I had guessed that there might some sort of naturalness connection; however, I had been afraid to say it because making the connection makes pro-homosexual arguments even less successful.
It's not an absolute connection; however, valuable things could still be drawn from it while still recognizing the areas where it doesn't at all work.
I long since figured that's a problem with the term "sex offender"; even with some distinctions legally drawn, it tends to lump together people with offenses with widely various degrees of seriousness.
Justified concern about the more-serious sex-related offenses somehow tends to trigger not-as-justified concerns about less-serious sex-related offenses
Witchhunts don't make sense, even if there are a few witches out there.:P
There's also the whole "improperly assessing the degree of risk" issue.
As much as I want to see guilty people get punished
Sigh; why?
I want to see them dealt with effectively, which may or may not include stiff punishments; I understand if some important nuances got lost in a quick first post. In a way, I'm saying that things like this are an example of ineffective punishment
With regards to the "13" part, I'm inclined to see it as far enough away from 18/21 to not really be the gray area you seem to imply.
In general, I'm more concerned about violent crime (cf. Carlin, "I'd rather have my son watch a video of two people making love than two people trying to kill one another.") However, some specific sex & other nonviolent crimes are more serious than some specific violent crimes.
Kudos to you, Mr. Coward. True openness shall sometimes lead to apparent "non-openness"
Seeking 'openness' for its own sake seems to me to be, ironically, just as close-minded.
It seems only logical that there's some room for both, especially if you're really looking at each individual product on its own merits. If the independent/open model inherently produced better results like it supposedly does, than that will show itself.
(I find music label discussions to be an analogue or component of these issues, as my signature refers to.)
As much as I want to see guilty people get punished, things like this that are a de facto sort of life sentence (even after release from jail) don't make sense either.
Congratulations for at least giving it a chance. I've obviously heard of its really-low critical opinion, but I wouldn't feel confident repeating that myself until I've actually tried it
To provide an audio example (as I hesitate to use the term 'music' here), Ke$ha sucks, but I'll only say that because I actually (tried to) listen to her album.
While critics are often right, and critical opinion does sometimes serve as an information-processing heuristic, I keep the following factors in mind: * there's lots of stuff that's better than the critics think (or worse than the critics think) * You're one of the sliver of people the thing appeals to and/or the critic(s) are one of the sliver of people the thing doesn't appeal to.
Looking through my music collection, I notice that there are many cases of different songs sharing a name as well. Generally, the name involved is a straightforward word or short word combination. Indeed, copyright shouldn't be that anal, and it isn't (at least not yet.:P)
A couple examples: "Mother" (John Lennon and Pink Floyd) "Move Over" (Janis Joplin and Steppenwolf)
This seems to be a relatively nuanced discussion of an IP-law related issue, at least by this site's standards.:)
In our terms, it has to do with how the level of copyright protection affects input costs for new works. There's a bit of moral creators' rights theory in this discussion. However, a lot of the discussion has to do with what policy leads to better or more-popular works; that part of the commentary also seems strictly economic, as it relates to the utility people derive from the products in question.
A lot of economic issues are, apparently, quite frankly, somewhat unclear or complicated, like the answer to the questions posed in this article. I'm not sure what answer to offer, myself, and I understand why the discussion went so back and forth.
Interesting that the discussion came about because what is arguably just an attempted defense of immature behavior.
However, the other approach to that argument seems to be valuing originality for its own sake, not for the sake of originality leading to better stuff. The latter argument makes sense, the former doesn't.
I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter. Bowie/Lennon/McCartney/Page/Plant would be a kickass songwriter credit.
However, this would be more likely to invoke charges of musical sacrilege than the Dawson/Horton/Germanotta/Khayat/Nielsen/Penhaglion mashup project I've been working on.:)
You're right, a 30-second bit of each just strung after the last would not be very artistic. I can, however, see something interesting happen if it was bits that added up to 30 seconds each being ordered in an unexpected manner.
That joke reminds me: I'm a junior now, but at various points last year (and four years prior), I pointed out that I was quite entitled to enjoy sophomoric humor.
Ah, another fan. On the advice of a cousin who's a fan, I did a bit of YouTubing, I torrented The Graduate (his 2006 album), and I was promptly hooked - this lead to me buying his other albums and going to a concert once he showed up locally. That sounds pretty much like the process Slashdotters often describe when discussing BitTorrent, and it actually happened in my case. Lars speaks of this phenomenon himself, with "Download this Song": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBkuiChImb8
(You can't really beat Mario Paint - should have checked the lyrics and typed 'playing' there.)
Relatively oldschool, but had some simple-but-interesting instrumental themes. Even so, I turned its sound effects off and let my media player do its usual thing.
I've had some of that stuff, since it's easier to find than the Mexican imports. (Makes sense, since I'm on the northern border and not the southern.) It's perfectly alright, maybe a bit better, but I haven't noticed any huge earth-shattering taste differences. I'm not the kind to get hyperbolic about the supposed health risks of HFCS; neither that nor cane sugar seem like the world's best ideas.:)
People tend to 'know' that military jobs have a lot of suck attached to them (the VA issues you mentioned, the famously abusive training, etc.) Hence, people do seem to be avoiding them to an extent.
Sure, IT work sucks in a different way, maybe not "as bad", so I understand how some people might dislike b4upoo's comparison. "Military life sucks _more_" seems like a nonsequitur
Maybe people need to be made similarly aware of the pitfalls of IT work, and they'd start to avoid it, as people do in b4upoo's other example.
Thing is, many still remain. Military work is highly respected (at least in some circles) - is that a saving grace for those grunts, or does that attitude somehow make things even worse for them? Likewise, is upping public respect for IT the answer to *those* problems?
I don't care for soccer either, but even so, I'd be likely to go for something besides insightful: "funny", maybe "informative" if I was feeling devious.
I like American football, but I like watching it in DVR-playback form. (The 30-second commercial-skip button also works very well for the dead time in between plays.) Some sports, ioncludign soccer, basketball and hockey, don't really have that kind of discrete/separate plays, so they can't benefit from DVRing the way American football can.
Though, about nothing is going to make the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Lions or Rams entertaining this season.:P
I live in Rochester, and especially early in the season, it seems like some people have forgotten how to drive in those conditions.
And then there are the people who do notice, but overcompensate by driving too slow/too cautiously. I suppose that's better than the alternative, but still...
Hank (to a "hardcore" christian rock band): "Can't you see you're not making christianity any better, you're just making rock 'n roll worse".
I figure the general concepts discussed with regards to music would carry over well to video games or other creative endeavors. Also, many of the things said about religious messages in art could also apply to nonreligious messages.
Okay, you have an artist who wants to deliver a message. The message could fuel an especially good piece of art, or it could overpower the art in question.
A bad artist isn't going to become good just because they are delivering a message, kind of like how a bad comedian isn't going to become funny just because he's obscene. However, in continuation of that comment, good comedians working dirty can be quite funny, just like how a good artist can be successful when delivering a message.
While there are definite pitfalls, I don't see this as an an *inherently* bad idea.
I've found myself appreciating some pieces of art even if I don't care for the message, since they're, in general, well-done. That would be one mark of success for a religious video game or some other "message" thing. Whether it's successful in getting people to care about the message, that's an issue that I don't want to get into.
What I think about the message these Christian types are pushing for, that's *another* issue I don't want to get into right now.
And this is nothing against artworks that are, in the words of Seinfeld, "a [show|song|movie] about nothing." Or maybe not being overtly about something sometimes mean it is about something else.:P
Yeah, that's why I went to college and got a useful degree. Living in the middle of farm country with no education isn't exactly a place to get picky about wages.
Hit nail on head. I recall that when I was working in the back room of my university's major dining hall, I said several times something to the extent of "One big reason I'm going to college is so I don't have to do crap like this forever".
I must say though, it's humbling (and otherwise instructive/valuable) to do that kind of work for any noticeable amount of time, even if you don't go full time with it. (I was there for 25 weeks, 10 hrs each, $7/hr [approximately])
Slashdot Mirror
I had guessed that there might some sort of naturalness connection; however, I had been afraid to say it because making the connection makes pro-homosexual arguments even less successful.
It's not an absolute connection; however, valuable things could still be drawn from it while still recognizing the areas where it doesn't at all work.
Assuming 'ms13' refers to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mara_Salvatrucha
I long since figured that's a problem with the term "sex offender"; even with some distinctions legally drawn, it tends to lump together people with offenses with widely various degrees of seriousness.
Justified concern about the more-serious sex-related offenses somehow tends to trigger not-as-justified concerns about less-serious sex-related offenses
Witchhunts don't make sense, even if there are a few witches out there. :P
There's also the whole "improperly assessing the degree of risk" issue.
As much as I want to see guilty people get punished
Sigh; why?
I want to see them dealt with effectively, which may or may not include stiff punishments; I understand if some important nuances got lost in a quick first post.
In a way, I'm saying that things like this are an example of ineffective punishment
With regards to the "13" part, I'm inclined to see it as far enough away from 18/21 to not really be the gray area you seem to imply.
In general, I'm more concerned about violent crime (cf. Carlin, "I'd rather have my son watch a video of two people making love than two people trying to kill one another.")
However, some specific sex & other nonviolent crimes are more serious than some specific violent crimes.
Real-world gray areas stink. :(
Kudos to you, Mr. Coward.
True openness shall sometimes lead to apparent "non-openness"
Seeking 'openness' for its own sake seems to me to be, ironically, just as close-minded.
It seems only logical that there's some room for both, especially if you're really looking at each individual product on its own merits.
If the independent/open model inherently produced better results like it supposedly does, than that will show itself.
(I find music label discussions to be an analogue or component of these issues, as my signature refers to.)
As much as I want to see guilty people get punished, things like this that are a de facto sort of life sentence (even after release from jail) don't make sense either.
assuming he *is* guilty, he knows about "stiff punishments"... :P
Congratulations for at least giving it a chance.
I've obviously heard of its really-low critical opinion, but I wouldn't feel confident repeating that myself until I've actually tried it
To provide an audio example (as I hesitate to use the term 'music' here), Ke$ha sucks, but I'll only say that because I actually (tried to) listen to her album.
While critics are often right, and critical opinion does sometimes serve as an information-processing heuristic, I keep the following factors in mind:
* there's lots of stuff that's better than the critics think (or worse than the critics think)
* You're one of the sliver of people the thing appeals to and/or the critic(s) are one of the sliver of people the thing doesn't appeal to.
I first saw that on bash.org, with John Denver cassette tapes as the focal point of the joke.
Looking through my music collection, I notice that there are many cases of different songs sharing a name as well. :P)
Generally, the name involved is a straightforward word or short word combination.
Indeed, copyright shouldn't be that anal, and it isn't (at least not yet.
A couple examples:
"Mother" (John Lennon and Pink Floyd)
"Move Over" (Janis Joplin and Steppenwolf)
This seems to be a relatively nuanced discussion of an IP-law related issue, at least by this site's standards. :)
In our terms, it has to do with how the level of copyright protection affects input costs for new works.
There's a bit of moral creators' rights theory in this discussion.
However, a lot of the discussion has to do with what policy leads to better or more-popular works; that part of the commentary also seems strictly economic, as it relates to the utility people derive from the products in question.
A lot of economic issues are, apparently, quite frankly, somewhat unclear or complicated, like the answer to the questions posed in this article. I'm not sure what answer to offer, myself, and I understand why the discussion went so back and forth.
Interesting that the discussion came about because what is arguably just an attempted defense of immature behavior.
However, the other approach to that argument seems to be valuing originality for its own sake, not for the sake of originality leading to better stuff. The latter argument makes sense, the former doesn't.
I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Bowie/Lennon/McCartney/Page/Plant would be a kickass songwriter credit.
However, this would be more likely to invoke charges of musical sacrilege than the Dawson/Horton/Germanotta/Khayat/Nielsen/Penhaglion mashup project I've been working on. :)
You're right, a 30-second bit of each just strung after the last would not be very artistic. I can, however, see something interesting happen if it was bits that added up to 30 seconds each being ordered in an unexpected manner.
That joke reminds me: I'm a junior now, but at various points last year (and four years prior), I pointed out that I was quite entitled to enjoy sophomoric humor.
Ah, another fan.
On the advice of a cousin who's a fan, I did a bit of YouTubing, I torrented The Graduate (his 2006 album), and I was promptly hooked - this lead to me buying his other albums and going to a concert once he showed up locally.
That sounds pretty much like the process Slashdotters often describe when discussing BitTorrent, and it actually happened in my case. Lars speaks of this phenomenon himself, with "Download this Song": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBkuiChImb8
(You can't really beat Mario Paint - should have checked the lyrics and typed 'playing' there.)
Relatively oldschool, but had some simple-but-interesting instrumental themes. Even so, I turned its sound effects off and let my media player do its usual thing.
"They say Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil / I can beat Through the Fire and Flames on Expert level" ...
"Beating Mario Paint doesn't mean you have perspective."
MC Lars, Guitar Hero Hero
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7V7BaRAy0k
I've had some of that stuff, since it's easier to find than the Mexican imports. (Makes sense, since I'm on the northern border and not the southern.) :)
It's perfectly alright, maybe a bit better, but I haven't noticed any huge earth-shattering taste differences.
I'm not the kind to get hyperbolic about the supposed health risks of HFCS; neither that nor cane sugar seem like the world's best ideas.
The not-free trade part still is BS, though.
People tend to 'know' that military jobs have a lot of suck attached to them (the VA issues you mentioned, the famously abusive training, etc.) Hence, people do seem to be avoiding them to an extent.
Sure, IT work sucks in a different way, maybe not "as bad", so I understand how some people might dislike b4upoo's comparison.
"Military life sucks _more_" seems like a nonsequitur
Maybe people need to be made similarly aware of the pitfalls of IT work, and they'd start to avoid it, as people do in b4upoo's other example.
Thing is, many still remain.
Military work is highly respected (at least in some circles) - is that a saving grace for those grunts, or does that attitude somehow make things even worse for them?
Likewise, is upping public respect for IT the answer to *those* problems?
True, I'm afraid, but it sounds like the bank didn't even care enough to watch out for its *own* interests.
I don't care for soccer either, but even so, I'd be likely to go for something besides insightful: "funny", maybe "informative" if I was feeling devious.
I like American football, but I like watching it in DVR-playback form. (The 30-second commercial-skip button also works very well for the dead time in between plays.)
Some sports, ioncludign soccer, basketball and hockey, don't really have that kind of discrete/separate plays, so they can't benefit from DVRing the way American football can.
Though, about nothing is going to make the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Lions or Rams entertaining this season. :P
I live in Rochester, and especially early in the season, it seems like some people have forgotten how to drive in those conditions.
And then there are the people who do notice, but overcompensate by driving too slow/too cautiously. I suppose that's better than the alternative, but still...
(as cited here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=King+of+the+Hill)
Hank (to a "hardcore" christian rock band): "Can't you see you're not making christianity any better, you're just making rock 'n roll worse".
I figure the general concepts discussed with regards to music would carry over well to video games or other creative endeavors. Also, many of the things said about religious messages in art could also apply to nonreligious messages.
Okay, you have an artist who wants to deliver a message. The message could fuel an especially good piece of art, or it could overpower the art in question.
A bad artist isn't going to become good just because they are delivering a message, kind of like how a bad comedian isn't going to become funny just because he's obscene. However, in continuation of that comment, good comedians working dirty can be quite funny, just like how a good artist can be successful when delivering a message.
While there are definite pitfalls, I don't see this as an an *inherently* bad idea.
I've found myself appreciating some pieces of art even if I don't care for the message, since they're, in general, well-done. That would be one mark of success for a religious video game or some other "message" thing.
Whether it's successful in getting people to care about the message, that's an issue that I don't want to get into.
What I think about the message these Christian types are pushing for, that's *another* issue I don't want to get into right now.
And this is nothing against artworks that are, in the words of Seinfeld, "a [show|song|movie] about nothing." Or maybe not being overtly about something sometimes mean it is about something else. :P
Yeah, that's why I went to college and got a useful degree. Living in the middle of farm country with no education isn't exactly a place to get picky about wages.
Hit nail on head. I recall that when I was working in the back room of my university's major dining hall, I said several times something to the extent of "One big reason I'm going to college is so I don't have to do crap like this forever".
I must say though, it's humbling (and otherwise instructive/valuable) to do that kind of work for any noticeable amount of time, even if you don't go full time with it. (I was there for 25 weeks, 10 hrs each, $7/hr [approximately])