I would suspect it has to do with the fact that they want to play nice with the current holders of the copyrights, so if they need help they can at least ask. If they look like they are going to hand out any of the information to the public, the companies who have had a nostalgia revolution with the latest gen consoles through online distribution are going think they are going to lose some profit.
The bill is about spending money on important industries to kick start the economy. Senator Feinstein is proposing giving ISPs money to put in filtering technologies. Seems like they could still swing this one on single purpose... They are politicians and even take that away most of them are lawyers, do you really think they couldn't weasel out of single purpose limitations especially on bills this broad?
I do agree the finish is nicer than your average case, but I've seen full tower cases with finishes as nice run $100 cheaper than the cheap looking HTPC cases.
As opposed to someone else typed it into a book? My books are not filled completely with references to peer-reviewed papers or committee approved technical specs. And this doesn't exactly give me warm fuzzies about the integrity of publishing houses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_Nights The internet is a mixture of facts and inaccuracies, so is any published work. The only difference is now you don't have to be rich to make your mixture of facts and inaccuracies heard.
Research is both about weeding out the important stuff from the unimportant stuff but weeding out true stuff from untrue stuff. Banning wikipedia or failing someone for a refence to it is just pointless. Wikipedia is good for a starting point for research, a representation of what the general public thinks about a topic(factual accuracy being unimportant in that case), and a good exercise in critical thinking (Does it make sense? Can I find other sources that back up what I found? What do the edits/discussions say about the information presented? Why is that important to the topic?).
Once upon a time when news outlets reported on news, they needed to protect some of their sources because some of the information could result in retribution on the source. To get sources to open up they promised confidentiality where appropriate and as time went on this became the culture: The news has source authority based on the assumption they are practicing good journalism. As information has recently accelerated, there is less time for good journalism and instead we have good-enough journalism but they still maintain a front of source authority.
FWIW the second is changing, not because the old school gamers are changing but because the medium has become good enough to attract mainstream fans. You have an increase in casual games, a recent introduction of rhythm games to the mainstream, and graphics that can easily compete with animated (and sometimes non-animated) television. This has spread the love to lots of other people. I say gaming is almost to the point that it is mainstream. In a few years all this videogame regulation stuff will disappear into the background noise.
To the GP: Baseball, Football, Basketball, Hockey, and Soccer players are also just grown ups playing kids games for money, but they carry a legitimacy that Chess Masters do not. There is more to the issue than the "fact" that videogames are for kids. Game developers will always carry some of that anti-intellectual stigma, but I think that as games come into the mainstream like sports have but Chess hasn't then game developers will go into the cool nerd category.
So the obvious answer is take the money from all the people and use it to undermine what 86% of the people who contributed believe and 54% strongly believe, to appease the experts of a single field (albiet very important). Good luck with getting that through even in a dictatorship.
What would happen if the History teachers demanded that all students give up movies and instead read? Certainly the historical inaccuracies of film undermines the facts taught in history class, but most would see that as an absurd and out-of-line movement. And that example is just entertainment, you are talking about undermining core beliefs.
As important as Science is to you and me, it is one of many fields of studies to most people and holds no more sway than that. I'm not talking about compromising science but working individually with students that are snarled with a mental block so that they can come the closest to understanding that they can. Just like a teacher should be doing with any student that has any sort of trouble comprehending the material. Maybe some day they will thoroughly apply reason to their entire lives, or at least compartmentalize things enough to make significant contributions to science despite their partial lack of reason.
Yes but the telcos/cablecos have no interest in Net Neutrality, providing you with better service for the same price, providing you with a better price for the same service, or letting real competition into their feifdoms.
Why does it have to be one or the other? Can't teachers just teach facts and processes and deal gingerly with conflicts of any kind? We expect them to deal gingerly with suspected parental abuse, but they can't try and work out with a student at least well enough for the student to understand why the scientific community thinks some way? At least not with any tolerance to what kind of conflict internally or externally that might cause for the student? This my way or the highway mentality of both sides is what irritates me.
It looks like it is lowered down the cliff by a larger robot with a winch. That isn't really all that exciting, even if it can unhook itself at the bottom of the cliff, do a mission, find the rope again, and reattach itself.
Why can't we deliver equivalent weapon systems from the ground, sea, air? Those have been well used in past conflicts. Is there some special benefit to having a weapons platform in space other than the fact we can pass it through enemy territory without a diplomatic incident? There has to be some major benefit that offsets the cost of launching and maintaining something that is extremely remote. I get surveilence satellites but not weapons platforms.
Wait. I thought that I read that the delay measure did not include extra money for converter coupons and that is "supposed" to be part of the stimulus ball-o-pork that is being bounced around congress. Did I misunderstand?
but the article I read this morning attributed the size to a warmer period of time in Earth's history. It said we would have to worry about this type of thing if global warming continued except for the fact that we have destroyed the natural habitat for giant snakes. I'm not sure whether to cheer for ecological catastrophy or not...
Insanely stupid in that... how many Colorado Springs residents own a batleth anyway?
Well sword collecting tends to be popular among low income people. Bat'leths tend to show up in the cheap sword booths at Renaissance fairs and flea markets. They also look very exotic. You probably would be surprised at the number of replicas in people's collections, even people who don't have a clue it has anything to do with a nerdy hobby.
If you're sub average and insist on being in the industry then face it that you're only going to be employed 50% of the time.
That would only be true if the industry had twice as many IT employees as it did positions. I have yet to hear of any major IT company laying off half its employees or too many IT companies go under. If the odds were 50% to get hired then you would see alot of the sub-average IT folks switching careers or not choosing it to begin with, shifting the odds more in favor of the sub-average people remaining.
For those who have recently lost a job, it isn't about skill: it is about the bottom line. It may be that you were great but making more money than your coworkers(tallest blade of grass, first to get cut). It may be that your project was not financially important to the company(maybe not canceled but deprioritized). It may be that your coworkers skillsets would be easier to realign(less training costs). It may be that they can pay a team in India or Poland to do what you were doing on your own for the same price. You will hit similar things while you are searching for a new job. As someone whose performance reviews have always been stellar among many managers but whose job searches have always taken many months, I hope you all find a good fit in a timely fashion without strain on your families.
This statement includes the implicit assumption that it's OK to be subjected to prudish sexual mores. (and if you don't think they can be legitimately offensive, you're wrong -- I know people offended by women who dress in burkhas and such)
So the people you know would be offended by any non-sexually suggestive clothing or just clothing that is tied to a culture that currently suppresses womens' rights?
If the first, are these people women? If you know women, then what are you doing posting here? (sorry couldn't resist)
If the second, I know people who would be offended at sexually suggestive clothing who would also be offended at women in burkhas and such. This would suggest that the issue is reasonably separate from the freedom of sexual morality, whether you want to lump them together or not.
Slashdot Mirror
The word memes looks alot like herpes. I've learned alot from this article, like not to skim the slashdot headlines.
I would suspect it has to do with the fact that they want to play nice with the current holders of the copyrights, so if they need help they can at least ask. If they look like they are going to hand out any of the information to the public, the companies who have had a nostalgia revolution with the latest gen consoles through online distribution are going think they are going to lose some profit.
Just surround the airport with wind power sites and the problem is solved...
The bill is about spending money on important industries to kick start the economy. Senator Feinstein is proposing giving ISPs money to put in filtering technologies. Seems like they could still swing this one on single purpose... They are politicians and even take that away most of them are lawyers, do you really think they couldn't weasel out of single purpose limitations especially on bills this broad?
Good luck getting that passed in California.
I for one welcomed our new Democratic overlords, but now I'm not so sure...
I do agree the finish is nicer than your average case, but I've seen full tower cases with finishes as nice run $100 cheaper than the cheap looking HTPC cases.
HTPC cases are expensive because they can be.
As opposed to someone else typed it into a book? My books are not filled completely with references to peer-reviewed papers or committee approved technical specs. And this doesn't exactly give me warm fuzzies about the integrity of publishing houses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_Nights The internet is a mixture of facts and inaccuracies, so is any published work. The only difference is now you don't have to be rich to make your mixture of facts and inaccuracies heard.
Research is both about weeding out the important stuff from the unimportant stuff but weeding out true stuff from untrue stuff. Banning wikipedia or failing someone for a refence to it is just pointless. Wikipedia is good for a starting point for research, a representation of what the general public thinks about a topic(factual accuracy being unimportant in that case), and a good exercise in critical thinking (Does it make sense? Can I find other sources that back up what I found? What do the edits/discussions say about the information presented? Why is that important to the topic?).
Once upon a time when news outlets reported on news, they needed to protect some of their sources because some of the information could result in retribution on the source. To get sources to open up they promised confidentiality where appropriate and as time went on this became the culture: The news has source authority based on the assumption they are practicing good journalism. As information has recently accelerated, there is less time for good journalism and instead we have good-enough journalism but they still maintain a front of source authority.
FWIW the second is changing, not because the old school gamers are changing but because the medium has become good enough to attract mainstream fans. You have an increase in casual games, a recent introduction of rhythm games to the mainstream, and graphics that can easily compete with animated (and sometimes non-animated) television. This has spread the love to lots of other people. I say gaming is almost to the point that it is mainstream. In a few years all this videogame regulation stuff will disappear into the background noise.
To the GP: Baseball, Football, Basketball, Hockey, and Soccer players are also just grown ups playing kids games for money, but they carry a legitimacy that Chess Masters do not. There is more to the issue than the "fact" that videogames are for kids. Game developers will always carry some of that anti-intellectual stigma, but I think that as games come into the mainstream like sports have but Chess hasn't then game developers will go into the cool nerd category.
So the obvious answer is take the money from all the people and use it to undermine what 86% of the people who contributed believe and 54% strongly believe, to appease the experts of a single field (albiet very important). Good luck with getting that through even in a dictatorship.
What would happen if the History teachers demanded that all students give up movies and instead read? Certainly the historical inaccuracies of film undermines the facts taught in history class, but most would see that as an absurd and out-of-line movement. And that example is just entertainment, you are talking about undermining core beliefs.
As important as Science is to you and me, it is one of many fields of studies to most people and holds no more sway than that. I'm not talking about compromising science but working individually with students that are snarled with a mental block so that they can come the closest to understanding that they can. Just like a teacher should be doing with any student that has any sort of trouble comprehending the material. Maybe some day they will thoroughly apply reason to their entire lives, or at least compartmentalize things enough to make significant contributions to science despite their partial lack of reason.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1690/Religion.aspx
Yes but the telcos/cablecos have no interest in Net Neutrality, providing you with better service for the same price, providing you with a better price for the same service, or letting real competition into their feifdoms.
Why does it have to be one or the other? Can't teachers just teach facts and processes and deal gingerly with conflicts of any kind? We expect them to deal gingerly with suspected parental abuse, but they can't try and work out with a student at least well enough for the student to understand why the scientific community thinks some way? At least not with any tolerance to what kind of conflict internally or externally that might cause for the student? This my way or the highway mentality of both sides is what irritates me.
Apparently not enough to bring up Skynet...Yet.
Or you know the fact that it looks like a car axel...
It looks like it is lowered down the cliff by a larger robot with a winch. That isn't really all that exciting, even if it can unhook itself at the bottom of the cliff, do a mission, find the rope again, and reattach itself.
One more reason to waste taxpayer money at a time when many states are basing their budgets on a federal bailout...
Why can't we deliver equivalent weapon systems from the ground, sea, air? Those have been well used in past conflicts. Is there some special benefit to having a weapons platform in space other than the fact we can pass it through enemy territory without a diplomatic incident? There has to be some major benefit that offsets the cost of launching and maintaining something that is extremely remote. I get surveilence satellites but not weapons platforms.
Jack Thompson is already preparing legislation detailing the alarming connections between Videogames and Arson...
Wait. I thought that I read that the delay measure did not include extra money for converter coupons and that is "supposed" to be part of the stimulus ball-o-pork that is being bounced around congress. Did I misunderstand?
but the article I read this morning attributed the size to a warmer period of time in Earth's history. It said we would have to worry about this type of thing if global warming continued except for the fact that we have destroyed the natural habitat for giant snakes. I'm not sure whether to cheer for ecological catastrophy or not...
Insanely stupid in that... how many Colorado Springs residents own a batleth anyway?
Well sword collecting tends to be popular among low income people. Bat'leths tend to show up in the cheap sword booths at Renaissance fairs and flea markets. They also look very exotic. You probably would be surprised at the number of replicas in people's collections, even people who don't have a clue it has anything to do with a nerdy hobby.
If you're sub average and insist on being in the industry then face it that you're only going to be employed 50% of the time.
That would only be true if the industry had twice as many IT employees as it did positions. I have yet to hear of any major IT company laying off half its employees or too many IT companies go under. If the odds were 50% to get hired then you would see alot of the sub-average IT folks switching careers or not choosing it to begin with, shifting the odds more in favor of the sub-average people remaining.
For those who have recently lost a job, it isn't about skill: it is about the bottom line. It may be that you were great but making more money than your coworkers(tallest blade of grass, first to get cut). It may be that your project was not financially important to the company(maybe not canceled but deprioritized). It may be that your coworkers skillsets would be easier to realign(less training costs). It may be that they can pay a team in India or Poland to do what you were doing on your own for the same price. You will hit similar things while you are searching for a new job. As someone whose performance reviews have always been stellar among many managers but whose job searches have always taken many months, I hope you all find a good fit in a timely fashion without strain on your families.
This statement includes the implicit assumption that it's OK to be subjected to prudish sexual mores. (and if you don't think they can be legitimately offensive, you're wrong -- I know people offended by women who dress in burkhas and such)
So the people you know would be offended by any non-sexually suggestive clothing or just clothing that is tied to a culture that currently suppresses womens' rights?
If the first, are these people women? If you know women, then what are you doing posting here? (sorry couldn't resist)
If the second, I know people who would be offended at sexually suggestive clothing who would also be offended at women in burkhas and such. This would suggest that the issue is reasonably separate from the freedom of sexual morality, whether you want to lump them together or not.