What do you mean by your phrase "only in america?" Well, let me clarify my post. I do not support games that portray senseless violence and crulety, but a game such as Mortal Kombat is "beyond" realistic. Take Quake, you actually have a gun that you use to kill people. In Mortal Kombat, you use fireballs => people would not try to emulate what goes on in the latter in real life. But Quake (in general FPSs) could potentially encourage many real life imitators. So I guess what I meant to say was that games that could potentially be dangerous (imitable) should be rated (but not censored) but games that obviously are beyond reality should not be as strictly rated or restricted. Sorry for the simple-minded comment in the first post. (That was my FIRST ever first post - So I guess I just wrote the first thing that came into my head! - Now that I look back at it, it was pretty dumb)
Please visit FreeDonation.com - You can donate Food and Medicine for FREE to Save Children. The donation is fully paid by corporate sponsors. There is no charge to you. You can make one free donation a day.
I love mortal kombat! Games should not be censored or rated!:)
Please visit FreeDonation.com - You can donate Food and Medicine for FREE to Save Children. The donation is fully paid by corporate sponsors. There is no charge to you. You can make one free donation a day.
Ever read thestreet.com's article on the "red hots?"
In it, Cramer said that Red Hat is one of those companies who had a good idea, convinced a few mutual funds to buy into it before the IPO, and soon EVERYONE is jumping on the Red Hat Bandwagon. the key thing is, when red hat ipoed, it essentially had no long term profit model (it was giving away software and making money from service and maintaince contracts)
however, now with a market cap of over 7 billion, red had is using its stock to buy real money making (i.e. profitable) companies such as Cygnus to fill out its business model. it just seems a little crazy that essential we the public gave red hat this money even before it had a long term model and said use this money to buy up competition and innovation!? please comment on this.
The Standard Oil company was broken up by the US Government into several pieces (i.e. Exxon...) Before the breakup, many people were doomsayers and the stand oil stock was killed. after the break up, however, people discovered that their was a ton of "hidden" assets in the huge corporate infrastructure that the standard had built over the years and this was a case in which the sum of the parts is greater than the whole (i.e. emergent properties). In my opinion, if the government were to breakup microsoft in a few "baby bells," then microsoft's stock should be higher as a result of the invariable discovery of assets that were before heavily discounted such as microsoft's internet properties. what do you guys think?
Slashdot Mirror
What do you mean by your phrase "only in america?"
Well, let me clarify my post.
I do not support games that portray senseless violence and crulety, but a game such as Mortal Kombat is "beyond" realistic. Take Quake, you actually have a gun that you use to kill people. In Mortal Kombat, you use fireballs => people would not try to emulate what goes on in the latter in real life. But Quake (in general FPSs) could potentially encourage many real life imitators. So I guess what I meant to say was that games that could potentially be dangerous (imitable) should be rated (but not censored) but games that obviously are beyond reality should not be as strictly rated or restricted.
Sorry for the simple-minded comment in the first post. (That was my FIRST ever first post - So I guess I just wrote the first thing that came into my head! - Now that I look back at it, it was pretty dumb)
Please visit FreeDonation.com - You can donate Food and Medicine for FREE to Save Children. The donation is fully paid by corporate sponsors. There is no charge to you. You can make one free donation a day.
I love mortal kombat! Games should not be censored or rated! :)
Please visit FreeDonation.com - You can donate Food and Medicine for FREE to Save Children. The donation is fully paid by corporate sponsors. There is no charge to you. You can make one free donation a day.
Ever read thestreet.com's article on the "red hots?"
In it, Cramer said that Red Hat is one of those companies who had a good idea, convinced a few mutual funds to buy into it before the IPO, and soon EVERYONE is jumping on the Red Hat Bandwagon. the key thing is, when red hat ipoed, it essentially had no long term profit model (it was giving away software and making money from service and maintaince contracts)
however, now with a market cap of over 7 billion, red had is using its stock to buy real money making (i.e. profitable) companies such as Cygnus to fill out its business model. it just seems a little crazy that essential we the public gave red hat this money even before it had a long term model and said use this money to buy up competition and innovation!? please comment on this.
The Standard Oil company was broken up by the US Government into several pieces (i.e. Exxon ...) Before the breakup, many people were doomsayers and the stand oil stock was killed. after the break up, however, people discovered that their was a ton of "hidden" assets in the huge corporate infrastructure that the standard had built over the years and this was a case in which the sum of the parts is greater than the whole (i.e. emergent properties). In my opinion, if the government were to breakup microsoft in a few "baby bells," then microsoft's stock should be higher as a result of the invariable discovery of assets that were before heavily discounted such as microsoft's internet properties. what do you guys think?