I run a gaming site - granted, not a popular one, but that doesn't hurt my feelings any. And advertisements is something that any site has to deal with.
The problem I see with the whole Express.com/Gamefan Network thing isn't a legal thing, but a right thing. Sure, the legal thing for them to do is to cut their losses, don't pay the sites, and keep the corporation going.
Then there's the right thing to do. In the case of Something Awful, the guy's out $3000 in server costs because he's not going to get paid. I think more about the case of VoodooExtreme.com, which was probably getting a few million hits a day - and evidently they are owed $100,000 that they're never going to see.
These are folks who had an agreement, that they would run their site, bring in traffic, and have ads up for the "parent company" - and in return they would recieve money to keep it going. In the case of some of these sites, people have probably quit their day jobs because they had enough money coming in (or promised to come in) to take care of them.
Yeah, Express.com doesn't have to pay them. But if they don't, you can bet that they're not getting another $0.02 out of me. I'll buy my anime and import stuff somewhere else. (Damn, and I had my eye on those Final Fantasy Selphie figurines).
Do the right thing, Express. John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
Under $300:
Games, of course - Grandia II, Final Fantasy IX, Majora's Mask -
But you're probably looking at gadgits. So I'll say a GameBoy Advanced (yes, I know the US version is a year away, but I can dream), or a Wonderswan (same deal - but I want to play Final Fantasy I-III (the real I - III, not "we'll call IV FFII and VI FFIII! Bwahahaha!").
The other item would be a Playstation One (small footprint) with the LCD panel and a car adapter so I could take it on trips.
$1500+
It took me a little bit, but I'd want one of those Honda gas-electric cars http://arstechnica.com/ rev iews/3q00/honda/insight-1.html - save gas $, save the planet, and stick it to OPEC all at the same time. (Now, if only they'd make an ethenol version so I could help out Kansas farms at the same time...) John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
After reading the article (you did read the article before replying, didn't you?), I've come to the conclusion that MS isn't interested in money anymore.
Like the RIAA, they're after power. Power to decide where and when "their" software gets installed on your machine. Whether it be their.Net program (where all of your applications are "upgraded" for a fee over the Internet), or their OEM system ("This version of Windows 2000 is OEM only - if your format the hard drive and put on the retail version without buying a copy of the retail version for this specific computer, you're in violation!").
Either way, their trying to control the method of how and when their software is used. The only thing they forget is that the second that money changes hands, it's no longer their software - it's now my software, and I can do whatever the hell I please as long as I don't put it on more machines than I have licenses for. I don't give a crap if it's the OEM version or upgrade or retail - if I legally own a copy, I'm putting it on whatever damn machine I want.
This is the reason I'm trying to convince my workplace to shift to Linux and be done with MS. I don't want to play games about who or what owns who; I just want to get my work done.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
I'm sure that the boys of Slashdot get tons of news messages that they ignore (for being old, repetitive, off topic, and the like.) Which isn't a bad thing; they help keep the site from getting crowded with too much crap. (Well, almost;).
But what I'd like to see someday is a site where news stories are put in, and the users actually vote on it (much like the moderators here). You'd have to have your karma setting (so you'd know if the guy was useful or just liked to put up porn links for no reason), and then people could comment on the story from there.
It would probably take a few months to get the kinks out (as the reliability of news posters was tested), but I can see the news sites going this direction one day (or perhaps even this one). Then the Slashdot guys could just sit back and watch the action (while performing maintenance to make sure nothing blows up.)
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Back when the net was still young, there were few sites offering good gaming news.
Then came along a little site called VoodooExtreme.com. I've watched it grow from a small Provo, UT based "Isn't 3DFX a cool company?" to a full fledged "We got 50 billion news updates made every day".
Almost all of their news is reported from the readers, eager to be famous for 5 seconds with the tag line "Soandso reported this story to us...". The site had grown, and it now one of the biggest gaming news sites on the Internet. (It and Blue's News.)
I'd say both of these sites demonstrate with Mr. Katz is talking about - sites where the readers are the journalists, and the editors function as an error and fact checking system against them. John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
I don't see a prolem with information storage. After working at a bank for some time, I see the good in knowing that the person you're handing a $5000 check to is actually going to pay you back based on their credit history.
The problem is, there isn't any real accountability. Oh, sure, you can "challenge" items in your credit report and the like, and the companies like TRW and Equifax have a time frame to fix things, but there's no incentive for them to verify on their own what's true or not. And even more insidious is the crime of identidy theft, where someone uses your information as their own to purchase things, defraud others, or even commit crimes in your name.
So here's my wish-list for how to prevent problems. I haven't narrowed down any ideas, but some general thoughts.
I want to see whatever information a company has on me, whenever I want to. If some company, government organization, or otherwise has information on or about me, it should be my right to see it whenever I wish. Nobody has the right to me except me.
Mistakes are fined. If there is a mistake in the information, the information holder has to prove that they are right (example: if it says I had a Nordstrom card in 1988 and I never did, they have to prove that I did). If they are wrong, then they are fined some reasonable amount. How long would it take for credit reporting agencies to start being more precise in their information gathering and reporting techniques when they learn it will cost them money?
There's probably more I could add, but that's the short list. The main theme here is accountability and respect; my information is mine, and if you want to hold it, then you'd damn well better get it right, or else.
As always, I could be wrong. John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
What I see the problem approaching capitalism, and society in general, is the idea of ownership. When I buy a house, I'm investing not just my money, but my time, my energy, and something of my life. It becomes a long term investment that I'll pass onto my children (well, for now child, but that'll change in another year;) ). When I buy a car, I plan on having it for 10 years - yes, that long. With ownership comes responsibility and committment.
With our society becoming so disposible, people have extended this into their personal lives. Marriages don't last - why commit? If it doesn't work, just find a new spouse. Families break apart when parents don't want to put the work and effort into raising children (and leave it up to day care or the schools), then complain when we have children attacking each other or having children themselves because they haven't been taught responsibility. Our elderly are shipped off into homes - why bother taking care of them? It's just too hard!
I know I'm exaggerating a little bit here, and I'm not saying that the Internet or Technology is the reason for these attitudes. This has been growing since the turn of the former century (the 19th Century). Maybe it changed when we moved off the farms and into the industrial workplace, and corporations started on their rise.
The best gift I can give my little girl is to take my responsibility as a father seriously, and to show her to think for more than just this one moment. I admit; I'm not perfect at it, with all the distractions out there. But I should at least try.
After all, she is my most important long term responsibility.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
This one is a hard choice for me. On the one side, Iron Chef certainly has the copyrights to its logo, images, and sounds from its show. And it probably has the right to go after people who they feel have violated that copyright. After all, if they don't reign in people now, what's to stop someone else from making Iron Porn or something that comes back to bite them in the butt?
Now, that having been said, Fuji should take a careful look as to what site is doing what. If the site is positive and promotes traffic, I'd give them a letter saying "Hey, that's our stuff - but you can use it all if you sign this agreement saying that it's all ours, and that you won't claim its yours, and give us a link to our site on each page in a nice viewable manner." This way they maintain control of the copyright (by forcing people to have Fuji's permission, a perfectly reasonable request IMHO), and if a site doesn't agree, then they can slap them down. As always, that's just my $0.02. I could be wrong.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
From the article, it would appear the Microsoft has the lid on on the codec through their Media Player. Anyone know of people working on an open source version of this codec?
And how will this affect the DeCSS trial? Now the lawyers can prove that pirating is possible thanks to DeCSS putting the file on the hard drive, then compressing it. Comments? It shouldn't hurt that much (since the old "copying a video tape is fair use because the quality isn't as good" arguement would tie in here, but I'm not so sure.)
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Re:The problem of bullies
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 1
Yes, but if you look at the reports of the Chechen war in Russia, that's the justification the Russain government is using to persue conflict in that region, because they are "pursueing terrorists." John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
The problem of bullies
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 1
I haven't read the book yet, so I'll have to rely on Mr. Katz's comments on it (though my interest is piqued).
In many ways, it appears that the problem with "rogue nations" around the world - countries like Iraq who "peacefully" invade others, or countries like Serbia or Russia who are hunting down "terrorists" in other countries, all the while killing everyone they can get their hands. It's like watching bears on National Geographic, how the male bears will kill any cubs it finds to ensure the survival of its own offspring. (I might be a little off there, I haven't watched National Geographic since I was a kid).
But it seems to me that this problem is no more different than watching bullies in junior high and high school, picking on those smaller and weaker than themselves. I guess I was lucky; back in school I was the "geeky jock", the kid who liked computers and played football and wresling and the like. But the few times I did have a run in with a bully, I quickly learned a valuable lesson: the only way to stop a bully is to destroy them. Completly. Humiliate them, break bones, whatever it takes. To hurt them so badly that they never, ever even think about hurting someone else again. I'm the nicest guy in the world. But sometimes, fear and pain are the only remaining solutions.
I have come to believe that the biggest part of the problem with helping out countries in need (this is coming from a US standpoint, so forgive me if this offends people of other nationalities) is that we're too "nice" about it. "Oh, look, these people are starving. Let's throw food at them." The problem of local warlords stealing the food to buy planes (how the hell does Etheopia get planes for war, when all I keep hearing about it how drought is killing people left and right?). "Look, this ethnic group is getting killed. Let's protect them with smart missiles! But we can't hurt any civilians!" Overlooked is the fact that in war, there are no civilians or soldiers; in war, everyone is the enemy.
WWII was won when nearly everything in Berlin was being bombed to the dust. When Japan realized the power of the atomic bomb, and how it would destroy nearly everything. The Civil War was won in large part I believe by Sherman's March, when everything that could burn was torched to the ground, and the "civilians" were forced to rethink having black people as slaves.
War sucks. But if you're going to do it, let's stop with the "Oh, don't hurt the innocents!" Serbia might not be a problem if the NATO forces had realized that to end the problem, that a total change had to be made. Total surrender from Serbia, then a McCarthy plan to reshape the government into one that gives the citizens a voice.
The second part is the most important. You see, I discovered something else about bullies in my years of school. After you've broken them, the most important thing to do afterwards is to make them your friend, to show them the right way to act. A bully unbroken is a bully. A bully broken is nothing more than a whipped dog. A bully made into a friend can be the most powerful thing a person can have.
My rants over. Have a nice day.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
I'm no big friend of Microsoft's, but I have to admit that their doing everything right. I've been talking to some folks about what they think of it, and it's been interesting. One company in particular (I can't say who, but I'll just say "They make sports games" have increasing frustrations with the PlayStation 2, with its incredible level of difficulty to program for. MS has reduced Win2000 to a super small, super tight kernel, no GUI at all, just "load file, run file, close file" type stuff and memory management. Without all of the other 250 MB of stuff, it looks like Win2000 is actually a good system.
What they've done right: Gotten developers kits quickly, and made it super easy to program for. Yes, it uses DirectX and the like. But for PC programmers, it's an easy jump from X-box to PC and back again. Lots of built in stuff. Built in hard drive. Lots of memory, good processor, and a graphics chip by Nvidia, the current (if you don't include the $600 Voodoo 6000) graphics chip king. Ethernet at the outset. They know that modems are going away, and that DSL and the like is what's going on. DVD on the outset. It works for the PS/2, it should work for the X-box.
What they've done wrong: Games. I haven't heard of any games (except for Munch's Oddysee, and that's not a definite yet) that are coming for the X-Box. It doesn't matter how pretty it is, it needs games. MS has been trying to buy up companies (some rumors include Square), but no go just yet. Bad image. Let's face it, MS doesn't have the right image for, well, anything. And with their trial going on, this might be a problem. Is this an application or OS? If MS is smart, they'll spin it off onto its own company, Open Source the kernal (to let more developers into building for it), and they'll have a winner. If they try to keep their propriety hands on it, they won't win against big Nintendo and Sony. John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Yeah, I think your proposed law does need a little work.
Oh, I agree. I'm a geek, not a lawyer, so you'll have to focus on the spirit of the idea, not the literal words. Somebody else will have to come up with the exact wording.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Over the past few months, I've observed an interesting new approach on control of information.
I guess I really first noticed it when AOL wouldn't let anybody else use thier Instant Messaging system. Microsoft and AOL got into a fight over that, and eventually, Microsoft lost because it wouldn't put "insecure" pieces into its messaging system. (Hey, MS! How 'bout doing that with Outlook or IIS4.0? Thanks!)
Then there was the infamous denial of service from Turner Communications, forgoing to show ABC on thier system, and even putting up the inflamitory message "Disney has taken ABC away from you!" After being reported to the FCC, Turner put the channel back on.
Now, we have a new problem brewing between Blockbuster Video and American Beauty. It seems that Blockbuster didn't get as much money out of the deal that they wanted. So rather than purchasing fewer videos and placing those on the shelves, they are simply holding them behind the counter so people have to ask for them directly. Their reasoning? Well, since they have that "it's in, or it's free" offer, they don't want to lose money from having so few copies in. Everybody knows that's not it. It's because they're pissed they didn't get their way, so they'll punish Dreamworks by making it more difficult to rent videos (seeing how much money the movie studios make from that rental income.)
So what does this have to do with anything? It's interesting that a country that holds that:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
But it makes no mention of private industry. Businesses can do the very things that government cannot, restrict speech. Perhaps we need a new ammendment to the constitution that would read:
No industry, whether public or private, shall make no restrictions to the flow of information except for information that they own directly.
This still allows money to be made from copyrights (if Dreamworks owns American Beauty, they can restrict what informatoin goes out), but Time Warner can't keep it off a cable channel if they don't like it. It probably needs a little work, and the Courts would have to help define it, but it seems like we need some Constitutional changes to protect freedoms from businesses.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Re:But here's a question...Plse help
on
Universal Access
·
· Score: 2
I've been thinking about this one for some time, since I have several people out in "the field" (read: I can't get to them to fix their laptops when they screw them up).
Because of this, I think there need to be a series of pieces that will help companies out:
Instant on computers. On a recent Jay Leno show, William "The Girdle Wasn't Mine" Shatner talked about how hard it was to use his computer. The On switch was in the back, and it took forever to boot up. I keep thinking that the advances in the Palm OS, or perhaps some super small kernel of Linux for specific hardware systems (where the entire Linux OS was held within a Flash Bios that could boot within 2 seconds). Hit the button, it's on. Hit the button, it's off.
Real tech support I've been seeing these "Free Computer" deals, where for $30 a month you get the Internet, computer, and "support". But usually support is all online, and for somebody using the Internet for the first time, they don't even know how to get onto the Internet. The iMac has helped with this (plug it in and you're practically done), but PC's should take the same route. As a Linux newbie, it seemed to take forever to hook up my modem to the Internet. (Yes, DSL was easier through the Ethernet, but that's another story.)
Stability I know I'm preaching to the choir here, so this should be short. When that blue screen pops up, the "average user" doesn't know what it means. Go back to 1 to instant boot computers, and you notice I make Linux the base. Perhaps BSD would be better, but make it so that it's very difficult to crash. It some company were to make these machines like the iMac (hey, perhaps the iMac would be a good choice to begin with...) with one hardware system, they could update the system over the Internet.
Don't require anything to plug in other than power, but allow expansion. Keep it simple. Allow PS/2 and VGA ports, but don't make the user have to use them if they don't want to. Give it the ability to have new upgrades if the user wants, but don't force them to do it.
Worldwide ISP I signed on my executives with AT&T because I knew they were global. Guess what: they don't offer global internet access. I was going to use IBM.net, but they got bought by AT&T (the bastards). Now I'm forced to use MSN or AOL so they can get to the 'Net from Japan using the same account. Somebody out there know of a good global ISP that doesn't make me use an install CD I don't want?
Don't force the user to upgrade I was in a CompUSA once, talking to once of the salespeople, when he made an interesting comment. "I don't like to sell people the iMac," he told me. "If they buy a Windows system, they're always back to upgrade it and make it better. If they buy a iMac, they don't have to upgrade the machine, the OS, or anything else. We usually never see them again."
All right, so that was a little long. But this is what we need. You hardware vendors out there, get cracking. Make it small, make it affordable, and make it so I don't have to force Bob from Alabama to email me his laptop when it breaks down.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
This isn't meant to flame anybody, but what is Napstar's purpose anyway?
I have it installed (v 2.0 beta 5), and I admit, I've downloaded music from it, usually stuff I can't get (like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy music, I'm a game geek, so sue me.) I know that it's a chat room/music downloading program. Fine, I get that as well.
But what is the point of Napstar? How does this company expect to make money, or is it a volunteer effort? Do they expect to sell the search lists (so somebody at RCA can say "Hey, check this out, people love this Final Fantasy Music CD! Press another 50,000 copies and send them all to Salt Lake City")?
I love my.MP3's, and in the words of Charlton Heston, "From my cold, dead fingers RIAA." But it seems that Napster is providing a service that could only be described as illegal. Again, I admit I use the service, and perhaps I should try and find out where I can purchase the music I am downloading. I'm just as guilty as everybody else.
But I still have to wonder: what is the point of Napster? In all reality, it appears to be encouraging piracy, and for all the arguments of "music companies pay too much for CD's", I don't see how using this service will help the situation any. It doesn't give money to the artists (who deserve the lions share of the money rather than the publishers), and it doesn't make it any more legal than if I went to a friends house and copied his songs onto a CD.
Like I said, I've used Napster. And I'll probably use it again to find songs I can't find anywhere else. And I'll keep ripping CD's from my personal collection. But perhaps there's a better middle ground that we can find here, like "every time a song is downloaded, the RIAA gives $0.25 to the artist" and I pay $0.50. I can go for that. To be honest, I don't have a good answer. But there must be a better one than "Napster is cool! MP3's rock! RIAA sucks ass!"
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Some time ago, I read a book by Orsen Scott Card I believe called The Worthing Saga. Part of the book deals with a man who wanted to engineer the destruction of civilization, since he saw humanity and its culture as stagnating.
He proceeded to enginner the total collapse of society, first by purposly angering the "lower people" just enough so that they would be angry, but not revolt. Then he alienated the "upper people" so that they were incinsed, but would not withdraw support. He sent messages out that "All is well, do not worry" while issuing secret messages to people about "how bad things really are."
And when all the pieces were ready, he finally pushed everybody over the edge at once, and everything fell apart all at once, like a house of cards toppled by a child.
I don't hate Microsoft. I've used DOS as far back as I can remember, I've used Windows when that's all I knew. Indirectly, I have a good living as a professional geek and now game reviewer. I like my life, and I owe a part of that to companies like Microsoft.
But the more they act, the more it seems like they are engineering their own demise. They upset people just enough with their competitive practices- and I'm not just talking about making new products, but giving them away to put other people out of business. They upset government officials by continueing to engage in monopoly practices while they are under investigation- from the Kerberos issue to "renting" software at university's at such a low price that college students can't resist, then jacking up the prices after everyones standardized. They put on commercials saying "We innovate, we work hard for you!" while they have "Holloween E-mails" that talk about how scared they are of Linux.
Microsoft is not a bad company. I'm going to say this again: Microsoft is not a bad company. I may not like all of their products, but others I think are great. I like Internet Explorer, I just don't like how it was rammed down my throat.
But with each new story, I become a little angrier at Microsoft, to the point that I'm about to install Linux on my machine at home and only use the Windows partitions for games (hey, I've still got to write my reviews.) And if Microsoft keeps up this behavior, they'll find thier carefully built house of cards all falling to the ground at the same time.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel We don't just like games, we love them!
Granted, this book is probably a fun an interesting read. But one of the best things about the scientific process is that eventually, after all of the human frailties have burnt out, truth does prevail. It may take years or decades or even centuries - but truth is truth, and no amount of human greed, bigotry, or censorship can ever change it. John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
Yes, I know that there's other versions out there (anybody know of good instructions to get it to work with StarOffice?), but I'd still like to see 3com's original program ported over. I'm willing to bet if they announced better Linux support, their stock would go up further.
I can see why they don't want to support the Linux version- they probably don't have the staff yet to support the OS. Fine. But why not put the Linux executables on the CD anyway, and just put in a note saying "Not supported", the way they did with the Unread Editor when it came out. Complaining for nothing? Maybe. This just seems like pointy-haired management.
This is one area that I admit I'm a little evil in. I don't care if people are mentally ill- I say kill them too if they can't be treated. And if they can be, if they stop taking their medication for non-health reasons, and then hurt somebody, kill them, since they obviously can't be trusted.
Mean, overdone? Perhaps, and I'll be the first to admit it. But lets face it- the dead don't kill.
I like the approach- very scientific. Let's get to the heart of these problems and fix them (aka- the teens), and not to the external things (aka- the outsiders.)
Stephen Covey in his book 7 Habits makes an interesting comment on how he's lived in Ireland, South Africa, and other "hot-spots" in the world. And in every case, his observation was that people say "If those people over there would start doing/stop doing these things, then we would get along." But if you go to "those people", they would say the same thing as the other side.
Focus on where the real problem is first- the individual. Then move out.
Great- maybe laws won't help. I'll even agree that I might be wrong. But I would like to see the laws say that they need to have a license for kids- not just a piece of paper saying they can have one, but a real training program. We have them for cars, and the State has to agree that you have demonstrated the ability to drive. Perhaps if we made them take a test to prove they were responsible, understood the laws, at least something might stick in their heads that shooting somebody else isn't cool.
Think on this:
Guy walking around with gun. Cop pulls him over. "Do you have your license for that gun?" If the guy says no, fined, gun taken from him. If yes, thanks, have a nice day.
Would it help things? Maybe, maybe not. As I said, I'm not against people having guns in and of itself. But I am against them having guns without being taught the awesome responsibility and control that goes along with it. We ask this much of car owners- any reason why we can't have it for something made specifically to kill?
Apology in advance: This is a) long, b) I can't spell worht a damn, so forgive me, and c) I am basing some items on being in the USA, so forgive me if I make certain assumptions on laws and customs that you might not be familiar with. Thanks!
Well, now that we've debated up one end over the other about media, games, parents, cheerleaders who lead them on, teasing, and everything else, I'm going to make a try to see if I can figure out why, and what the solution is.
You see, this is very important to me. My daughter was born April 1. I want to see her graduate from High School, go to college, and be happy and successful some day. I want to sit down at the table each night and hear about her day when she's going to school.
I don't want to hear about how little Bobby shot up little Stevie because they didn't like each other.
So, here's my own opinion:
Why they did it:
1. No emotional connection to other students I watched the news the morning after on the Today show, as they interviewed different teenagers about the killings. Almost all of them said "No, I really didn't know them. Well, I knew their name and face, but that was it." Only one student said "I was friends with one guy- and he told me to leave that morning. I left."
These two teenagers had no reference to the other students. Forget the Neo-Nazi stuff or whatever- it wouldn't have mattered. They had no emotional connection to these kids.
2. Parents didn't get a clue The day after, their was a web page viewed on the news that was suppose to have been made by one of the students. Now, maybe that's been debunked by now- if it has, let me know. But the web page was basically "We hate them all, we wish they would die."
How the hell didn't the parents notice this? Or the pipe bombs in the basement, or at least the supplies to make them, or all of the ammo?
3. Not just disconnected, but disliked An interview with a local student who had just moved from that area talked about how these two teenagers were into computers and, while he never used the word "geek", let's face it, they probably were. They lived in a culture that society rewards with money later in life, but punishes because they dare to be different in high school. Day after day, they probably heard the comments from other people, or perhaps just ignored.
4. Faulty wiring. Something inside their heads just didn't connect right, and they decided that killing people was OK.
All right. Now, the solutions. Again, these are just my opinions, so work with me here. If you have a better idea, let me know- I've got to find out before my daughter get's too old.
1. Parental involvement. Above all else, I believe in my heart that this is the most important thing. I know, people say "Teenagers hide stuff, they don't tell parents anything". I know this- I was a teen, I certainly didn't tell my parents everything I did. But my mother at least made the effort. There always had to be a parent or adult at someplace I was going to- and let me tell you, it's hard to try and put the moves on a girl when Dad's in the other room. I had a curfew- perhaps too strict of one, but it was there. I plan on having one for my daughter, but I'll give her slack as long as she calls to tell me first.
My father used to read my journal and my mail- jerk action for sure. I've sworn that I'll never do this to my child, and I mean it. But I will know what's she's doing. Who she hangs out with. If this means that I have to give up some of my time to come home some afternoon, make cookies or bring in video games for them to play (yes, those evil video games.) Check out where they go on the Internet, or their web page. Sure, they can make up something on geocities where you'll never find it. But make some sort of effort- odds are, you'll find out something before it gets to be a problem.
2. Some gun control for teens. Before you get your panties in a not, just finish reading. Personally, I don't like guns. Too loud. But I have no problem with people who own them- I have a former co-worker who had a concealed weapons permit, and kept one in her purse. Great- I'm happy for her.
But there's no need for teenagers to have a gun except for the a) firing range and b) hunting range. A fellow at my last job was taught by his father when he turned 11 how to handle a gun. The number one lesson? How to put it away, lock it up, and never ever use it except for where it is supposed to be used. He was told over and over again, no guns on people. Don't shoot the birds. Respect this- or else your privilage to use the gun will be taken away for a long time. He was taught to respect the power and responsibility that comes with it- and when to use it, and when not too.
A law out in my place in the world came up about restricting concealed weapons in schools and churches, and was shot down. Seems that would infringe on little Johnny's rights to carry a rifle into school.
Teens don't needs guns- if you can't drink alcohol until you're 21, smoke until you're 19, and drive until you're 16, there's no way I want to give you the power to kill somebody just because you're big enough to wrap your finger around the trigger.
3. Death penalty for teens. Yes, I'm saying death penalty- or at least hard laws. I don't give a flying leap if you're just 16, 14, or even 11. You kill somebody, I want it plain and simple that you are going to the chair, and nobody can save you. I admit, this won't stop some kids, especially these two who committed suicide after their rampage. But you know what- I bet that if every teen knew that if they shot somebody and killed them, they would be guarenteed a trip down death row, shootings would slow down. If they knew that Amy would be in jail until she was 70 for shooting Carla, she might think twice about it. As it is, some laws have them until they turn 21, or even 18, clear their record, and send them back out. I'll be honest- kill them. First felony, some jail time and therapy. Second felony, some more jail time, better therapy, job training, and then move them far away from where they commit crimes so they don't keep going back to the "bad crowd". Third felony- kill them. They obviously can't learn, and are therefore genetically defective, and must be culled from the herd. And those who think that I would spare my own child- think twice. Looking into my heart, and honestly feel that if my daughter did these things, I would cry, I would wonder what I did wrong- and then I would tell the DA to send her to the chair, and then spend the rest of my life feeling terrible about it. But I'd do it for the rest of society.
So, there's my rant, my opinions, and my views. Help me out- let's find a solution, write to our congresspeople, and fix these students. I figure I've got about 11 years to have this fixed before my daughter is old enough to worry about it, and want to get started now.
Slashdot Mirror
I run a gaming site - granted, not a popular one, but that doesn't hurt my feelings any. And advertisements is something that any site has to deal with.
The problem I see with the whole Express.com/Gamefan Network thing isn't a legal thing, but a right thing. Sure, the legal thing for them to do is to cut their losses, don't pay the sites, and keep the corporation going.
Then there's the right thing to do. In the case of Something Awful, the guy's out $3000 in server costs because he's not going to get paid. I think more about the case of VoodooExtreme.com, which was probably getting a few million hits a day - and evidently they are owed $100,000 that they're never going to see.
These are folks who had an agreement, that they would run their site, bring in traffic, and have ads up for the "parent company" - and in return they would recieve money to keep it going. In the case of some of these sites, people have probably quit their day jobs because they had enough money coming in (or promised to come in) to take care of them.
Yeah, Express.com doesn't have to pay them. But if they don't, you can bet that they're not getting another $0.02 out of me. I'll buy my anime and import stuff somewhere else. (Damn, and I had my eye on those Final Fantasy Selphie figurines).
Do the right thing, Express.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
Under $300:
Games, of course - Grandia II, Final Fantasy IX, Majora's Mask -
But you're probably looking at gadgits. So I'll say a GameBoy Advanced (yes, I know the US version is a year away, but I can dream), or a Wonderswan (same deal - but I want to play Final Fantasy I-III (the real I - III, not "we'll call IV FFII and VI FFIII! Bwahahaha!").
The other item would be a Playstation One (small footprint) with the LCD panel and a car adapter so I could take it on trips.
$300 - $1500:
One of two things:
A Voodoo 6000 (128 MB RAM, 4 processors, needs its own external power source - can you say Unreal Tournament at 1024x768 4x AA at 100 frames a second? Oh, yes. Check it at http://www.3dfx.com/prod/vood oo/ v5-6000-overv.html
Creative Labs Jukebox http://www.nomadworld.com/products/j uke box/ - 6 gigs of MP3 storage from a name I trust.
$1500+
It took me a little bit, but I'd want one of those Honda gas-electric cars http://arstechnica.com/ rev iews/3q00/honda/insight-1.html - save gas $, save the planet, and stick it to OPEC all at the same time. (Now, if only they'd make an ethenol version so I could help out Kansas farms at the same time...)
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
After reading the article (you did read the article before replying, didn't you?), I've come to the conclusion that MS isn't interested in money anymore.
Like the RIAA, they're after power. Power to decide where and when "their" software gets installed on your machine. Whether it be their .Net program (where all of your applications are "upgraded" for a fee over the Internet), or their OEM system ("This version of Windows 2000 is OEM only - if your format the hard drive and put on the retail version without buying a copy of the retail version for this specific computer, you're in violation!").
Either way, their trying to control the method of how and when their software is used. The only thing they forget is that the second that money changes hands, it's no longer their software - it's now my software, and I can do whatever the hell I please as long as I don't put it on more machines than I have licenses for. I don't give a crap if it's the OEM version or upgrade or retail - if I legally own a copy, I'm putting it on whatever damn machine I want.
This is the reason I'm trying to convince my workplace to shift to Linux and be done with MS. I don't want to play games about who or what owns who; I just want to get my work done.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
I'm sure that the boys of Slashdot get tons of news messages that they ignore (for being old, repetitive, off topic, and the like.) Which isn't a bad thing; they help keep the site from getting crowded with too much crap. (Well, almost ;).
But what I'd like to see someday is a site where news stories are put in, and the users actually vote on it (much like the moderators here). You'd have to have your karma setting (so you'd know if the guy was useful or just liked to put up porn links for no reason), and then people could comment on the story from there.
It would probably take a few months to get the kinks out (as the reliability of news posters was tested), but I can see the news sites going this direction one day (or perhaps even this one). Then the Slashdot guys could just sit back and watch the action (while performing maintenance to make sure nothing blows up.)
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
Back when the net was still young, there were few sites offering good gaming news.
Then came along a little site called VoodooExtreme.com. I've watched it grow from a small Provo, UT based "Isn't 3DFX a cool company?" to a full fledged "We got 50 billion news updates made every day".
Almost all of their news is reported from the readers, eager to be famous for 5 seconds with the tag line "Soandso reported this story to us...". The site had grown, and it now one of the biggest gaming news sites on the Internet. (It and Blue's News.)
I'd say both of these sites demonstrate with Mr. Katz is talking about - sites where the readers are the journalists, and the editors function as an error and fact checking system against them.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
I don't see a prolem with information storage. After working at a bank for some time, I see the good in knowing that the person you're handing a $5000 check to is actually going to pay you back based on their credit history.
The problem is, there isn't any real accountability. Oh, sure, you can "challenge" items in your credit report and the like, and the companies like TRW and Equifax have a time frame to fix things, but there's no incentive for them to verify on their own what's true or not. And even more insidious is the crime of identidy theft, where someone uses your information as their own to purchase things, defraud others, or even commit crimes in your name.
So here's my wish-list for how to prevent problems. I haven't narrowed down any ideas, but some general thoughts.
I want to see whatever information a company has on me, whenever I want to.
If some company, government organization, or otherwise has information on or about me, it should be my right to see it whenever I wish. Nobody has the right to me except me.
Mistakes are fined.
If there is a mistake in the information, the information holder has to prove that they are right (example: if it says I had a Nordstrom card in 1988 and I never did, they have to prove that I did). If they are wrong, then they are fined some reasonable amount. How long would it take for credit reporting agencies to start being more precise in their information gathering and reporting techniques when they learn it will cost them money?
There's probably more I could add, but that's the short list. The main theme here is accountability and respect; my information is mine, and if you want to hold it, then you'd damn well better get it right, or else.
As always, I could be wrong.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
What I see the problem approaching capitalism, and society in general, is the idea of ownership. When I buy a house, I'm investing not just my money, but my time, my energy, and something of my life. It becomes a long term investment that I'll pass onto my children (well, for now child, but that'll change in another year ;) ). When I buy a car, I plan on having it for 10 years - yes, that long. With ownership comes responsibility and committment.
With our society becoming so disposible, people have extended this into their personal lives. Marriages don't last - why commit? If it doesn't work, just find a new spouse. Families break apart when parents don't want to put the work and effort into raising children (and leave it up to day care or the schools), then complain when we have children attacking each other or having children themselves because they haven't been taught responsibility. Our elderly are shipped off into homes - why bother taking care of them? It's just too hard!
I know I'm exaggerating a little bit here, and I'm not saying that the Internet or Technology is the reason for these attitudes. This has been growing since the turn of the former century (the 19th Century). Maybe it changed when we moved off the farms and into the industrial workplace, and corporations started on their rise.
The best gift I can give my little girl is to take my responsibility as a father seriously, and to show her to think for more than just this one moment. I admit; I'm not perfect at it, with all the distractions out there. But I should at least try.
After all, she is my most important long term responsibility.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
This one is a hard choice for me. On the one side, Iron Chef certainly has the copyrights to its logo, images, and sounds from its show. And it probably has the right to go after people who they feel have violated that copyright. After all, if they don't reign in people now, what's to stop someone else from making Iron Porn or something that comes back to bite them in the butt?
Now, that having been said, Fuji should take a careful look as to what site is doing what. If the site is positive and promotes traffic, I'd give them a letter saying "Hey, that's our stuff - but you can use it all if you sign this agreement saying that it's all ours, and that you won't claim its yours, and give us a link to our site on each page in a nice viewable manner." This way they maintain control of the copyright (by forcing people to have Fuji's permission, a perfectly reasonable request IMHO), and if a site doesn't agree, then they can slap them down. As always, that's just my $0.02. I could be wrong.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
From the article, it would appear the Microsoft has the lid on on the codec through their Media Player. Anyone know of people working on an open source version of this codec?
And how will this affect the DeCSS trial? Now the lawyers can prove that pirating is possible thanks to DeCSS putting the file on the hard drive, then compressing it. Comments? It shouldn't hurt that much (since the old "copying a video tape is fair use because the quality isn't as good" arguement would tie in here, but I'm not so sure.)
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
Yes, but if you look at the reports of the Chechen war in Russia, that's the justification the Russain government is using to persue conflict in that region, because they are "pursueing terrorists."
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
I haven't read the book yet, so I'll have to rely on Mr. Katz's comments on it (though my interest is piqued).
In many ways, it appears that the problem with "rogue nations" around the world - countries like Iraq who "peacefully" invade others, or countries like Serbia or Russia who are hunting down "terrorists" in other countries, all the while killing everyone they can get their hands. It's like watching bears on National Geographic, how the male bears will kill any cubs it finds to ensure the survival of its own offspring. (I might be a little off there, I haven't watched National Geographic since I was a kid).
But it seems to me that this problem is no more different than watching bullies in junior high and high school, picking on those smaller and weaker than themselves. I guess I was lucky; back in school I was the "geeky jock", the kid who liked computers and played football and wresling and the like. But the few times I did have a run in with a bully, I quickly learned a valuable lesson: the only way to stop a bully is to destroy them. Completly. Humiliate them, break bones, whatever it takes. To hurt them so badly that they never, ever even think about hurting someone else again. I'm the nicest guy in the world. But sometimes, fear and pain are the only remaining solutions.
I have come to believe that the biggest part of the problem with helping out countries in need (this is coming from a US standpoint, so forgive me if this offends people of other nationalities) is that we're too "nice" about it. "Oh, look, these people are starving. Let's throw food at them." The problem of local warlords stealing the food to buy planes (how the hell does Etheopia get planes for war, when all I keep hearing about it how drought is killing people left and right?). "Look, this ethnic group is getting killed. Let's protect them with smart missiles! But we can't hurt any civilians!" Overlooked is the fact that in war, there are no civilians or soldiers; in war, everyone is the enemy.
WWII was won when nearly everything in Berlin was being bombed to the dust. When Japan realized the power of the atomic bomb, and how it would destroy nearly everything. The Civil War was won in large part I believe by Sherman's March, when everything that could burn was torched to the ground, and the "civilians" were forced to rethink having black people as slaves.
War sucks. But if you're going to do it, let's stop with the "Oh, don't hurt the innocents!" Serbia might not be a problem if the NATO forces had realized that to end the problem, that a total change had to be made. Total surrender from Serbia, then a McCarthy plan to reshape the government into one that gives the citizens a voice.
The second part is the most important. You see, I discovered something else about bullies in my years of school. After you've broken them, the most important thing to do afterwards is to make them your friend, to show them the right way to act. A bully unbroken is a bully. A bully broken is nothing more than a whipped dog. A bully made into a friend can be the most powerful thing a person can have.
My rants over. Have a nice day.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
I'm no big friend of Microsoft's, but I have to admit that their doing everything right. I've been talking to some folks about what they think of it, and it's been interesting. One company in particular (I can't say who, but I'll just say "They make sports games" have increasing frustrations with the PlayStation 2, with its incredible level of difficulty to program for. MS has reduced Win2000 to a super small, super tight kernel, no GUI at all, just "load file, run file, close file" type stuff and memory management. Without all of the other 250 MB of stuff, it looks like Win2000 is actually a good system.
What they've done right:
Gotten developers kits quickly, and made it super easy to program for. Yes, it uses DirectX and the like. But for PC programmers, it's an easy jump from X-box to PC and back again.
Lots of built in stuff. Built in hard drive. Lots of memory, good processor, and a graphics chip by Nvidia, the current (if you don't include the $600 Voodoo 6000) graphics chip king.
Ethernet at the outset. They know that modems are going away, and that DSL and the like is what's going on.
DVD on the outset. It works for the PS/2, it should work for the X-box.
What they've done wrong:
Games. I haven't heard of any games (except for Munch's Oddysee, and that's not a definite yet) that are coming for the X-Box. It doesn't matter how pretty it is, it needs games. MS has been trying to buy up companies (some rumors include Square), but no go just yet.
Bad image. Let's face it, MS doesn't have the right image for, well, anything. And with their trial going on, this might be a problem. Is this an application or OS? If MS is smart, they'll spin it off onto its own company, Open Source the kernal (to let more developers into building for it), and they'll have a winner. If they try to keep their propriety hands on it, they won't win against big Nintendo and Sony.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
Yeah, I think your proposed law does need a little work.
Oh, I agree. I'm a geek, not a lawyer, so you'll have to focus on the spirit of the idea, not the literal words. Somebody else will have to come up with the exact wording.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
Over the past few months, I've observed an interesting new approach on control of information.
I guess I really first noticed it when AOL wouldn't let anybody else use thier Instant Messaging system. Microsoft and AOL got into a fight over that, and eventually, Microsoft lost because it wouldn't put "insecure" pieces into its messaging system. (Hey, MS! How 'bout doing that with Outlook or IIS4.0? Thanks!)
Then there was the infamous denial of service from Turner Communications, forgoing to show ABC on thier system, and even putting up the inflamitory message "Disney has taken ABC away from you!" After being reported to the FCC, Turner put the channel back on.
Now, we have a new problem brewing between Blockbuster Video and American Beauty. It seems that Blockbuster didn't get as much money out of the deal that they wanted. So rather than purchasing fewer videos and placing those on the shelves, they are simply holding them behind the counter so people have to ask for them directly. Their reasoning? Well, since they have that "it's in, or it's free" offer, they don't want to lose money from having so few copies in. Everybody knows that's not it. It's because they're pissed they didn't get their way, so they'll punish Dreamworks by making it more difficult to rent videos (seeing how much money the movie studios make from that rental income.)
So what does this have to do with anything? It's interesting that a country that holds that:
But it makes no mention of private industry. Businesses can do the very things that government cannot, restrict speech. Perhaps we need a new ammendment to the constitution that would read:This still allows money to be made from copyrights (if Dreamworks owns American Beauty, they can restrict what informatoin goes out), but Time Warner can't keep it off a cable channel if they don't like it. It probably needs a little work, and the Courts would have to help define it, but it seems like we need some Constitutional changes to protect freedoms from businesses.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
I've been thinking about this one for some time, since I have several people out in "the field" (read: I can't get to them to fix their laptops when they screw them up).
Because of this, I think there need to be a series of pieces that will help companies out:
Instant on computers.
On a recent Jay Leno show, William "The Girdle Wasn't Mine" Shatner talked about how hard it was to use his computer. The On switch was in the back, and it took forever to boot up. I keep thinking that the advances in the Palm OS, or perhaps some super small kernel of Linux for specific hardware systems (where the entire Linux OS was held within a Flash Bios that could boot within 2 seconds). Hit the button, it's on. Hit the button, it's off.
Real tech support
I've been seeing these "Free Computer" deals, where for $30 a month you get the Internet, computer, and "support". But usually support is all online, and for somebody using the Internet for the first time, they don't even know how to get onto the Internet. The iMac has helped with this (plug it in and you're practically done), but PC's should take the same route. As a Linux newbie, it seemed to take forever to hook up my modem to the Internet. (Yes, DSL was easier through the Ethernet, but that's another story.)
Stability
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, so this should be short. When that blue screen pops up, the "average user" doesn't know what it means. Go back to 1 to instant boot computers, and you notice I make Linux the base. Perhaps BSD would be better, but make it so that it's very difficult to crash. It some company were to make these machines like the iMac (hey, perhaps the iMac would be a good choice to begin with...) with one hardware system, they could update the system over the Internet.
Don't require anything to plug in other than power, but allow expansion.
Keep it simple. Allow PS/2 and VGA ports, but don't make the user have to use them if they don't want to. Give it the ability to have new upgrades if the user wants, but don't force them to do it.
Worldwide ISP
I signed on my executives with AT&T because I knew they were global. Guess what: they don't offer global internet access. I was going to use IBM.net, but they got bought by AT&T (the bastards). Now I'm forced to use MSN or AOL so they can get to the 'Net from Japan using the same account. Somebody out there know of a good global ISP that doesn't make me use an install CD I don't want?
Don't force the user to upgrade
I was in a CompUSA once, talking to once of the salespeople, when he made an interesting comment. "I don't like to sell people the iMac," he told me. "If they buy a Windows system, they're always back to upgrade it and make it better. If they buy a iMac, they don't have to upgrade the machine, the OS, or anything else. We usually never see them again."
All right, so that was a little long. But this is what we need. You hardware vendors out there, get cracking. Make it small, make it affordable, and make it so I don't have to force Bob from Alabama to email me his laptop when it breaks down.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
This isn't meant to flame anybody, but what is Napstar's purpose anyway?
I have it installed (v 2.0 beta 5), and I admit, I've downloaded music from it, usually stuff I can't get (like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy music, I'm a game geek, so sue me.) I know that it's a chat room/music downloading program. Fine, I get that as well.
But what is the point of Napstar? How does this company expect to make money, or is it a volunteer effort? Do they expect to sell the search lists (so somebody at RCA can say "Hey, check this out, people love this Final Fantasy Music CD! Press another 50,000 copies and send them all to Salt Lake City")?
I love my .MP3's, and in the words of Charlton Heston, "From my cold, dead fingers RIAA." But it seems that Napster is providing a service that could only be described as illegal. Again, I admit I use the service, and perhaps I should try and find out where I can purchase the music I am downloading. I'm just as guilty as everybody else.
But I still have to wonder: what is the point of Napster? In all reality, it appears to be encouraging piracy, and for all the arguments of "music companies pay too much for CD's", I don't see how using this service will help the situation any. It doesn't give money to the artists (who deserve the lions share of the money rather than the publishers), and it doesn't make it any more legal than if I went to a friends house and copied his songs onto a CD.
Like I said, I've used Napster. And I'll probably use it again to find songs I can't find anywhere else. And I'll keep ripping CD's from my personal collection. But perhaps there's a better middle ground that we can find here, like "every time a song is downloaded, the RIAA gives $0.25 to the artist" and I pay $0.50. I can go for that. To be honest, I don't have a good answer. But there must be a better one than "Napster is cool! MP3's rock! RIAA sucks ass!"
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
Some time ago, I read a book by Orsen Scott Card I believe called The Worthing Saga. Part of the book deals with a man who wanted to engineer the destruction of civilization, since he saw humanity and its culture as stagnating.
He proceeded to enginner the total collapse of society, first by purposly angering the "lower people" just enough so that they would be angry, but not revolt. Then he alienated the "upper people" so that they were incinsed, but would not withdraw support. He sent messages out that "All is well, do not worry" while issuing secret messages to people about "how bad things really are."
And when all the pieces were ready, he finally pushed everybody over the edge at once, and everything fell apart all at once, like a house of cards toppled by a child.
I don't hate Microsoft. I've used DOS as far back as I can remember, I've used Windows when that's all I knew. Indirectly, I have a good living as a professional geek and now game reviewer. I like my life, and I owe a part of that to companies like Microsoft.
But the more they act, the more it seems like they are engineering their own demise. They upset people just enough with their competitive practices- and I'm not just talking about making new products, but giving them away to put other people out of business. They upset government officials by continueing to engage in monopoly practices while they are under investigation- from the Kerberos issue to "renting" software at university's at such a low price that college students can't resist, then jacking up the prices after everyones standardized. They put on commercials saying "We innovate, we work hard for you!" while they have "Holloween E-mails" that talk about how scared they are of Linux.
Microsoft is not a bad company. I'm going to say this again: Microsoft is not a bad company. I may not like all of their products, but others I think are great. I like Internet Explorer, I just don't like how it was rammed down my throat.
But with each new story, I become a little angrier at Microsoft, to the point that I'm about to install Linux on my machine at home and only use the Windows partitions for games (hey, I've still got to write my reviews.) And if Microsoft keeps up this behavior, they'll find thier carefully built house of cards all falling to the ground at the same time.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
We don't just like games, we love them!
Granted, this book is probably a fun an interesting read. But one of the best things about the scientific process is that eventually, after all of the human frailties have burnt out, truth does prevail. It may take years or decades or even centuries - but truth is truth, and no amount of human greed, bigotry, or censorship can ever change it.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
Yes, I know that there's other versions out there (anybody know of good instructions to get it to work with StarOffice?), but I'd still like to see 3com's original program ported over. I'm willing to bet if they announced better Linux support, their stock would go up further.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
Game news? http://www.pcfan.com
I can see why they don't want to support the Linux version- they probably don't have the staff yet to support the OS. Fine. But why not put the Linux executables on the CD anyway, and just put in a note saying "Not supported", the way they did with the Unread Editor when it came out. Complaining for nothing? Maybe. This just seems like pointy-haired management.
This is one area that I admit I'm a little evil in. I don't care if people are mentally ill- I say kill them too if they can't be treated. And if they can be, if they stop taking their medication for non-health reasons, and then hurt somebody, kill them, since they obviously can't be trusted.
Mean, overdone? Perhaps, and I'll be the first to admit it. But lets face it- the dead don't kill.
I like the approach- very scientific. Let's get to the heart of these problems and fix them (aka- the teens), and not to the external things (aka- the outsiders.)
Stephen Covey in his book 7 Habits makes an interesting comment on how he's lived in Ireland, South Africa, and other "hot-spots" in the world. And in every case, his observation was that people say "If those people over there would start doing/stop doing these things, then we would get along." But if you go to "those people", they would say the same thing as the other side.
Focus on where the real problem is first- the individual. Then move out.
Great- maybe laws won't help. I'll even agree that I might be wrong. But I would like to see the laws say that they need to have a license for kids- not just a piece of paper saying they can have one, but a real training program. We have them for cars, and the State has to agree that you have demonstrated the ability to drive. Perhaps if we made them take a test to prove they were responsible, understood the laws, at least something might stick in their heads that shooting somebody else isn't cool.
Think on this:
Guy walking around with gun. Cop pulls him over. "Do you have your license for that gun?" If the guy says no, fined, gun taken from him. If yes, thanks, have a nice day.
Would it help things? Maybe, maybe not. As I said, I'm not against people having guns in and of itself. But I am against them having guns without being taught the awesome responsibility and control that goes along with it. We ask this much of car owners- any reason why we can't have it for something made specifically to kill?
Apology in advance: This is a) long, b) I can't spell worht a damn, so forgive me, and c) I am basing some items on being in the USA, so forgive me if I make certain assumptions on laws and customs that you might not be familiar with. Thanks!
Well, now that we've debated up one end over the other about media, games, parents, cheerleaders who lead them on, teasing, and everything else, I'm going to make a try to see if I can figure out why, and what the solution is.
You see, this is very important to me. My daughter was born April 1. I want to see her graduate from High School, go to college, and be happy and successful some day. I want to sit down at the table each night and hear about her day when she's going to school.
I don't want to hear about how little Bobby shot up little Stevie because they didn't like each other.
So, here's my own opinion:
Why they did it:
1. No emotional connection to other students
I watched the news the morning after on the Today show, as they interviewed different teenagers about the killings. Almost all of them said "No, I really didn't know them. Well, I knew their name and face, but that was it." Only one student said "I was friends with one guy- and he told me to leave that morning. I left."
These two teenagers had no reference to the other students. Forget the Neo-Nazi stuff or whatever- it wouldn't have mattered. They had no emotional connection to these kids.
2. Parents didn't get a clue
The day after, their was a web page viewed on the news that was suppose to have been made by one of the students. Now, maybe that's been debunked by now- if it has, let me know. But the web page was basically "We hate them all, we wish they would die."
How the hell didn't the parents notice this? Or the pipe bombs in the basement, or at least the supplies to make them, or all of the ammo?
3. Not just disconnected, but disliked
An interview with a local student who had just moved from that area talked about how these two teenagers were into computers and, while he never used the word "geek", let's face it, they probably were. They lived in a culture that society rewards with money later in life, but punishes because they dare to be different in high school. Day after day, they probably heard the comments from other people, or perhaps just ignored.
4. Faulty wiring.
Something inside their heads just didn't connect right, and they decided that killing people was OK.
All right. Now, the solutions. Again, these are just my opinions, so work with me here. If you have a better idea, let me know- I've got to find out before my daughter get's too old.
1. Parental involvement.
Above all else, I believe in my heart that this is the most important thing. I know, people say "Teenagers hide stuff, they don't tell parents anything". I know this- I was a teen, I certainly didn't tell my parents everything I did. But my mother at least made the effort. There always had to be a parent or adult at someplace I was going to- and let me tell you, it's hard to try and put the moves on a girl when Dad's in the other room. I had a curfew- perhaps too strict of one, but it was there. I plan on having one for my daughter, but I'll give her slack as long as she calls to tell me first.
My father used to read my journal and my mail- jerk action for sure. I've sworn that I'll never do this to my child, and I mean it. But I will know what's she's doing. Who she hangs out with. If this means that I have to give up some of my time to come home some afternoon, make cookies or bring in video games for them to play (yes, those evil video games.) Check out where they go on the Internet, or their web page. Sure, they can make up something on geocities where you'll never find it. But make some sort of effort- odds are, you'll find out something before it gets to be a problem.
2. Some gun control for teens.
Before you get your panties in a not, just finish reading. Personally, I don't like guns. Too loud. But I have no problem with people who own them- I have a former co-worker who had a concealed weapons permit, and kept one in her purse. Great- I'm happy for her.
But there's no need for teenagers to have a gun except for the a) firing range and b) hunting range. A fellow at my last job was taught by his father when he turned 11 how to handle a gun. The number one lesson? How to put it away, lock it up, and never ever use it except for where it is supposed to be used. He was told over and over again, no guns on people. Don't shoot the birds. Respect this- or else your privilage to use the gun will be taken away for a long time. He was taught to respect the power and responsibility that comes with it- and when to use it, and when not too.
A law out in my place in the world came up about restricting concealed weapons in schools and churches, and was shot down. Seems that would infringe on little Johnny's rights to carry a rifle into school.
Teens don't needs guns- if you can't drink alcohol until you're 21, smoke until you're 19, and drive until you're 16, there's no way I want to give you the power to kill somebody just because you're big enough to wrap your finger around the trigger.
3. Death penalty for teens.
Yes, I'm saying death penalty- or at least hard laws. I don't give a flying leap if you're just 16, 14, or even 11. You kill somebody, I want it plain and simple that you are going to the chair, and nobody can save you. I admit, this won't stop some kids, especially these two who committed suicide after their rampage. But you know what- I bet that if every teen knew that if they shot somebody and killed them, they would be guarenteed a trip down death row, shootings would slow down. If they knew that Amy would be in jail until she was 70 for shooting Carla, she might think twice about it. As it is, some laws have them until they turn 21, or even 18, clear their record, and send them back out. I'll be honest- kill them. First felony, some jail time and therapy. Second felony, some more jail time, better therapy, job training, and then move them far away from where they commit crimes so they don't keep going back to the "bad crowd". Third felony- kill them. They obviously can't learn, and are therefore genetically defective, and must be culled from the herd. And those who think that I would spare my own child- think twice. Looking into my heart, and honestly feel that if my daughter did these things, I would cry, I would wonder what I did wrong- and then I would tell the DA to send her to the chair, and then spend the rest of my life feeling terrible about it. But I'd do it for the rest of society.
So, there's my rant, my opinions, and my views. Help me out- let's find a solution, write to our congresspeople, and fix these students. I figure I've got about 11 years to have this fixed before my daughter is old enough to worry about it, and want to get started now.