I really don't see it being useful in film and television either. Guess what? Stereotypes are influenced by the -real world- that is, for every ethnic stereotype out there there have been multiple people to create it and many other people to keep it alive. In most games, the setting is mostly homogeneous, that is it takes place in one main setting that has a distinctive race. However, the people who want to see diversity in games end up failing because they don't want to see any of their race die. So you set a game in Africa with zombies, no problem right? Oh wait, you can't portray black people as zombies that you can kill without being "racist". And guess what? In most countries in Africa people are generally -gasp- African. So that means you can't set the game in Africa without being "racist". The same game wouldn't have been considered "racist" if you were shooting up a European village with all white people.
It is pointless to find "racism" in games, film, television, radio, or any other media. Stereotypes exist because of how people generally act, it is a generalization. Most of the time, they end up being pretty right.
There are a few things for one, guess who buys the most video games? White (or Asian for Asian games) males. Unsurprisingly, most video games feature them. I'm a lot more likely to pick up a game featuring someone like me. I honestly have no desire to play a random fantasy game as a black person, I'd rather play it as a white person because I'm white. Then there is the fact that you simply can't show minorities being killed. For some reason a game that depicts white people being beheaded is ok, while the same game with the person being beheaded as black would be deemed "racist". For some strange reason if black people are depicted as "bad" that becomes "stereotypical".
Because Japan is pretty much ethnically homogeneous. Everyone is basically, well, Japanese. And Japanese people are in general of whiter complexion than that of other nations (Chinese people are more yellow than white for an example). So while they may look Caucasian to us, it looks Asian-ish to them.
So? Either they are happy with mediocrity or they fail and take the course again either way. Either they learn time management and do well or they don't and they fail.
But there are loads of written fiction masquerading as truth. That I wouldn't call fraud. Just look at The Da Vinci Code, which despite loads of inaccuracies Dan Brown claims is at least mostly true.
But would it really make a difference? In the days before cell phones people would either write notes or at the very least think about the conversation, playing it out in their head. No one is ever 100% focused in school, especially in the classes that they don't want.
Its only fraud if he had people give money (such as, help me build a new wi-fi proof house because I have this condition) simply blogging about fictional events is not fraud.
Sure, but if they do have the resources, theres no point in penalizing them from using it. Similar to if I have a personal book on the February revolution, I shouldn't be excluded from using it on the report, even though other students might not be able to get it.
Also, not all kids who have technology are brilliant students who are only going to use it for research or other related activities. I knew this one kid who brought his laptop into school and would be playing World of Warcraft during class. Do you think every single kid packing a powerful cell phone is appropriately using that power for anything more important than texting their friends? No way! With a cell phone like that, I could SSH into my home network, I could easily research things while on the go, etc. Other students think their only purpose is a glorified gaming machine and texting machine.
Sure, but again, it should teach you time management. If you can play WoW, do homework and listen to the teacher, good for you. In the real world, there are many people who are contracted to do a single task, if they can do it while watching TV, playing a game, etc. and the people who paid them were happy. It doesn't matter. In school its approximately the same thing, you are "contracted" to write a paper, if you feel like playing some Flash games while doing it, go ahead. If you can right an A level paper, it doesn't matter.
But if a student can pass the class while playing video games and texting everyday, they shouldn't be penalized for it. Similarly, if I was contracted for making a webpage and I did it in 10 minutes in Kompozer exactly how they wanted it, and the person who contracted me approved of it, it wouldn't have mattered if during that time I was playing WoW on a different monitor.
But everyone has something to contribute if they have at least a passing interest. Sometimes, the least skilled member of a group has the most valuable insight, many times, a simple solution is all it requires.
My growing up had always been about reason, as has most of my (well at least the enjoyable) part of my employment. If my parents set something unreasonable, it was my right and responsibility to tell them about it and persuade them otherwise. There were very few things that were "banned" and most of them were either illegal or contrary to biblical principles (and really, that wasn't a big deal, I was a nerd back in HS and I guess I still am as I'm on/.) they never tried to censor anything I was reading, listening to, watched on TV (well, they probably wouldn't have been happy if I started reading Playboy in front of them, but anything else was ok) or tried to micro-manage my life. So I suppose I managed to grow up relatively enlightened.
Here are a few flaws. For one the school system desperately needs reforming, they seem to be stuck in the 1950s or so. Cell phones, research and collaboration are a huge part of the real world. Cell phone use should be -encouraged- as they encourage collaboration. Use useful methods of assessing skills, critical thinking is perhaps the most important skill.
And really, you also fail to see that in an emergency such as a shooting, the chances of mass survival is greater if every student has a cell phone and can use it to call authorities.
But could they be called? Lets say a student randomly collapsed? I would call that as a requirement to call an emergency worker who might need to call any number of people for a number of reasons.
Exactly. I was taught "computers" by a business major in high school who didn't know a thing about programming computers. I took every single computers class offered (well, aside from remedial computers and keyboarding II because I already had about a 70 WPM typing speed) and the most advanced thing I learned was basic HTML (as in, I use more complex formatting to format this/. post than I learned in that class) that was obsolete when I was being taught it, let alone today.
Their sysadmin (if you can call them that) called me several times during my high school years for tech advice. In short, I had a shocking experience in college where some students actually learned programming, and I was way behind. In short, small to medium sized schools don't hire techs.
Exactly, teachers claim they are a "distraction" however most of the distraction came, not surprisingly, from the teacher. A cell phone goes off because its not on silent, it takes 2 seconds to turn the volume down and stick it back in your pocket, on the other hand when the teacher has to confiscate it and make a big deal, it takes a whole lot longer.
Really, they should be -encouraging- the use of cell phones because that is how the real world is. It is pointless to have more "get a sheet of questions and answer them" because the real world isn't like that. The real world uses collaboration and research. Teachers need to use more critical thinking, things that will help in the -real world-, something that school is supposed to prepare you for.
I think the main problem is really the fact that the school is not designed for the 21st century. Students should be -encouraged- to collaborate because the real world is built on collaboration and research. Memorization ends up being part of it when you research the same thing. Think of programming, even if you use a reference book, eventually you start to memorize it to the point where you hardly need to look in the book. Really, the school system needs reformed, more critical thinking, less multiple choice or single-answer questions, because like it or not that isn't the real world. You aren't locked in a dark room with no internet, no reference materials, no collaboration and being handed a sheet of questions. That isn't how it works. Schools should not be teaching the way they are, teach in a way that allows collaboration because that is how the real world works.
How about actually -allowing- them and designing the curriculum around them? There are some things you can't fit in a text message, essays, critical thinking, etc. And those are the real skills that will actually matter. Similarly, in the real world, you do have access to the internet and any and all reference materials. The school system seems to be designed for 1950s level technology and advancement. Not 2009 which we live in. Collaboration, research and technology are a real part of the world. Contrary to popular belief in most jobs you don't get locked alone in a completely silent environment without internet, phones, etc. to do your job.
Some get money for putting crapware on their systems. However, the one thing I hate more are the annoying OEM branded programs. Ok, sure, I want a CD burner that can burn ISOs, however I don't want a TOSHIBA (R) DISK BURNER, even though its a decent disk burning program, I hate OEM branded stuff, I buy a computer, I'm smart enough to know theres very little difference between this Toshiba and a similarly equipped Compaq. The OEM branded wallpapers also annoy me, yes, I know what computer I bought. It says so everywhere on the machine, it doesn't matter. I don't need OEM wallpapers.
But, that is what happens when you get a system designed by a marketing department...
Good thing this doesn't come on the cheap models, I bought a cheap-as dirt ($300 new, not a netbook) Toshiba laptop that is a L305-S5955 and thankfully it doesn't have this "feature" but I feel like I dodged a bullet with this one.
There are actually a lot of Linux games, especially for the Gp2x. While most development is naturally focused into making emulators, there are a few other games. And Windows ported to ARM wouldn't really be any better than Linux for games.
The point was it shouldn't have been flagged. The second point being is that even if it was flagged its trivial to look through a book then pass it on. Anything longer than the government taking half an hour shouldn't have happened.
Because it is really that hard to look in a box, take a book, flip through it, realize its all paper and say "yep its clear". That doesn't take 8 days, 8 minutes perhaps, not 8 days.
But still, saying that is like saying you were in your house minding your own business when the police burst down the door with no warning only to say "whoops" and being glad they didn't break the glass. Yes, that is good, but honestly it should have never happened in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't see it being useful in film and television either. Guess what? Stereotypes are influenced by the -real world- that is, for every ethnic stereotype out there there have been multiple people to create it and many other people to keep it alive. In most games, the setting is mostly homogeneous, that is it takes place in one main setting that has a distinctive race. However, the people who want to see diversity in games end up failing because they don't want to see any of their race die. So you set a game in Africa with zombies, no problem right? Oh wait, you can't portray black people as zombies that you can kill without being "racist". And guess what? In most countries in Africa people are generally -gasp- African. So that means you can't set the game in Africa without being "racist". The same game wouldn't have been considered "racist" if you were shooting up a European village with all white people.
It is pointless to find "racism" in games, film, television, radio, or any other media. Stereotypes exist because of how people generally act, it is a generalization. Most of the time, they end up being pretty right.
They tried to put Canadian NPCs in games, but the playtesters were annoyed by having to hear "Eh" at the end of every sentence.
There are a few things for one, guess who buys the most video games? White (or Asian for Asian games) males. Unsurprisingly, most video games feature them. I'm a lot more likely to pick up a game featuring someone like me. I honestly have no desire to play a random fantasy game as a black person, I'd rather play it as a white person because I'm white. Then there is the fact that you simply can't show minorities being killed. For some reason a game that depicts white people being beheaded is ok, while the same game with the person being beheaded as black would be deemed "racist". For some strange reason if black people are depicted as "bad" that becomes "stereotypical".
Because Japan is pretty much ethnically homogeneous. Everyone is basically, well, Japanese. And Japanese people are in general of whiter complexion than that of other nations (Chinese people are more yellow than white for an example). So while they may look Caucasian to us, it looks Asian-ish to them.
So? Either they are happy with mediocrity or they fail and take the course again either way. Either they learn time management and do well or they don't and they fail.
But there are loads of written fiction masquerading as truth. That I wouldn't call fraud. Just look at The Da Vinci Code, which despite loads of inaccuracies Dan Brown claims is at least mostly true.
But would it really make a difference? In the days before cell phones people would either write notes or at the very least think about the conversation, playing it out in their head. No one is ever 100% focused in school, especially in the classes that they don't want.
Its only fraud if he had people give money (such as, help me build a new wi-fi proof house because I have this condition) simply blogging about fictional events is not fraud.
Also, not all kids who have technology are brilliant students who are only going to use it for research or other related activities. I knew this one kid who brought his laptop into school and would be playing World of Warcraft during class. Do you think every single kid packing a powerful cell phone is appropriately using that power for anything more important than texting their friends? No way! With a cell phone like that, I could SSH into my home network, I could easily research things while on the go, etc. Other students think their only purpose is a glorified gaming machine and texting machine.
Sure, but again, it should teach you time management. If you can play WoW, do homework and listen to the teacher, good for you. In the real world, there are many people who are contracted to do a single task, if they can do it while watching TV, playing a game, etc. and the people who paid them were happy. It doesn't matter. In school its approximately the same thing, you are "contracted" to write a paper, if you feel like playing some Flash games while doing it, go ahead. If you can right an A level paper, it doesn't matter.
But if a student can pass the class while playing video games and texting everyday, they shouldn't be penalized for it. Similarly, if I was contracted for making a webpage and I did it in 10 minutes in Kompozer exactly how they wanted it, and the person who contracted me approved of it, it wouldn't have mattered if during that time I was playing WoW on a different monitor.
But everyone has something to contribute if they have at least a passing interest. Sometimes, the least skilled member of a group has the most valuable insight, many times, a simple solution is all it requires.
My growing up had always been about reason, as has most of my (well at least the enjoyable) part of my employment. If my parents set something unreasonable, it was my right and responsibility to tell them about it and persuade them otherwise. There were very few things that were "banned" and most of them were either illegal or contrary to biblical principles (and really, that wasn't a big deal, I was a nerd back in HS and I guess I still am as I'm on /.) they never tried to censor anything I was reading, listening to, watched on TV (well, they probably wouldn't have been happy if I started reading Playboy in front of them, but anything else was ok) or tried to micro-manage my life. So I suppose I managed to grow up relatively enlightened.
Here are a few flaws. For one the school system desperately needs reforming, they seem to be stuck in the 1950s or so. Cell phones, research and collaboration are a huge part of the real world. Cell phone use should be -encouraged- as they encourage collaboration. Use useful methods of assessing skills, critical thinking is perhaps the most important skill.
And really, you also fail to see that in an emergency such as a shooting, the chances of mass survival is greater if every student has a cell phone and can use it to call authorities.
But could they be called? Lets say a student randomly collapsed? I would call that as a requirement to call an emergency worker who might need to call any number of people for a number of reasons.
Exactly. I was taught "computers" by a business major in high school who didn't know a thing about programming computers. I took every single computers class offered (well, aside from remedial computers and keyboarding II because I already had about a 70 WPM typing speed) and the most advanced thing I learned was basic HTML (as in, I use more complex formatting to format this /. post than I learned in that class) that was obsolete when I was being taught it, let alone today.
Their sysadmin (if you can call them that) called me several times during my high school years for tech advice. In short, I had a shocking experience in college where some students actually learned programming, and I was way behind. In short, small to medium sized schools don't hire techs.
Exactly, teachers claim they are a "distraction" however most of the distraction came, not surprisingly, from the teacher. A cell phone goes off because its not on silent, it takes 2 seconds to turn the volume down and stick it back in your pocket, on the other hand when the teacher has to confiscate it and make a big deal, it takes a whole lot longer.
Really, they should be -encouraging- the use of cell phones because that is how the real world is. It is pointless to have more "get a sheet of questions and answer them" because the real world isn't like that. The real world uses collaboration and research. Teachers need to use more critical thinking, things that will help in the -real world-, something that school is supposed to prepare you for.
I think the main problem is really the fact that the school is not designed for the 21st century. Students should be -encouraged- to collaborate because the real world is built on collaboration and research. Memorization ends up being part of it when you research the same thing. Think of programming, even if you use a reference book, eventually you start to memorize it to the point where you hardly need to look in the book. Really, the school system needs reformed, more critical thinking, less multiple choice or single-answer questions, because like it or not that isn't the real world. You aren't locked in a dark room with no internet, no reference materials, no collaboration and being handed a sheet of questions. That isn't how it works. Schools should not be teaching the way they are, teach in a way that allows collaboration because that is how the real world works.
How about actually -allowing- them and designing the curriculum around them? There are some things you can't fit in a text message, essays, critical thinking, etc. And those are the real skills that will actually matter. Similarly, in the real world, you do have access to the internet and any and all reference materials. The school system seems to be designed for 1950s level technology and advancement. Not 2009 which we live in. Collaboration, research and technology are a real part of the world. Contrary to popular belief in most jobs you don't get locked alone in a completely silent environment without internet, phones, etc. to do your job.
My Modern British Literature high school class had it as required reading.
Some get money for putting crapware on their systems. However, the one thing I hate more are the annoying OEM branded programs. Ok, sure, I want a CD burner that can burn ISOs, however I don't want a TOSHIBA (R) DISK BURNER, even though its a decent disk burning program, I hate OEM branded stuff, I buy a computer, I'm smart enough to know theres very little difference between this Toshiba and a similarly equipped Compaq. The OEM branded wallpapers also annoy me, yes, I know what computer I bought. It says so everywhere on the machine, it doesn't matter. I don't need OEM wallpapers.
But, that is what happens when you get a system designed by a marketing department...
Good thing this doesn't come on the cheap models, I bought a cheap-as dirt ($300 new, not a netbook) Toshiba laptop that is a L305-S5955 and thankfully it doesn't have this "feature" but I feel like I dodged a bullet with this one.
There are actually a lot of Linux games, especially for the Gp2x. While most development is naturally focused into making emulators, there are a few other games. And Windows ported to ARM wouldn't really be any better than Linux for games.
The point was it shouldn't have been flagged. The second point being is that even if it was flagged its trivial to look through a book then pass it on. Anything longer than the government taking half an hour shouldn't have happened.
Because it is really that hard to look in a box, take a book, flip through it, realize its all paper and say "yep its clear". That doesn't take 8 days, 8 minutes perhaps, not 8 days.
But still, saying that is like saying you were in your house minding your own business when the police burst down the door with no warning only to say "whoops" and being glad they didn't break the glass. Yes, that is good, but honestly it should have never happened in the first place.