franchise to promote postage. I mean, in this day an age with instant messaging, SMS, and email, it's not like postage stamps are flying off the shelves so to speak.
It's pretty shallow to think that "the game" in Ender's Game was about "actively training young killers at an early age". It was about developing the "students" to a higher level. They didn't want killers, they wanted people who could think on a higher level than the "average joe". The point of the book, or book series if you like, I always thought, was to bring people out to think where things COULD be going, now where they *were* going (that's a bit presumptuous) but where they could go. That being said, it's quite the boast to say "our game is so cool it will guide the world to the view we're striving for". It almost seems to go beyond the point of video games. There are so many discussions regarding the "appropriateness" of video games. Remember, the rating system is by the "ENTERTAINMENT Software Review Board". People focus on this like it's the "EDUCATION Software Review Board". If kids are learning from video games, it's because they're filling a gap in their education that they're not getting somewhere else. It's only education if someone hasn't learned better. I have nothing against creationism, but I was raised to believe in evolution. I was taught, by my parents, to have faith in science vs... well, it's a bad analogy, but... faith. Science was the focus of my education and understanding, not the church. While I've been playing video games since the Atari 2600 (to age myself), I never developed beliefs based on what I "played". The problem isn't in what we read, or what we play. The problem is in what we're taught. And too many people don't seem to realize that, while we go to school, the education at school is only as applicable as our parents tell us it is (particularly at a young age). Spore sounds cool to me... but I don't think it would had I been raised in a strictly church-driven environment. And maybe it shouldn't be considered that a video game has no more influence than a parent. If you want your kid to be raised with beliefs you have, than raise them with those beliefs. Having been a fan of Orson Scott Card for some years now, and having loved his message but not having always agreed with him, I think there's a bigger role to be played by the families that are now thinking "the TV" or "the X-Cube-Station-2007" than the family that is willing to sit a child down and say "this is how we think". I'm thinking about my future children now, and as-such thinking of how to raise them, and *I* realize how much of a role my thoughts could play in their development. I don't think anyone can say "this is going to make our children " without thinking about how much of a role a parent has in a child's beliefs. Beliefs that will most likely hold longer than reading a text book.
I'm actually looking into Ubuntu. So far it just seems like the most user friendly "get into Linux" way to go. I'm not saying it's where I'll be in 2 years, but I think it may be a good start. It's well supported (so far anyway), I know people who have / do use it, and from what I gather, the GUI is fairly intuitive for an M$ user. I don't find my job "threatened" per-say, but I do find a lot of opportunity learning to develop in a Linux environment (and oss in general), and I'm one who is slow to change. Ubuntu seems like a fairly small step in, what I consider to be, the right direction. Ubuntu also offers a "run off the CD" option. And since I've got a wife to bring along, it may be the easiest way to go. I don't now, but I hope.
While I respect that, I also see the reason... Servers typically mean a larger client, which typically means more money. Money = good = Dell happy. I imagine if my 2 dell systems cost more than the $5k (U.S.) I spent on them (combined), I'd be getting a bit more customer support too. If they put Linux on their machines, they need to deal with the thousands (or, more likely, millions) of customers who bought one system and demand customer support. Financially it's a nightmare. Putting Linux on their boxes doesn't mean "enterprise" it means supporting the masses that think "Linux will make me look cooler" in a home user support role. I've been through numerous software and hardware scenarios where being a "home user" just isn't lucrative enough for some decent support. But, if you tally up the numbers, who's more likely to give you a bad reputation? Thousands of pissed off (home) consumers or hundreds of happy (enterprise) consumers? Who do *you* think the U.S.'s (notoriously one sided) media is going to showcase? And then, there's market share. How can a company, who's ultimate responsibility is the dollar, justify offering Linux? Microsoft can say "in the past Y years we sold N copies of Windows" while all Linux can say is "X number of people downloaded our OS" without being able to (financially) justify that they were *all* new users (or at least a majority)? As long as Linux is free it will be hard to say how much of a share they have in the computing world. I pray it's always free, and hearing of institutions going OSS is great (like so many governments) but shy of that, it's hard to put a price on the users who use Linux and will buy a Linux based system. Financially it may add up, but there just aren't enough numbers to prove it.
I'm not a Linux user (yet). I just started looking into a distro to install, and I'm swimming in some unknown waters here. I can kinda sympathize. Not that I'm a huge Dell fan. I bought 2 5 years ago and was never really happy with their customer support, but as a well known, well established PC vendor, they have to have people on hand that can support a Linux environment. They've spent years as an M$ only vendor, so it's not like they have a bunch of Linux guys who can just show up and say "sure, I'll do customer support". They need to know that their support people can handle the calls. Bash Dell all you want (I won't disagree) but they still have to maintain what they sell, and so they need some level of confidence in the people who are supporting their computers. It's not like Windows where you can count on most of the users being no smarter than a tech-support person with a script to read, if they're going to be serious about sending out a box with Linux, they need to be able to support it. It's much more than "is our hardware supported". They need to be ready for when someone who's never even seen linux calls in and needs some help. Personally I know where to go, but I can just imagine some of the people I know thinking "Linux is the next big thing, I need one of those" and then scratching their head and wondering what they got themselves into. From what I've gathered from my Linux using friends, tech support is going to be a lot more than just "restart".