It's true! At my school (University of Arizona) CS consistently either has the lowest or second lowest female enrollment of any major (we're in a competition with Optical Engineering it seems). My roommate is a Math major and he actually *met* his current girlfriend through a student teaching position (they were both TAs). Women are doing better in Math specifically, but in other "mathy" fields (CS, Engineering, etc) they are still really underrepresented. Not that it's the job of the University to find me a date who will listen to me prattle on about the editor wars or anything:p
It's unlikely too many people would want to just ride the train and not need a car on the other end.
While I agree with the general sentiment of this statement, I think the number of people not needing a car at the other end would be greater than one would initially think. Take people going to Sky Harbor (the airport in Phoenix), for example. Tucson does have its own airport but it's generally cheaper to fly out of Phoenix. I once flew from Tucson to Salt Lake City. The first thing we did? Fly to Phoenix and switch planes. When we got to Phoenix we all joked about how we probably could have driven to Phoenix and gotten there faster, since we wouldn't have had to deal with airport security, etc.
My point is, a lot of travelers (including, for example, out of state college students, of which there are many in Tucson because of U of A) would jump at the chance to take a reasonably-priced 30 minute train ride to the airport. Even in-state students like me would find it handy for occasions where you have to run home for the weekend but really don't need your car.
Arizona cities are generally pretty heinous examples of urban sprawl, but we're getting better about it. For example, Phoenix just got a light rail system back in December. If I could take this train to a station within walking distance of the light rail, I could go all the way from Tucson to about 15 minutes away from my parent's house without a car. Not bad, eh?
I'm going to start with an easy game to discuss: RapeLay â" an obscure title by a Japanese publisher that focuses on forced sex situations. There is something special about sexual crimes that make them even worse than murder in the United States. I don't know why, but Hot Coffee in GTA3 drew far more criticism than the normal killing rampage in that game and games before it.
If I remember correctly, the Hot Coffee mod allowed your character in GTA3 to have sex with prostitutes, which is a completely different thing than raping a woman. That's why I disagree with the assumption that our aversion to rape in entertainment has something to do with our culture being prudish/puritanical/etc. For this to be true, it would seem to also follow that societies with a more liberal view of human sexuality (like in Europe, for example) would also have a more lax view on rape in entertainment. However, I seriously doubt that a German or a Swede would somehow be more relaxed about playing a video game with rape involved than an American.
Rape is a particularly heinous crime because, unlike murder, once the act has been perpetrated the victim's suffering has only just begun. And unlike killing someone, it's never morally justified. There's nothing a woman could do to somehow justify a person raping her. If someone attacks you with a deadly weapon, however, you're well within acceptable moral and legal boundaries to kill that person. We're less averse to violence in games and entertainment because we can take "baby steps" with justifiable violence. Start with "Call of Duty," then move on to GTA and then once you get to Manhunt it doesn't seem all that bad. Hell, even in Manhunt you're only killing people because you're essentially being forced to.
Don't get me wrong; American moral sensibilities about sex are fucked up, no pun intended. For some strange reason, when we go to see a movie about a guy in a mask stabbing people in the woods, nudity and sex are almost expected but when we go to see a love story, anything but the most white-washed sex scene will offend the audience. It's like the time I watched "Amelie" with my mom. She freaked out that a movie about two people falling in love might actually have some sexual content in it. But rape will always be taboo, as it should be. From what I gather, this isn't an exploration into the tortured psyche of a rapist (like a book or movie on the subject might be), but rather a rape simulator of sorts. Therefore, people are justified in their concern that folks would want to play such a game. Of course the developer has a right to publish the game, just as consumers have the right to boycott and criticize it.
(sorry for the rambling post, kind of out of it today)
I'm not surprised by this given that an incredibly similar thing happened back in February with Germany's new Economics and Technology minister. Then again, there's something that stings much more about a phoney quotation showing up in an obituary rather than an extra name being added to a person.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but there is no copyrighted material on pirate bay. The site contains torrent trackers, not the files themselves. If Pirate Bay were just a giant server full of pirated mp3s and movies, it would have been taken down a long time ago. Hence the drug dealer analogy doesn't work at all, since maintaining a site about *where to get drugs* isn't illegal.
are malware-laden Windows boxes at small businesses with little or no regular IT Staff. I did contract IT work for small business a while back and some of the computers I had to deal with were borderline unusable. In some cases, a full reboot meant a full 15 minutes before the computer was in some semblance of working order again. That's definitely enough time to make a less savvy user want to just leave the thing on overnight and only shutdown/reboot when you really had to. And of course many of these folks didn't want to hear about how their super-awesome toolbars were the root of the problem.
Everybody is talking about violent video game control. Got to control the violent video games. Fuck, that, I like violent video games. No, I think we need some knife control. I think every knife should cost five thousand pounds. Five thousand pounds for a knife. Know why? Cos if a knife cost five thousand pounds, there'd be no more innocent by-standers. That'd be it. Some guy'd be stabbed you'd be all 'Damn, he must've done something, that other guy put 5,000 pounds into stabbing his ass!' And people'd think before they stabbed someone 'Man I would cut your fucking head off, if I could afford it. I'm gonna get me a second job, start saving up, and you a dead man. You'd better hope I don't get no knives on lay-away!'
They followed me into the games and told all the other players to turn me in because they didn't want to see that crap or their kids to see that crap.
I think the point she's making is that they're on rather dubious "moral" grounds here. You don't want any evil gay gamers to pollute the impressionable minds of "teh childrenz"; just leave them in peace so they can blow each other up and scream some of the most foul obscenities possible into their headsets.
Seriously, have you heard the kind of things people say on XBOX live? Most of those comments would get your ass beat if you said them in any major metropolitan area/bar/public park. Hell, some of the user names would do the trick, too! Racial slurs, derogatory comments towards women, plain old four letter words, etc.
The point being, if you are so impressionable and vulnerable that the mere mention that someone might be gay would somehow "damage" you, you should stay the hell off of xbox live, lest you start dropping n-bombs and f-bombs at work/school/church.
I had to remove this off of my uncle's computer over Thanksgiving. I thought I had succeeded but then I heard Howie Mandel's disembodied voice shilling for buy.com, a clear signal that some more work needed to be done. It's a tenacious little sucker; I ended up downloading Malwarebytes and having to rename the install file. I guess it recognized it and was blocking it.
"Free" rings alarm bells and this is an issue I rarely hear mention of when people talk about the problems linux has spreading.
That's why Eric Raymond et. al. coined the term "Open Source" back in '96 or thereabouts: because most people presume that "free" means "free as in beer," and get suspicious. But the name "open source" has its own problems, namely RMS railed against it because it doesn't address the idea of freedom.
I think we should call it "freedomware" but my idea doesn't seem to have caught on.;-)
While I can understand your reasoning in calling it "freedomware," something about the name makes it sound like an alternate term for something that was originally called "frenchware.":p
I don't believe Genesis is cited as the source of the geocentric theory of the universe. It's never quite written out in black and white to my knowledge, but it'd definitely alluded to several places in the Old Testament:
I'm curious, how often do you read a piece of poetry and assume that the author was making a scientific statement? In the absence of scientific absence, it is understandable that people might read more into a statement than they should, as has happened, but there is no requirement for poetry to be interpreted literally, so while it might be accurate to say that these statements were taken to mean geocentric thinking was correct, it is not accurate to say that they actually endorse such thinking or even have the subject in mind.
(emphasis added)
I'm sorry if you misunderstood my post, but I wasn't trying to say anything about my beliefs but rather how people in the past attempted to justify the idea that the earth was the center of the universe by citing the bible.
it is not accurate to say that they actually endorse such thinking or even have the subject in mind.
Which was why I ended my original post with:
When dealing with religious issues, it's important to remember that what people actually believe can be quite different from what their scripture says, especially in periods of high illiteracy.
Back in the day when people had questions about the nature of the universe, they turned to the Bible. The Bible was considered the final authority on *all* matters, even ones that weren't particularly related to anything said in the book, an attitude that is dangerously carried into the present by people declaring that "all the answers" are in the Bible.
So when someone asked "What is the structure of the universe?" they frantically tore through the Bible looking for any clues related to how God created the Universe since Genesis is rather vague on the subject from what I can recall. It was not my intent to say that I agree with this line of reasoning but rather to explain it given the original poster's comment that geocentricity was not mentioned in Genesis.
I don't believe Genesis is cited as the source of the geocentric theory of the universe. It's never quite written out in black and white to my knowledge, but it'd definitely alluded to several places in the Old Testament: 1 Chronicles 16:30
Tremble before him, all the earth!
The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.
Ecclesiastes 1:5
The sun rises and the sun sets,
and hurries back to where it rises.
When dealing with religious issues, it's important to remember that what people actually believe can be quite different from what their scripture says, especially in periods of high illiteracy.
I'd wager that these researches are the type that think they're above the law, too good to sort through thousands of penis pill adverts and phony pleas to transfer thousands of dollars to anonymous, foreign bank accounts. They definitely had a chip on their collective shoulder.
I'm sure everyone at some point is surprised of tabbed completion.
Don't forget ctl+a to get to the beginning of a line, too. Why I wasn't taught both of those things on the first day of my first UNIX class I will never understand.
The words in question begin with the letters "F" and "S." The Associated Press typically does not use them.
"The reason these words shock is because of their association with a literal meaning," Chief Justice John Roberts said, suggesting his support for the policy
Then why are we allowed to say copulation and feces on TV?
Indeed. The literal meaning of "rape" is a million times worse than the literal meaning of "fuck," and yet we unfortunately hear the former quite often during news broadcasts.
Slashdot Mirror
It's true! At my school (University of Arizona) CS consistently either has the lowest or second lowest female enrollment of any major (we're in a competition with Optical Engineering it seems). My roommate is a Math major and he actually *met* his current girlfriend through a student teaching position (they were both TAs). Women are doing better in Math specifically, but in other "mathy" fields (CS, Engineering, etc) they are still really underrepresented. Not that it's the job of the University to find me a date who will listen to me prattle on about the editor wars or anything :p
"Oh. I forgot to carry the one."
It's unlikely too many people would want to just ride the train and not need a car on the other end.
While I agree with the general sentiment of this statement, I think the number of people not needing a car at the other end would be greater than one would initially think. Take people going to Sky Harbor (the airport in Phoenix), for example. Tucson does have its own airport but it's generally cheaper to fly out of Phoenix. I once flew from Tucson to Salt Lake City. The first thing we did? Fly to Phoenix and switch planes. When we got to Phoenix we all joked about how we probably could have driven to Phoenix and gotten there faster, since we wouldn't have had to deal with airport security, etc.
My point is, a lot of travelers (including, for example, out of state college students, of which there are many in Tucson because of U of A) would jump at the chance to take a reasonably-priced 30 minute train ride to the airport. Even in-state students like me would find it handy for occasions where you have to run home for the weekend but really don't need your car.
Arizona cities are generally pretty heinous examples of urban sprawl, but we're getting better about it. For example, Phoenix just got a light rail system back in December. If I could take this train to a station within walking distance of the light rail, I could go all the way from Tucson to about 15 minutes away from my parent's house without a car. Not bad, eh?
If I remember correctly, the Hot Coffee mod allowed your character in GTA3 to have sex with prostitutes, which is a completely different thing than raping a woman. That's why I disagree with the assumption that our aversion to rape in entertainment has something to do with our culture being prudish/puritanical/etc. For this to be true, it would seem to also follow that societies with a more liberal view of human sexuality (like in Europe, for example) would also have a more lax view on rape in entertainment. However, I seriously doubt that a German or a Swede would somehow be more relaxed about playing a video game with rape involved than an American.
Rape is a particularly heinous crime because, unlike murder, once the act has been perpetrated the victim's suffering has only just begun. And unlike killing someone, it's never morally justified. There's nothing a woman could do to somehow justify a person raping her. If someone attacks you with a deadly weapon, however, you're well within acceptable moral and legal boundaries to kill that person. We're less averse to violence in games and entertainment because we can take "baby steps" with justifiable violence. Start with "Call of Duty," then move on to GTA and then once you get to Manhunt it doesn't seem all that bad. Hell, even in Manhunt you're only killing people because you're essentially being forced to.
Don't get me wrong; American moral sensibilities about sex are fucked up, no pun intended. For some strange reason, when we go to see a movie about a guy in a mask stabbing people in the woods, nudity and sex are almost expected but when we go to see a love story, anything but the most white-washed sex scene will offend the audience. It's like the time I watched "Amelie" with my mom. She freaked out that a movie about two people falling in love might actually have some sexual content in it. But rape will always be taboo, as it should be. From what I gather, this isn't an exploration into the tortured psyche of a rapist (like a book or movie on the subject might be), but rather a rape simulator of sorts. Therefore, people are justified in their concern that folks would want to play such a game. Of course the developer has a right to publish the game, just as consumers have the right to boycott and criticize it.
(sorry for the rambling post, kind of out of it today)
I'm not surprised by this given that an incredibly similar thing happened back in February with Germany's new Economics and Technology minister. Then again, there's something that stings much more about a phoney quotation showing up in an obituary rather than an extra name being added to a person.
Indeed. If there are no buttons, what will I have to mash?
There's gotta be a sexting joke in there somewhere...
Richard Stallman! Seriously, he'd be the best man for the job.
He was asked and declined due to being too busy because of his commitments as Copyleft Czar.
Definitely. As has been pointed out before, if a corporation were a person, it would most likely be a sociopath
I hate to sound like a broken record, but there is no copyrighted material on pirate bay. The site contains torrent trackers, not the files themselves. If Pirate Bay were just a giant server full of pirated mp3s and movies, it would have been taken down a long time ago. Hence the drug dealer analogy doesn't work at all, since maintaining a site about *where to get drugs* isn't illegal.
are malware-laden Windows boxes at small businesses with little or no regular IT Staff. I did contract IT work for small business a while back and some of the computers I had to deal with were borderline unusable. In some cases, a full reboot meant a full 15 minutes before the computer was in some semblance of working order again. That's definitely enough time to make a less savvy user want to just leave the thing on overnight and only shutdown/reboot when you really had to. And of course many of these folks didn't want to hear about how their super-awesome toolbars were the root of the problem.
Oh god, nooooo, it's being moded over 9,000!!!!!
Everybody is talking about violent video game control. Got to control the violent video games. Fuck, that, I like violent video games. No, I think we need some knife control. I think every knife should cost five thousand pounds. Five thousand pounds for a knife. Know why? Cos if a knife cost five thousand pounds, there'd be no more innocent by-standers. That'd be it. Some guy'd be stabbed you'd be all 'Damn, he must've done something, that other guy put 5,000 pounds into stabbing his ass!' And people'd think before they stabbed someone 'Man I would cut your fucking head off, if I could afford it. I'm gonna get me a second job, start saving up, and you a dead man. You'd better hope I don't get no knives on lay-away!'
I think the point she's making is that they're on rather dubious "moral" grounds here. You don't want any evil gay gamers to pollute the impressionable minds of "teh childrenz"; just leave them in peace so they can blow each other up and scream some of the most foul obscenities possible into their headsets.
Seriously, have you heard the kind of things people say on XBOX live? Most of those comments would get your ass beat if you said them in any major metropolitan area/bar/public park. Hell, some of the user names would do the trick, too! Racial slurs, derogatory comments towards women, plain old four letter words, etc.
The point being, if you are so impressionable and vulnerable that the mere mention that someone might be gay would somehow "damage" you, you should stay the hell off of xbox live, lest you start dropping n-bombs and f-bombs at work/school/church.
And Emacs is a plugin for what?
Woah, woah, let's not get into Metaphysics here ;-)
I had to remove this off of my uncle's computer over Thanksgiving. I thought I had succeeded but then I heard Howie Mandel's disembodied voice shilling for buy.com, a clear signal that some more work needed to be done. It's a tenacious little sucker; I ended up downloading Malwarebytes and having to rename the install file. I guess it recognized it and was blocking it.
That's why Eric Raymond et. al. coined the term "Open Source" back in '96 or thereabouts: because most people presume that "free" means "free as in beer," and get suspicious. But the name "open source" has its own problems, namely RMS railed against it because it doesn't address the idea of freedom.
I think we should call it "freedomware" but my idea doesn't seem to have caught on. ;-)
While I can understand your reasoning in calling it "freedomware," something about the name makes it sound like an alternate term for something that was originally called "frenchware." :p
That's preposterous. The Windows API wasn't even written until...oh, the *other* wine...
I'm curious, how often do you read a piece of poetry and assume that the author was making a scientific statement? In the absence of scientific absence, it is understandable that people might read more into a statement than they should, as has happened, but there is no requirement for poetry to be interpreted literally, so while it might be accurate to say that these statements were taken to mean geocentric thinking was correct, it is not accurate to say that they actually endorse such thinking or even have the subject in mind.
(emphasis added)
I'm sorry if you misunderstood my post, but I wasn't trying to say anything about my beliefs but rather how people in the past attempted to justify the idea that the earth was the center of the universe by citing the bible.
it is not accurate to say that they actually endorse such thinking or even have the subject in mind.
Which was why I ended my original post with:
When dealing with religious issues, it's important to remember that what people actually believe can be quite different from what their scripture says, especially in periods of high illiteracy.
Back in the day when people had questions about the nature of the universe, they turned to the Bible. The Bible was considered the final authority on *all* matters, even ones that weren't particularly related to anything said in the book, an attitude that is dangerously carried into the present by people declaring that "all the answers" are in the Bible.
So when someone asked "What is the structure of the universe?" they frantically tore through the Bible looking for any clues related to how God created the Universe since Genesis is rather vague on the subject from what I can recall. It was not my intent to say that I agree with this line of reasoning but rather to explain it given the original poster's comment that geocentricity was not mentioned in Genesis.
1 Chronicles 16:30
Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.
Ecclesiastes 1:5
The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.
When dealing with religious issues, it's important to remember that what people actually believe can be quite different from what their scripture says, especially in periods of high illiteracy.
I'd wager that these researches are the type that think they're above the law, too good to sort through thousands of penis pill adverts and phony pleas to transfer thousands of dollars to anonymous, foreign bank accounts. They definitely had a chip on their collective shoulder.
I'm sure everyone at some point is surprised of tabbed completion.
Don't forget ctl+a to get to the beginning of a line, too. Why I wasn't taught both of those things on the first day of my first UNIX class I will never understand.
The words in question begin with the letters "F" and "S." The Associated Press typically does not use them. "The reason these words shock is because of their association with a literal meaning," Chief Justice John Roberts said, suggesting his support for the policy
Then why are we allowed to say copulation and feces on TV?
Indeed. The literal meaning of "rape" is a million times worse than the literal meaning of "fuck," and yet we unfortunately hear the former quite often during news broadcasts.
It checks to see if you have an internet connection.
There's only one man in the whole of England powerful enough to save this kid from the clutches of the evil Scientologist thugs. I think we all know who I'm talking about...