Well, I for one, have been faithful to Castle Wolfenstein, since it's Apple ][ debut. Yes, you guys think Castle Wolfenstein on the PC, I used to play it when it was really and I mean REALLY, 2d, maze like. It's gone a long way.
I don't want wolfenstein to be based on realism, in fact, the more Hitler/Nazis/Occult/Weird Science/Monsters we get, the better it is.
And of course, that BJ finds new types of weapons and defences based on what the enemy has been unearthing, researching, etc..., I love it!
Bottom line, I want to have fun, and I love the Wolfenstein series for that. It's fun!:)
I still have the PC version and I run it through DOS Box on XP.
As for Return to Castle Wolfenstein, I have loads of fun with that, loved it!
Now, I'm shocked that they would prohibit a game because of the headgear, that's ridiculous! It's a GAME! Beside, this type of head gear is sold everywhere!
Not worse than those KKK back then, when they were wearing bedsheets for pete's sakes!
How can the authorities be so "STUPID!"
Wow.
My head is still spinning over this. Unbelieavable.
Everything can be used to conceal's one's identity.
Ok Uk Police, ban the following, please, because you must be thorough in your logic
1) makeup 2) hair extensions, hair pieces, hair products for coloring 3) ban the growth of beards 4) ban coloured contact lenses 5) ban theatrical makeup 6) ban plastic surgery 7) ban every form of toy weapons, including those dangerous Super Soaker Water guns, since these can actually be dangerous (try chlorine bleach instead of water) 8) hell ban all form of clothing too, because ya know, at this point, one could wear a long coat and a hat and try to conceal themselves too!!
I could go on, I'm just totally blown by how ridiculous the UK authorities are on this issue!
You know, these watchdog groups really bake my noodles!
Games are games. There are ratings for games, so, in essence, all the parents have to do, is "parenting".. you know, if a game is rated for teens or young adults, etc... then that's all there is, don't buy it! Supervise what your kids buys.
The Wii is a gaming console and platform and game developers should be able to create whatever games they wish. If some games are NOT meants for everyone, then, hey, no problems, just up the rating. The Wii was never meant to be a gaming platform where all games are for everyone. Gee, it's nice to know that some developers want to make restricted games on that platform!
As for these "nosey joes", get a life for pete's sakes! If you don't want your kids to play these games, fine, do that, maybe you have a point when it comes to your kid(s), we won't judge you for that, but don't stop everybody's else fun because of your beliefs.
I'm surprise to see that Apple is again, after more than 25 yrs, dealing with a new generation of "clone" issues.
In truth, I'm not an Apple expert, but, if Apple's hardware would contain a chip which, would contain special instructions that would allow an Apple only OS to be installed, if this chip isn't included int the hardware, then the Apple OS doesn't work. Now, if that was there and of course, some legal hooplah about "thou shall not modify thy OS else.. clause" and a "thy chip is only available in Apple approved hardware.. and thy chip cannot be installed or modified or read by third party blah blah.. clause.."
I mean let's face it, wouldn't that make sense?
If this had been implemented, It wouldn't stop the smart asses from cloning and hacking, but it sure would make it easier for Apple to nip anyone in the bud so to speak in a legal sense!
Oh well, maybe they did think about it, but it would make too much sense somehow and the legal department at Apple would get bored and become the "Maytag" department of Apple..
Could be Apple is looking forward with glee to a new type of confrontation in court!:)
Ah, I swear, the ultimate oxymoron has to be "common sense":P
Well, you know, this is funny, but I do get a lot of my stuff pirated at first, then, I try it, unlocked, no restrictions. If I don't like it, I delete it. If I like it, I go buy it, unless I have to work with DRM. DRM is a no-no.
If I can't make a backup of my game and play with the backup, I prefer the pirated version. Why? Because CD/DVDs can be scratched, simple and honest.
So, I don't have tons of games, but the ones I have for the most part, ironically, are not pirated and obviously no-DRM. I mean, let's face it, if I have to insert the original CD everytime I need to play, it will get scratch or become defective over time. Hell with that. As long as I can play from a copy of the game, instead of my original, then, I won't mind purchasing.
That our type of solar system is rare, well, that wouldn't surprise me in a bit, else, life out there could be so common that eventually, it would actually be quite, uh.. ordinary.
But then again, if one where to come up with an estimate on the odds of such systems, based on the amount of systems, galaxies, etc...
This is a rather very large universe, so I would wager there are indeed more out there.
Likely to be rare, yes, but probably still for sure.
We just eventually need to "go" out there and look for ourselves!:)
After all, what we see in the sky isn't representative of what is, but rather of "what is being projected to us" in our time, based on how long it took for this projection to be visible to us.
So, when we have the capability of visiting these systems and/or viewing them in some form of "real time" ways, then, we could be surprised!:) Don't you love sci-fi?;)
Amazing. It reminds me of the concept of the "Quantum Leap" computer, where neurons from 2 humans are used as the basis of the core brain of the "Quantum" computer named Ziggy.
Science-fiction is becoming less and less fiction, so, I tell you, we sure do live in interesting times, and I'm glad to be a part of this.
The possibilities for this are tremendous! For instance, imagine for the blind, a tool based on this technology which would allow them to be able to know what they face around them! A talking "virtual" seeing eye dog application so to speak! I know the goal for the blind is to restore their sight, but this is an alternative until its done. Imagine this in situation where you require an unmanned probe with some form of decision making process, should there be something that could be a threat to its functions.
I could go on here, but, again.. wow this is really cool news!
Given the less than ideal state of this world, with the criminal elements that still florishes and the ever spreading threat of terrorism, the government the law enforcement agencies are really grasping here in many ways.
The fundamental problem is that our laws are not updated quickly enough for the new realities and challenges that are facing this world.
Now, say you are a completely innocent person, no crimes, no infractions. Do you really care if Big Brother watches over you? If you don't participate in any illegal activities, then, really, where is the harm? After all, the good of the one cannot always outweigh of the good of the many. "yeah, cheap Star Trek-like reference here":)
Seriously, since it's their job to protect us from threats, the authorties require ways of not only stopping threats and crimes, but also, in preventing them whenever possible.
So, our individual freedom and our right to privacy, must bend a bit, in order to ensure that the society we live in, is as safe as possible.
So, GPSing potential suspects, is that ok without a warrent? well, yes, I think so.
I know that in the US, Canada and England, we are presumed innocent until proven guilty. I know.
And, when you look it in that light, then, this does violate that principle, this I agree.
But then again, if the authorities "suspect" a person of planning a crime or suspect they have already committed one, we need to give them the leverage they require to perform their duties, and to investigate.
And to err on the side of prevention is certainly without a doubt even more beneficial, especially in terrorist threats.
In the end, truly innocent and law abiding citizens, really shouldn't have anything to fear.
Note: there are cases, where innocent people are falsely identified and accused of misdeeds, I can see that as a counter-argument to the above statement. Obviously, no system is perfect, and improvement is required by all forms of law enforcement agencies to further improve their investigative techniques so that they will not and/or are less likely to falsely accuse an innocent person of a felony this person is not responsible for.
When I teach security and passwords, I recommend the same approach. I ask my students to use a catch phrase they often use on a personal level.
Then, I make them use the first letter of each of the words in that phrase.
Finally, any of the words that be substitute for a number, we do it too.
So, for example: I can't believe this works for that! Would become Icbtw4t now if you are allowed to add a non-alpha-numeric character, go for Icbtw4t@:)
well, you know, in the larger scheme of things, the problem ultimately, when it comes to "economy" and "money" is that communism failed and capitalism is failing too.
Why?
Because money has become it's own purpose. As a society where everyone is supposed to have a function, the idea behind the concept of money is that you do a task, you get money, and money allows you to purchase goods and services.
But you know, what are these tasks?
That's where we go into primary, secondary, etc... industries.
Again, the theory is that some folks who would work into something "primaries", thus very much goal oriented to society's needs. "imagine after the 2nd world war, it was the forestry, the ore plants, etc...".
Secondary could be the people who cut your hair, fix your car, etc.. "services"..
Imagine when you live in a world where entertainment gets more value than say research for cancer? that's our reality.
So, anyways, if the "primary" industry workers have money, they would spend it, and thus it would go in to the loop.
But this begs the question about Canada and the US. What are these countries primary economies right now?
I'm not so sure anymore, I have to tell you, and I don't think anyone can really tell you too!
It's not clear.
And thus, the dilemna.
When you work for money's sake, and nothing else, then it's like a monopoly game where it is being horded by those who can get the most of it.
And that's the crux of the problem with capitalism right now.
The money isn't moving as it should. It's behind horded.
Because people are afraid, jobs are not secure, so, keep the cash. It's a simplified view, but it's very real nonetheless.
In an idealist world, money would be of no issue.
We would be raised with the concepts and the security that all our basic and most fundamental needs are there.
We would have function "work" based on what is required and our talents.
And we would be raised with the security that "hording" isn't necessary.
Our basic "human" rights would be quite expanded and society would provide for our needs and we would have a function in society. "Sounds Star Trekkie" but hey, I did say "an idealist" world:)
I hope this project works, because let's face it, an environmental friendly city that functions and coexist with nature is exactly what is required. I find it amazing that we are so worried about money.
Money is really not the issue. If this works, it becomes a goal for any countries' economy. It's idealistic to think this way, I know, but in a way, it's also very practical.
Our economies are skewed right now, our countries don't have any real goals, tangible goals. Building environmentally friendly cities (converting actually), are concrete, positive goals. All will benefit "economically" from such goals.
This is the ultimate job creation idea on a long term basis I would believe!
Yeah, I know, it's sounds simple but anything that gives people work, gives them purpose and makes the money move, which is really what the economy should be about anyways.
"Keep things simple, but not simpler" - Albert Einstein
Now, the truth is, regardless that our "soul" has weight or not, the issue was.. what role does it have? if one does wrong repeatedly because of a DNA defect, then, how can we have a "conscience" so to speak? That's really what I was trying to bring it.
But as I can see by your remarkable display of the english language, you like to jump to conclusions and attack, more than think. If I was moderator, I would actually give you a "karma" hit.. Unless you can prove to me that your DNA is the reason you are a "tool":)
The human mind and body is a complex piece of biological machinery. Add the mind to this, you know, the experiences we've lived, the memories we have and well, I can say that this can add even more complexity to the mix!
Take into account that we are affected by our environment, heck, the water in our bodies is affected by gravity and that's just one of the examples here I offer.
When push comes to shove, we understand very little about how things work when it comes to our overall health (mind and body) of a person.
There is a lot of knowledge, but it's not yet, I guess, merged properly, somehow. Still very segragated.
But as a rule, most people seek easy answers to problems. That in itself is a problem right there.
Diagnosing why a person is fat is a good example:
You can go to various specialists in their fields and they will tell you offer different diagnosise and solutions.
A psychologist will find one answer, a doctor another, a nutritionist another.
But, I'll bet that if these specialists worked together, they could find the real answer to the health issue.
The problem is they don't work together (most of the times anyways).
Human health isn't just the body, it's the mind, and in that respect, we are still way behind. Well, in my opinion anyways.
I don't think it's about blaming DNA. But if DNA is a factor, and it's proven to be, then we have more information on how to correct things.
And of course, the more we learn, the more questions arises and the more moral issues it raises. But you know, Life is problems, living is solving them.
Life is a journey in learning. We are all doing that. And we need to basically deal with it as it comes.:)
You raise good issues, but make no mistake, like anything else, that's the price to pay for increase knowledge, in this case, a reexamination of the moral issues this knowledge raises and a readjustment of how to deal with things.
But since we know so little still of the human body and it's chemistry and composition, indeed, maybe we have the ability to affect our DNA ourselves, based on what is around us and what we experience.
After all, we barely use 10% of our brains and if you take into consideration people with telepathy and telekinesis and other "psychic" abilities.
Who is to say we don't all these abilities in ourselves, but for some of us, just enough that it can "push a few DNA thingies so to speak, you know! I mean, it's all speculation, but hey, the point is, I'm not going to disagree with you, but it is highly possible in my opinion that "behavioural environment alters DNA" and "DNA controls behaviour" to be both true.
And as for the "soul" aspect and the "God" aspect, well, you know, I wasn't trying to sell that point, but rather, question it, because as one replied to this post pointed out. If too make mistakes is intrically linked to your DNA, then the question of sinning (depending on the mistake) and the question of forgiveness comes to play from a religious aspect. That's all.
Never been much of a religious buff myself, but indeed, this would be a good argument to give to the Pope:P He who knows all, has the direct pipeline to God himself/herself. LOL. I could only imagine a "religious" reply to this post:P
But I've always said that for humanity to improve, it needs to evolve its morality and spirituality to the point where religion isn't required for its members to function.
Religion has served its purpose, from its humble beginnings, so many of these religions with the same similar mandate, to keep their people in line, in tow so to speak. Do good, else, you go to hell! Really, religion has been the way to scare people into believing there is a purpose beyond the here and now. You are evil, go to hell, you are good, go to heaven. How to be good? Follow these rules.
So, yes, religion was a necessary "ahem" evil that was required to keep the peace and order in an ever growing village, land, civilisation, because it gave people a moral sense of structure and conduct and when you did wrong, there was retribution. Because death is the ultimate deal here, religion was the ultimate answer to "what happens when we die?" So, to "sin" meant to lose that chance of that perpetual blissful life in heaven.
Fear is religion's ultimate weapon and unfortunately, fear is a powerful motivator in learning. It's a sad truth. However, you would think that by now, in this day and age, our sense of morals (right and wrong) would assert itself on its own, without having to resort to religion?:)
By now, humanity as a whole should know right from wrong, regardless of religious doctrines.
Humanity's ultimate challenge in my honest opinion is to rise above religion, to stop using it as a crutch and to just move on and learn everything there is, in the purest and most unbiased way possible. To do what's right, because it's right, for no other reason that it's the way it should be.
That's when we shall achieve true morality and enlightement.
That's when our technological advancement, our moral and spiritual sides will all co-exist together in balance.
Wow, I should be writing a novel uh?
"The little engine that could" - the first self-help book a child encounters - Lewis Black
Well, the premise of the original topic, is that there is a link between DNA and the ability for people to learn from their mistakes.
Can this issue be resolved? can it be fixed? or for better term, is there treatment? in essence, can we correct this behaviour via gene therapy, or DNA re-writing, whatever?
So, maybe broken isn't the word, but certainly, there is something wrong.
if DNA can determine how we learn, in essence, it does affect to some degree "who" we are. Again, whereas I would have thought we are often more a product of our environment and the learning that we have received, it's interesting to see how we are also whether we like it or not, a product of our genetics, and that WHO we are, isn't just based on the experiences we have lived.
Where does genetics stop and environment and nurturing begin? I say it's getting a bit blurry here. But study like this can't be dismissed anymore. Again Psychology as we know it, may end, if we are able to treat many of the "mental" defects via DNA manipulation.
That's something we need to accept, because it's our limitation. Once we accept it, we then can use the tools we learn to overcome these limitations. Surely, that's the great thing about this.
Fixing these limitations, can increase our quality of life. I'm all for it!
If you are a douche, you should face the music (assuming all your DNA bits are correctly aligned)
Information is power. This type of information is actually going to alter the way we view at bad behaviours.
If someone can prove without a doubt, that our ability to make correct decisions is linked to our DNA and then, prove that someone's DNA can be faulty. Then, these indviduals are ill, but they are not "a douche"..:)
More to the point, if this can be corrected with gene therapy or something like that, I say Yay.
See, for me, the power of choice is based on free will. If your DNA compromises your ability to know right from wrong, then, where is that free will then?
I know this can become a real boon for defence lawyers who will try and use this to get their clients off the hook, but really, if we can figure out how to diagnose this, then we can figure out, in the short term, a better form of rehabilitation or incarceration for those who are afflicted, after all, if beyond a shadow of a doubt, one is set in their bad ways because of a DNA loophole, then, let's be humaine.
When the real fix is ready, again gene therapy, or whatever, we can cure them.
That being said, if DNA isn't an issue, well, they, indeed, they should face the music:)
Punish the healthy, heal the sick.:)
Darn, but I sense TekWar in the making..
on
Digital Drugs
·
· Score: 1
Remember that show? by William "Captain Kirk - Denny Crane" Shatner himself? Sounds like we are heading towards that. That's kinda scary!
I'm not surprised anymore at articles such as this one. Our DNA is basically a blue print of who we are. Our limitations, strengths, etc...
While we are also a product of our environment, it's interesting to see how as we move forward in the research of the human body and mind, many of our issues which we would have deemed "environmental", are actually genetic.
So, the question is, can we fix this? And then, if we fix it, are we a different person? or just better? Is our individuality really based on our DNA? what does that make of the human soul? Not a religious person by nature, I do think there is a God, but, I believe that humanity has the right and the responsibility to learn as much of itself as possible, in order to survive and to improve as a species.
To me, an interesting question that raises is about our soul, such as, is our individuality link to it? or not? Having read and seen documentaries that a person on their death bed loses weight as they migrate from life to death. Many believe that our "soul" has a quantitive weight.
Who are we? If one could fix a learning disability by "re-wiring" our DNA, then, what's this "soul" thing to us?
Could it be that really, our version of heaven is actually our ability to learn about ourselves to the point where we can engineer our own immortality?
After all, for many, heaven is a blissful eternity of life after death. That's what many religions sell in their brochure:P (I said MANY, not all)
Is our goal to achieve long life by understanding our DNA? is this really what our reward will be? our quest for immortality lies within our reach in research and understanding of ourselves and what makes us really tick?:)
This thread may sound off beat to the topic at hand, but, I personally think it that there is a link.
Being able to fix a person by DNA so that they can finally "learn" from their mistake, is a behavioral fix. Done using medical treatment. To me, this means that there could be a day where "Psychology" as we know it might actually end, and DNA fixes could actually be the cure to depression, etc...
Uh.. Actually, the "I am rich" app was approved by Apple, it was on the "online shelf" of its store. The app didn't violate any patent, else, it would never have been approved in the first place.
Apple just basically caved in and removed the app, due to peer pressure from a large group of constipated users, who were basically outrage and jealous that they couldn't afford this useless app. (by the way, I heard that 98% of all constipated people, don't give a crap!):P
Truth is, the "I am rich" app was simple, had no function beyond being ornemental, had no hidden functions either, nothing malicious, illegal or immoral and followed all of Apple's guidelines, including pricing.
So, Apple should not have taken it out of its online store.
I wouldn't buy this application, even if I had money to burn, but I still say it should have been left there. After all, it's a product, it was supposed to be a luxury item and while to most, it may have been garbage, to some, it wasn't, it could have been art for all I know and that is really what this is all about.
Power of choice.
For those who didn't want it, don't buy it. Those who do, let them. This is the crux of the matter. The "irate" people who demanded to have this app removed, basically, had no right to do so. And Apple should never have caved to their demands in the first place.
Freedom to sell and freedom to buy, supply and demand. It's very american to come up with useless gimmicks. This gimmick actually was more honest than most. Look at Facebook, who are being accused of tracking your internet usage, even when you are not on Facebook. Talk about Big Brother uh? See? Things are never totally free.
Apple could have easily let the product there and just give issued a disclaimer about the product and what it does. Then again, the programmer did have one, it was clear.
Those who complained about this app, well, there is a term for these people. But I'm too polite to write it here, suffice to say, some people can never leave well enough alone.
If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Most of all, you can't afford it, too bad.
It's like buying gold, platinum, etc...
Not everybody can afford it, but do you see boycotts at the jewellery stores? No.
But there is an even bigger picture to consider. Say you are a developer, would you trust Apple to make the right choice if you decide to develop an app for the IPhone?
Could you see yourself spending the money on the SDK, etc.., your time to create an app and then, it gets pulled off, because some folks don't agree with the cost or the function, when you've followed all of Apple's guidelines?
That is something to consider.
I can't wait for IPhone clones and similar stuff to come out, I hope these companies will learn from Apple's arrogance and mistakes.
You know as I was thinking about this, I truly believe it was a bad decision for Apple to have approved of this product, only to remove it based on peer pressure. They were better off, never allowing the product in its online Store shelf in the first place.
The reason I think so, is that anyone who is interested in developing software for the IPhone has to ask wonder about the following:
If one is to invest time and effort in the creation of a product for the IPhone, assuming the product is:
1) no threat
2) no hidden function
3) not damaging
4) not immoral
5) not illegal.
6) follows Apple's Guidelines (which this application did)
Are the risk of rejection worth it?
After all, if Apple removes an app based on SUBJECTIVE feedback from users, in the case of the "I am Rich" app, the feedback were all about perception and I dare say, jealousy.
Who wants to go out and stick their necks in the development of an app for the IPhone is Apple doesn't take a FAIR stance on issues like this.
Food for thought.
I hope other companies are coming out with IPhone like products because maybe then, Apple will lose some of their arrogance and start playing fair.
Apple only removed the product from its store due to pressure from those who were annoyed with the product.
They didn't "CHOOSE" to remove it.
Furthermore, in the end, call it what you want, but there is no justice in this. Again, it's not that I would endorse the product, this product in itself is useless, but the process with which it was removed, because of people's intolerance and jealousy, is wrong.
The Apple Store had approved the product in the first place, it was removed based on intolerance. That's what is wrong with the situation here.
Being fair is really all that matters.
I can be fair about this, I can see the truth for what it is. What about you?
Just because I don't like the product, I can certainly see NO HARM in it being offered, because it is not a harmful application.
So, in this instance, we can agree to disagree, but I will stick to my guns on this one. Apple should reinstate the product back and those who can't afford it, too bad.
Sometimes, you have to ask yourself this question, Who the hell died and made you God? See? because that's where this boils down to. Tolerance. The product in itself was not harmful, didn't represent anything evil, it was just a "so-called" luxury item.
And truth is, what is garbage for someone, is art for someone else.
So, seriously, you can reply all you want, but I doubt you have any real rational and ethical answer here that would truly be worthy of a response.
If people were more tolerant and less judgemental, this world would be a better place.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I for one, have been faithful to Castle Wolfenstein, since it's Apple ][ debut. Yes, you guys think Castle Wolfenstein on the PC, I used to play it when it was really and I mean REALLY, 2d, maze like. It's gone a long way.
I don't want wolfenstein to be based on realism, in fact, the more Hitler/Nazis/Occult/Weird Science/Monsters we get, the better it is.
And of course, that BJ finds new types of weapons and defences based on what the enemy has been unearthing, researching, etc..., I love it!
Bottom line, I want to have fun, and I love the Wolfenstein series for that. It's fun! :)
I still have the PC version and I run it through DOS Box on XP.
As for Return to Castle Wolfenstein, I have loads of fun with that, loved it!
So, a new Wolfenstein! YES!!
I looked up on the web what a balaclava was, for I wasn't familiar with the term.
In Canada they sell those made of wool and other sturdy fibers as a winter gear for protection against the cold weather.
See the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balaclava_(clothing)
Now, I'm shocked that they would prohibit a game because of the headgear, that's ridiculous! It's a GAME! Beside, this type of head gear is sold everywhere!
Not worse than those KKK back then, when they were wearing bedsheets for pete's sakes!
How can the authorities be so "STUPID!"
Wow.
My head is still spinning over this. Unbelieavable.
Everything can be used to conceal's one's identity.
Ok Uk Police, ban the following, please, because you must be thorough in your logic
1) makeup
2) hair extensions, hair pieces, hair products for coloring
3) ban the growth of beards
4) ban coloured contact lenses
5) ban theatrical makeup
6) ban plastic surgery
7) ban every form of toy weapons, including those dangerous Super Soaker Water guns, since these can actually be dangerous (try chlorine bleach instead of water)
8) hell ban all form of clothing too, because ya know, at this point, one could wear a long coat and a hat and try to conceal themselves too!!
I could go on, I'm just totally blown by how ridiculous the UK authorities are on this issue!
You know, these watchdog groups really bake my noodles!
Games are games. There are ratings for games, so, in essence, all the parents have to do, is "parenting".. you know, if a game is rated for teens or young adults, etc... then that's all there is, don't buy it! Supervise what your kids buys.
The Wii is a gaming console and platform and game developers should be able to create whatever games they wish. If some games are NOT meants for everyone, then, hey, no problems, just up the rating. The Wii was never meant to be a gaming platform where all games are for everyone. Gee, it's nice to know that some developers want to make restricted games on that platform!
As for these "nosey joes", get a life for pete's sakes! If you don't want your kids to play these games, fine, do that, maybe you have a point when it comes to your kid(s), we won't judge you for that, but don't stop everybody's else fun because of your beliefs.
I'm surprise to see that Apple is again, after more than 25 yrs, dealing with a new generation of "clone" issues.
In truth, I'm not an Apple expert, but, if Apple's hardware would contain a chip which, would contain special instructions that would allow an Apple only OS to be installed, if this chip isn't included int the hardware, then the Apple OS doesn't work. Now, if that was there and of course, some legal hooplah about "thou shall not modify thy OS else.. clause" and a "thy chip is only available in Apple approved hardware.. and thy chip cannot be installed or modified or read by third party blah blah.. clause.."
I mean let's face it, wouldn't that make sense?
If this had been implemented, It wouldn't stop the smart asses from cloning and hacking, but it sure would make it easier for Apple to nip anyone in the bud so to speak in a legal sense!
Oh well, maybe they did think about it, but it would make too much sense somehow and the legal department at Apple would get bored and become the "Maytag" department of Apple..
Could be Apple is looking forward with glee to a new type of confrontation in court! :)
Ah, I swear, the ultimate oxymoron has to be "common sense" :P
What's the NRA's motto? better be judged by 12 than carried by 6? ;)
In theory, getting a warrant is the way to go, in practice, time is sometimes not a luxury law enforcement has.
Getting a warrant, can be long and that in terms means that the opportunity to "strike" while it's hot can be lost, all because of red tape.
That's the problem. The process behind applying for a warrant needs to be sped up.
Why do people pirate games?
Well, you know, this is funny, but I do get a lot of my stuff pirated at first, then, I try it, unlocked, no restrictions. If I don't like it, I delete it. If I like it, I go buy it, unless I have to work with DRM. DRM is a no-no.
If I can't make a backup of my game and play with the backup, I prefer the pirated version. Why? Because CD/DVDs can be scratched, simple and honest.
So, I don't have tons of games, but the ones I have for the most part, ironically, are not pirated and obviously no-DRM. I mean, let's face it, if I have to insert the original CD everytime I need to play, it will get scratch or become defective over time. Hell with that. As long as I can play from a copy of the game, instead of my original, then, I won't mind purchasing.
Cheers!
That our type of solar system is rare, well, that wouldn't surprise me in a bit, else, life out there could be so common that eventually, it would actually be quite, uh.. ordinary.
But then again, if one where to come up with an estimate on the odds of such systems, based on the amount of systems, galaxies, etc...
This is a rather very large universe, so I would wager there are indeed more out there.
Likely to be rare, yes, but probably still for sure.
We just eventually need to "go" out there and look for ourselves! :)
After all, what we see in the sky isn't representative of what is, but rather of "what is being projected to us" in our time, based on how long it took for this projection to be visible to us.
So, when we have the capability of visiting these systems and/or viewing them in some form of "real time" ways, then, we could be surprised! :) Don't you love sci-fi? ;)
Amazing. It reminds me of the concept of the "Quantum Leap" computer, where neurons from 2 humans are used as the basis of the core brain of the "Quantum" computer named Ziggy.
Science-fiction is becoming less and less fiction, so, I tell you, we sure do live in interesting times, and I'm glad to be a part of this.
The possibilities for this are tremendous! For instance, imagine for the blind, a tool based on this technology which would allow them to be able to know what they face around them! A talking "virtual" seeing eye dog application so to speak! I know the goal for the blind is to restore their sight, but this is an alternative until its done. Imagine this in situation where you require an unmanned probe with some form of decision making process, should there be something that could be a threat to its functions.
I could go on here, but, again.. wow this is really cool news!
Given the less than ideal state of this world, with the criminal elements that still florishes and the ever spreading threat of terrorism, the government the law enforcement agencies are really grasping here in many ways.
The fundamental problem is that our laws are not updated quickly enough for the new realities and challenges that are facing this world.
Now, say you are a completely innocent person, no crimes, no infractions. Do you really care if Big Brother watches over you? If you don't participate in any illegal activities, then, really, where is the harm? After all, the good of the one cannot always outweigh of the good of the many. "yeah, cheap Star Trek-like reference here" :)
Seriously, since it's their job to protect us from threats, the authorties require ways of not only stopping threats and crimes, but also, in preventing them whenever possible.
So, our individual freedom and our right to privacy, must bend a bit, in order to ensure that the society we live in, is as safe as possible.
So, GPSing potential suspects, is that ok without a warrent? well, yes, I think so.
I know that in the US, Canada and England, we are presumed innocent until proven guilty. I know.
And, when you look it in that light, then, this does violate that principle, this I agree.
But then again, if the authorities "suspect" a person of planning a crime or suspect they have already committed one, we need to give them the leverage they require to perform their duties, and to investigate.
And to err on the side of prevention is certainly without a doubt even more beneficial, especially in terrorist threats.
In the end, truly innocent and law abiding citizens, really shouldn't have anything to fear.
Note: there are cases, where innocent people are falsely identified and accused of misdeeds, I can see that as a counter-argument to the above statement. Obviously, no system is perfect, and improvement is required by all forms of law enforcement agencies to further improve their investigative techniques so that they will not and/or are less likely to falsely accuse an innocent person of a felony this person is not responsible for.
When I teach security and passwords, I recommend the same approach. I ask my students to use a catch phrase they often use on a personal level.
Then, I make them use the first letter of each of the words in that phrase.
Finally, any of the words that be substitute for a number, we do it too.
So, for example: I can't believe this works for that! Would become Icbtw4t now if you are allowed to add a non-alpha-numeric character, go for Icbtw4t@ :)
I doubt a dictionary would have that.
But then again, who knows! :)
well, you know, in the larger scheme of things, the problem ultimately, when it comes to "economy" and "money" is that communism failed and capitalism is failing too.
Why?
Because money has become it's own purpose. As a society where everyone is supposed to have a function, the idea behind the concept of money is that you do a task, you get money, and money allows you to purchase goods and services.
But you know, what are these tasks?
That's where we go into primary, secondary, etc... industries.
Again, the theory is that some folks who would work into something "primaries", thus very much goal oriented to society's needs. "imagine after the 2nd world war, it was the forestry, the ore plants, etc...".
Secondary could be the people who cut your hair, fix your car, etc.. "services"..
Imagine when you live in a world where entertainment gets more value than say research for cancer? that's our reality.
So, anyways, if the "primary" industry workers have money, they would spend it, and thus it would go in to the loop.
But this begs the question about Canada and the US. What are these countries primary economies right now?
I'm not so sure anymore, I have to tell you, and I don't think anyone can really tell you too!
It's not clear.
And thus, the dilemna.
When you work for money's sake, and nothing else, then it's like a monopoly game where it is being horded by those who can get the most of it.
And that's the crux of the problem with capitalism right now.
The money isn't moving as it should. It's behind horded.
Because people are afraid, jobs are not secure, so, keep the cash. It's a simplified view, but it's very real nonetheless.
In an idealist world, money would be of no issue.
We would be raised with the concepts and the security that all our basic and most fundamental needs are there.
We would have function "work" based on what is required and our talents.
And we would be raised with the security that "hording" isn't necessary.
Our basic "human" rights would be quite expanded and society would provide for our needs and we would have a function in society. "Sounds Star Trekkie" but hey, I did say "an idealist" world :)
Cheers!
I hope this project works, because let's face it, an environmental friendly city that functions and coexist with nature is exactly what is required. I find it amazing that we are so worried about money.
Money is really not the issue. If this works, it becomes a goal for any countries' economy. It's idealistic to think this way, I know, but in a way, it's also very practical.
Our economies are skewed right now, our countries don't have any real goals, tangible goals. Building environmentally friendly cities (converting actually), are concrete, positive goals. All will benefit "economically" from such goals.
This is the ultimate job creation idea on a long term basis I would believe!
Yeah, I know, it's sounds simple but anything that gives people work, gives them purpose and makes the money move, which is really what the economy should be about anyways.
"Keep things simple, but not simpler" - Albert Einstein
Uh, not to be impolite, and I didn't say I believed it, I did only mention it, because it is a theory.
The link to this "ahem, cough, cough" research is here.
http://www.snopes.com/religion/soulweight.asp
Now, the truth is, regardless that our "soul" has weight or not, the issue was.. what role does it have? if one does wrong repeatedly because of a DNA defect, then, how can we have a "conscience" so to speak? That's really what I was trying to bring it.
But as I can see by your remarkable display of the english language, you like to jump to conclusions and attack, more than think. If I was moderator, I would actually give you a "karma" hit.. Unless you can prove to me that your DNA is the reason you are a "tool" :)
The human mind and body is a complex piece of biological machinery. Add the mind to this, you know, the experiences we've lived, the memories we have and well, I can say that this can add even more complexity to the mix!
Take into account that we are affected by our environment, heck, the water in our bodies is affected by gravity and that's just one of the examples here I offer.
When push comes to shove, we understand very little about how things work when it comes to our overall health (mind and body) of a person.
There is a lot of knowledge, but it's not yet, I guess, merged properly, somehow. Still very segragated.
But as a rule, most people seek easy answers to problems. That in itself is a problem right there.
Diagnosing why a person is fat is a good example:
You can go to various specialists in their fields and they will tell you offer different diagnosise and solutions.
A psychologist will find one answer, a doctor another, a nutritionist another.
But, I'll bet that if these specialists worked together, they could find the real answer to the health issue.
The problem is they don't work together (most of the times anyways).
Human health isn't just the body, it's the mind, and in that respect, we are still way behind. Well, in my opinion anyways.
I don't think it's about blaming DNA. But if DNA is a factor, and it's proven to be, then we have more information on how to correct things.
And of course, the more we learn, the more questions arises and the more moral issues it raises. But you know, Life is problems, living is solving them.
Life is a journey in learning. We are all doing that. And we need to basically deal with it as it comes. :)
You raise good issues, but make no mistake, like anything else, that's the price to pay for increase knowledge, in this case, a reexamination of the moral issues this knowledge raises and a readjustment of how to deal with things.
Cheers!
I'm not going to place myself as an expert.
But since we know so little still of the human body and it's chemistry and composition, indeed, maybe we have the ability to affect our DNA ourselves, based on what is around us and what we experience.
After all, we barely use 10% of our brains and if you take into consideration people with telepathy and telekinesis and other "psychic" abilities.
Who is to say we don't all these abilities in ourselves, but for some of us, just enough that it can "push a few DNA thingies so to speak, you know! I mean, it's all speculation, but hey, the point is, I'm not going to disagree with you, but it is highly possible in my opinion that "behavioural environment alters DNA" and "DNA controls behaviour" to be both true.
And as for the "soul" aspect and the "God" aspect, well, you know, I wasn't trying to sell that point, but rather, question it, because as one replied to this post pointed out. If too make mistakes is intrically linked to your DNA, then the question of sinning (depending on the mistake) and the question of forgiveness comes to play from a religious aspect. That's all.
Never been much of a religious buff myself, but indeed, this would be a good argument to give to the Pope :P He who knows all, has the direct pipeline to God himself/herself. LOL. I could only imagine a "religious" reply to this post :P
But I've always said that for humanity to improve, it needs to evolve its morality and spirituality to the point where religion isn't required for its members to function.
Religion has served its purpose, from its humble beginnings, so many of these religions with the same similar mandate, to keep their people in line, in tow so to speak. Do good, else, you go to hell! Really, religion has been the way to scare people into believing there is a purpose beyond the here and now. You are evil, go to hell, you are good, go to heaven. How to be good? Follow these rules.
So, yes, religion was a necessary "ahem" evil that was required to keep the peace and order in an ever growing village, land, civilisation, because it gave people a moral sense of structure and conduct and when you did wrong, there was retribution. Because death is the ultimate deal here, religion was the ultimate answer to "what happens when we die?" So, to "sin" meant to lose that chance of that perpetual blissful life in heaven.
Fear is religion's ultimate weapon and unfortunately, fear is a powerful motivator in learning. It's a sad truth. However, you would think that by now, in this day and age, our sense of morals (right and wrong) would assert itself on its own, without having to resort to religion? :)
By now, humanity as a whole should know right from wrong, regardless of religious doctrines.
Humanity's ultimate challenge in my honest opinion is to rise above religion, to stop using it as a crutch and to just move on and learn everything there is, in the purest and most unbiased way possible. To do what's right, because it's right, for no other reason that it's the way it should be.
That's when we shall achieve true morality and enlightement.
That's when our technological advancement, our moral and spiritual sides will all co-exist together in balance.
Wow, I should be writing a novel uh?
"The little engine that could" - the first self-help book a child encounters - Lewis Black
Well, the premise of the original topic, is that there is a link between DNA and the ability for people to learn from their mistakes.
Can this issue be resolved? can it be fixed? or for better term, is there treatment? in essence, can we correct this behaviour via gene therapy, or DNA re-writing, whatever?
So, maybe broken isn't the word, but certainly, there is something wrong.
if DNA can determine how we learn, in essence, it does affect to some degree "who" we are. Again, whereas I would have thought we are often more a product of our environment and the learning that we have received, it's interesting to see how we are also whether we like it or not, a product of our genetics, and that WHO we are, isn't just based on the experiences we have lived.
Where does genetics stop and environment and nurturing begin? I say it's getting a bit blurry here. But study like this can't be dismissed anymore. Again Psychology as we know it, may end, if we are able to treat many of the "mental" defects via DNA manipulation.
That's something we need to accept, because it's our limitation. Once we accept it, we then can use the tools we learn to overcome these limitations. Surely, that's the great thing about this.
Fixing these limitations, can increase our quality of life. I'm all for it!
If you are a douche, you should face the music (assuming all your DNA bits are correctly aligned)
Information is power. This type of information is actually going to alter the way we view at bad behaviours.
If someone can prove without a doubt, that our ability to make correct decisions is linked to our DNA and then, prove that someone's DNA can be faulty. Then, these indviduals are ill, but they are not "a douche".. :)
More to the point, if this can be corrected with gene therapy or something like that, I say Yay.
See, for me, the power of choice is based on free will. If your DNA compromises your ability to know right from wrong, then, where is that free will then?
I know this can become a real boon for defence lawyers who will try and use this to get their clients off the hook, but really, if we can figure out how to diagnose this, then we can figure out, in the short term, a better form of rehabilitation or incarceration for those who are afflicted, after all, if beyond a shadow of a doubt, one is set in their bad ways because of a DNA loophole, then, let's be humaine.
When the real fix is ready, again gene therapy, or whatever, we can cure them.
That being said, if DNA isn't an issue, well, they, indeed, they should face the music :)
Punish the healthy, heal the sick. :)
Remember that show? by William "Captain Kirk - Denny Crane" Shatner himself? Sounds like we are heading towards that. That's kinda scary!
I'm not surprised anymore at articles such as this one. Our DNA is basically a blue print of who we are. Our limitations, strengths, etc...
While we are also a product of our environment, it's interesting to see how as we move forward in the research of the human body and mind, many of our issues which we would have deemed "environmental", are actually genetic.
So, the question is, can we fix this? And then, if we fix it, are we a different person? or just better? Is our individuality really based on our DNA? what does that make of the human soul? Not a religious person by nature, I do think there is a God, but, I believe that humanity has the right and the responsibility to learn as much of itself as possible, in order to survive and to improve as a species.
To me, an interesting question that raises is about our soul, such as, is our individuality link to it? or not? Having read and seen documentaries that a person on their death bed loses weight as they migrate from life to death. Many believe that our "soul" has a quantitive weight.
Who are we? If one could fix a learning disability by "re-wiring" our DNA, then, what's this "soul" thing to us?
Could it be that really, our version of heaven is actually our ability to learn about ourselves to the point where we can engineer our own immortality?
After all, for many, heaven is a blissful eternity of life after death. That's what many religions sell in their brochure :P (I said MANY, not all)
Is our goal to achieve long life by understanding our DNA? is this really what our reward will be? our quest for immortality lies within our reach in research and understanding of ourselves and what makes us really tick? :)
This thread may sound off beat to the topic at hand, but, I personally think it that there is a link.
Being able to fix a person by DNA so that they can finally "learn" from their mistake, is a behavioral fix. Done using medical treatment. To me, this means that there could be a day where "Psychology" as we know it might actually end, and DNA fixes could actually be the cure to depression, etc...
Cheers!
Uh.. Actually, the "I am rich" app was approved by Apple, it was on the "online shelf" of its store. The app didn't violate any patent, else, it would never have been approved in the first place.
Apple just basically caved in and removed the app, due to peer pressure from a large group of constipated users, who were basically outrage and jealous that they couldn't afford this useless app. (by the way, I heard that 98% of all constipated people, don't give a crap!) :P
Truth is, the "I am rich" app was simple, had no function beyond being ornemental, had no hidden functions either, nothing malicious, illegal or immoral and followed all of Apple's guidelines, including pricing.
So, Apple should not have taken it out of its online store.
I wouldn't buy this application, even if I had money to burn, but I still say it should have been left there. After all, it's a product, it was supposed to be a luxury item and while to most, it may have been garbage, to some, it wasn't, it could have been art for all I know and that is really what this is all about.
Power of choice.
For those who didn't want it, don't buy it. Those who do, let them. This is the crux of the matter. The "irate" people who demanded to have this app removed, basically, had no right to do so. And Apple should never have caved to their demands in the first place.
Freedom to sell and freedom to buy, supply and demand. It's very american to come up with useless gimmicks. This gimmick actually was more honest than most. Look at Facebook, who are being accused of tracking your internet usage, even when you are not on Facebook. Talk about Big Brother uh? See? Things are never totally free.
Apple could have easily let the product there and just give issued a disclaimer about the product and what it does. Then again, the programmer did have one, it was clear.
Those who complained about this app, well, there is a term for these people. But I'm too polite to write it here, suffice to say, some people can never leave well enough alone.
If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Most of all, you can't afford it, too bad.
It's like buying gold, platinum, etc...
Not everybody can afford it, but do you see boycotts at the jewellery stores? No.
But there is an even bigger picture to consider. Say you are a developer, would you trust Apple to make the right choice if you decide to develop an app for the IPhone?
Could you see yourself spending the money on the SDK, etc.., your time to create an app and then, it gets pulled off, because some folks don't agree with the cost or the function, when you've followed all of Apple's guidelines?
That is something to consider.
I can't wait for IPhone clones and similar stuff to come out, I hope these companies will learn from Apple's arrogance and mistakes.
You know as I was thinking about this, I truly believe it was a bad decision for Apple to have approved of this product, only to remove it based on peer pressure. They were better off, never allowing the product in its online Store shelf in the first place. The reason I think so, is that anyone who is interested in developing software for the IPhone has to ask wonder about the following: If one is to invest time and effort in the creation of a product for the IPhone, assuming the product is: 1) no threat 2) no hidden function 3) not damaging 4) not immoral 5) not illegal. 6) follows Apple's Guidelines (which this application did) Are the risk of rejection worth it? After all, if Apple removes an app based on SUBJECTIVE feedback from users, in the case of the "I am Rich" app, the feedback were all about perception and I dare say, jealousy. Who wants to go out and stick their necks in the development of an app for the IPhone is Apple doesn't take a FAIR stance on issues like this. Food for thought. I hope other companies are coming out with IPhone like products because maybe then, Apple will lose some of their arrogance and start playing fair.
Apple only removed the product from its store due to pressure from those who were annoyed with the product. They didn't "CHOOSE" to remove it. Furthermore, in the end, call it what you want, but there is no justice in this. Again, it's not that I would endorse the product, this product in itself is useless, but the process with which it was removed, because of people's intolerance and jealousy, is wrong. The Apple Store had approved the product in the first place, it was removed based on intolerance. That's what is wrong with the situation here. Being fair is really all that matters. I can be fair about this, I can see the truth for what it is. What about you? Just because I don't like the product, I can certainly see NO HARM in it being offered, because it is not a harmful application. So, in this instance, we can agree to disagree, but I will stick to my guns on this one. Apple should reinstate the product back and those who can't afford it, too bad. Sometimes, you have to ask yourself this question, Who the hell died and made you God? See? because that's where this boils down to. Tolerance. The product in itself was not harmful, didn't represent anything evil, it was just a "so-called" luxury item. And truth is, what is garbage for someone, is art for someone else. So, seriously, you can reply all you want, but I doubt you have any real rational and ethical answer here that would truly be worthy of a response. If people were more tolerant and less judgemental, this world would be a better place.