Maybe if Communism actually worked I'd consider doing something like this.
Here here! If we all do this wifi communism, we're going to get wifi glasnost and then we'll get...
Sorry, runaway remembering of history got in the way of critical thinking for a moment. Now that that's out of the way, what the hell are you talking about? Communism? What does that have to do with open routers? You're not going to have economic stagnation as a result of routers being open. You're not going to have corruption as a result of routers being open. You're not going to have human rights violations as a result of routers being open.
you need labs and facilities costing tens of millions of dollars, upgraded every few years. At my school (UC Santa Cruz, Literature major) we read 300 year old books outside when the professor thought the day was nice enough. Why should I pay the same $40,000 to subsidize the hugely expensive and resource-intensive programs for engineers who are gonna make ten times what I make in my life?
Because a lot of prestige the school and thereby the degree has is from the sciences. Because you chose to go to a $40k school and should direct your complaints to yourself rather than the school you voluntarily went to. Because when you get cancer, it's not going to be research from the lit department that cures you.
I doubt anyone is going to switch from one of the harder majors to a 'soft' liberal arts program for basically any amount of money
I don't think you have any evidence for that. I was a biology major, several of my friends in STEM fields struggled initially, and considered switching, but stuck with it and are doing well. Had there been a financial incentive, they may have switched, and you'd have increased competition for the position of postal subcontractor rather than, say, doing research (for less than you're earning, I might add).
As somebody who has no college-age children I can tell you I don't want higher taxes so that I can subsidize the education of somebody whose parents had 10 kids.
But would you rather have your taxes spent on that then what they're being spent on now? I'd rather have the government fund the 10 kids (who presumably didn't decide their parents should have more kids than they could support) than Afghanistan or Iraq. There's a chance when I'm 60, one of those kids could be a really good doctor that I'd use, whereas I'm less likely see any benefit from blowing shit up overseas.
Look at A there and tell me how not allowing me (a 30 year old) to legally acquire something like Mortal Kombat or Left for Dead 2 [refused-cl...cation.com] is abiding by their own guidelines.
Well, it's the government, so they say they won't do something, that means they'll continue to say they're not doing it as they do it. I vaguely recall some Australian government official arguing that adults don't want the games based on the fact that they're not buying them, so the censorship would be consistent with A. Not addressed was the issue of "How would they buy them since they're not sold legally?" I might be imaging that...
If it makes you feel any better, that's small potatoes as far as government hypocrisy goes. I mean, north Korea has "Democratic" in the name of the country. Dear leader must actually be superhuman if his pants don't catch on fire every time he says that.
Sony cut corners -- some executive decided NOT to invest in proper security measures
Then sue the executives.
You realize that Sony's _ENTIRE_ gaming division operates at a NET LOSS, right?
Gee, how did I miss that in school?
Sony makes its money in the FINANCIAL SECTOR and subsidizes its gaming business. This lawsuit (even if it's in the billions) will NOT bring Sony down. So some research about the background of the company, before posting BS like this again... Thanks.
I'm not sure how "Sony's gaming division loses money all the time" translates into "Sony's gaming division losing billions more than usual cannot possibly harm the rest of sony."
By the way, relax a little. Why are you that upset about someone being ignorant of the intricacies of Sony's corporate structure?
Don't want to lose money as an investor? Sell you shares for this shitty corporation.
Don't want to lose your job? Don't work for corporate douche-bags with shitty ethics.
Shit's simple, huh?;)
I'd say simplistic, not simple. What does the guy putting together headphones know whether or not the PSN security guys are hashing the passwords? I don't really understand it, and I'm here. With a corporation even a tenth of the size of sony, it's unlikely that every employee and investor to know what liabilities every other employee is or is not opening the company up to and thereby risking their jobs.
It's not like these guys were working for "Child molesting inc," the ethic violations here, if any, were not so obvious that "they should have known better."
We can't keep allowing these huge corporations to do whatever they want at our expense. Then using the excuse of "investors and employees" as a reason to turn a blind eye to this kind of things.
I'm not suggesting anything like that. Holding the executives liable is the one and only way to effectively regulate this. They're the individuals who made the relevant decisions, they're the ones who need to be held accountable for those bad decisions. The executives who let this happen are the ones who should be sued.
I'd hate to see that, as the investors would lose, the employees would lose, and the global economy would lose. Sony's huge. Most of their employees and investors did nothing to deserve this. Isn't gaming only a small part of sony?
I dislike that sony has been allowed to grow that big and powerful, but killing it in the courts would be terrible for everyone but the lawyers.
I think violent gaming and acting out gangster lifestyle's promote warmer fuzzier feelings towards those moral wastelands.
I think that religion more often promotes warm, fuzzy feelings for morally bankrupt actions. I also think that you're basing your ideas on very little concrete evidence.
I have on occasion lamented that I did not get involved with online gaming. Well maybe it was for the best. As we know the gaming where you run around killing and maiming and destroying promotes good character.
I detect sarcasm. And you're right: violent games does not "promote good character." Much like any entertainment and/or religion don't make you a good person, GTA will not make you a good person. Won't make you a bad person either, obviously, but it's true that violent games cannot take the place of good parenting and/or morality.
I know we hate sony for the rootkit thing and for taking away other OS (I mean, it was LINUX!) but that's absurd. Removing other OS justifies at most a boycott, not theft, especially not stealing from CUSTOMERS, not sony.
All we need is about a quadrillion of them for a brain.
Who wants to make brains out of these? I'm guessing not the researchers, since we can already make brains the natural way, and there's little advantage that I could see to making one synthetically.
I dread to think of all the unintended consequences resulting from this nonsense.
So instead you skipped right to the most absurd... borg. Skipped right over accidental contamination of workers and the environment, cancer, poisoning... took for granted that AI will be invented right around the corner... assumed sentient androids hellbent on the destruction of the human race was next.
Amazing how many luddites and technophobes are cruising around on slashdot. I'm assuming they're trying to get to Amish slashdot, using stone and straw computer boxes, because, you know, skynet.
Most computers built within the past 5 years can run it and you can get one of those off Craigsist for LESS than the cost of the PS3.
Again, most of my gamer friends have 5 year old -laptops- which somehow seem to not count as computers in the eyes of most PC gamers. And again, cheaper than the cost of a PS3 doesn't matter to the gamers OP was talking to, their PS3s are already paid for. If you could get a computer that could run portal 2 for zero dollars, then yes, it would make sense for them.
You and I have different impressions of console fanboys then. I see console fanboys as generally being unconcerned with PC gamers. Consolers mainly seem to justify sony/ms/nintendo's every action and attack the "other" consoles. Furthermore, PC gamers are more vocal. I can't remember the last time I saw a PS3 or XBOX fan predicting the demise of PC gaming. PC fanboys conversely take every opportunity to preach their religion. Gaming article on slashdot? Two things are assured: 1. PC fanboy telling everyone they should throw away their consoles 2. Discussion of DRM.
Lastly, there's something much more arrogant about suggesting that -everyone- should do things exactly as they do (which is what PC fanboys like Dan667 are doing) than there is about making false predictions about the PC gaming industry (console fanboys).
Portal 2 doesn't require hundreds of dollar to run.
That depends entirely on what hardware you have already. Plenty of people have laptops that are more than 5 years old, and that work fine for anything besides gaming. Out of my gamer friends, only one has a computer capable of running portal 2.
I'm interested in this. Not interested enough to watch a 50 minute segment on it. Is there a transcript somewhere?
If this is about open vs closed access journals
1. The situation is rapidly improving. While it's not where it needs to be, in the last few years we've seen a lot more journals providing open access.
2. The practice has been going on quite a while and we have yet to see science die. I don't think it can possibly be "killing" science. Limiting its potential, sure, but there's no way pay-for-access is having nearly as much effect as cutting funding for basic research.
I understand that the slashdot community might be anxious to see the PSN come back up, but do we seriously have to start publishing nothing more substantial than speculation?
When it's that interesting, when there's not much other information to go on, when it's explicitly marked as speculation/hypothesis without any pretense that it's more authoritative than that, AND when the speculation is over something as inconsequential as a videogame network, I don't see any harm.
-It is exactly the type of story that we would be interested in, moreso if and when it becomes more than speculation.
-Sony is basically encouraging speculation by keeping tight-lipped about it.
-Doesn't degrade slashdot's credibility, since it was marked as speculation and this is slashdot...
-Unlike speculation about, say, the situation with the Fukushima reactor in Japan, publishing speculation is never going to create a dangerous situation
One gets the impression that at the PhD level people might be researching things that are, well, useless. Nobody knows what it is, nobody knows what it's for... and other than an exhaustive analysis of the difference between the masturbation techniques of left handed invertebrates vs right hand ones
...there are invertebrates with hands? And they pleasure themselves? I'm sorry, how is that not important? If bugs, which dramatically outnumber us, have developed hands, and they're masturbating, THAT MAY BE THE ONLY THING KEEPING THEM FROM DESTROYING US!
Hell, we need to be researching invertebrate television, invertebrate heroin, and invertebrate religion.
If by "take advantage of all of them" you mean something like "pay them a living wage" then you are correct, we can not do that. There are simply too many.
Take all that money we're spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, pour it into the sciences. Every PhD's bank account would be happy. Good chance we'd beat some cancers and or AIDS. At least until the tea partiers start burning scientists at the stake.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe if Communism actually worked I'd consider doing something like this.
Here here! If we all do this wifi communism, we're going to get wifi glasnost and then we'll get...
Sorry, runaway remembering of history got in the way of critical thinking for a moment. Now that that's out of the way, what the hell are you talking about? Communism? What does that have to do with open routers? You're not going to have economic stagnation as a result of routers being open. You're not going to have corruption as a result of routers being open. You're not going to have human rights violations as a result of routers being open.
you need labs and facilities costing tens of millions of dollars, upgraded every few years. At my school (UC Santa Cruz, Literature major) we read 300 year old books outside when the professor thought the day was nice enough. Why should I pay the same $40,000 to subsidize the hugely expensive and resource-intensive programs for engineers who are gonna make ten times what I make in my life?
Because a lot of prestige the school and thereby the degree has is from the sciences. Because you chose to go to a $40k school and should direct your complaints to yourself rather than the school you voluntarily went to. Because when you get cancer, it's not going to be research from the lit department that cures you.
I doubt anyone is going to switch from one of the harder majors to a 'soft' liberal arts program for basically any amount of money
I don't think you have any evidence for that. I was a biology major, several of my friends in STEM fields struggled initially, and considered switching, but stuck with it and are doing well. Had there been a financial incentive, they may have switched, and you'd have increased competition for the position of postal subcontractor rather than, say, doing research (for less than you're earning, I might add).
As somebody who has no college-age children I can tell you I don't want higher taxes so that I can subsidize the education of somebody whose parents had 10 kids.
But would you rather have your taxes spent on that then what they're being spent on now? I'd rather have the government fund the 10 kids (who presumably didn't decide their parents should have more kids than they could support) than Afghanistan or Iraq. There's a chance when I'm 60, one of those kids could be a really good doctor that I'd use, whereas I'm less likely see any benefit from blowing shit up overseas.
I get the feeling this will eventually be mainly "Raise the tuition for STEM faster" rather than "Make other majors cheaper."
Look at A there and tell me how not allowing me (a 30 year old) to legally acquire something like Mortal Kombat or Left for Dead 2 [refused-cl...cation.com] is abiding by their own guidelines.
Well, it's the government, so they say they won't do something, that means they'll continue to say they're not doing it as they do it. I vaguely recall some Australian government official arguing that adults don't want the games based on the fact that they're not buying them, so the censorship would be consistent with A. Not addressed was the issue of "How would they buy them since they're not sold legally?" I might be imaging that...
If it makes you feel any better, that's small potatoes as far as government hypocrisy goes. I mean, north Korea has "Democratic" in the name of the country. Dear leader must actually be superhuman if his pants don't catch on fire every time he says that.
Sony cut corners -- some executive decided NOT to invest in proper security measures
Then sue the executives.
You realize that Sony's _ENTIRE_ gaming division operates at a NET LOSS, right?
Gee, how did I miss that in school?
Sony makes its money in the FINANCIAL SECTOR and subsidizes its gaming business. This lawsuit (even if it's in the billions) will NOT bring Sony down. So some research about the background of the company, before posting BS like this again... Thanks.
I'm not sure how "Sony's gaming division loses money all the time" translates into "Sony's gaming division losing billions more than usual cannot possibly harm the rest of sony."
By the way, relax a little. Why are you that upset about someone being ignorant of the intricacies of Sony's corporate structure?
Don't want to lose money as an investor? Sell you shares for this shitty corporation. Don't want to lose your job? Don't work for corporate douche-bags with shitty ethics. Shit's simple, huh? ;)
I'd say simplistic, not simple. What does the guy putting together headphones know whether or not the PSN security guys are hashing the passwords? I don't really understand it, and I'm here. With a corporation even a tenth of the size of sony, it's unlikely that every employee and investor to know what liabilities every other employee is or is not opening the company up to and thereby risking their jobs.
It's not like these guys were working for "Child molesting inc," the ethic violations here, if any, were not so obvious that "they should have known better."
We can't keep allowing these huge corporations to do whatever they want at our expense. Then using the excuse of "investors and employees" as a reason to turn a blind eye to this kind of things.
I'm not suggesting anything like that. Holding the executives liable is the one and only way to effectively regulate this. They're the individuals who made the relevant decisions, they're the ones who need to be held accountable for those bad decisions. The executives who let this happen are the ones who should be sued.
I'd hate to see that, as the investors would lose, the employees would lose, and the global economy would lose. Sony's huge. Most of their employees and investors did nothing to deserve this. Isn't gaming only a small part of sony?
I dislike that sony has been allowed to grow that big and powerful, but killing it in the courts would be terrible for everyone but the lawyers.
I think violent gaming and acting out gangster lifestyle's promote warmer fuzzier feelings towards those moral wastelands.
I think that religion more often promotes warm, fuzzy feelings for morally bankrupt actions. I also think that you're basing your ideas on very little concrete evidence.
I have on occasion lamented that I did not get involved with online gaming. Well maybe it was for the best. As we know the gaming where you run around killing and maiming and destroying promotes good character.
I detect sarcasm. And you're right: violent games does not "promote good character." Much like any entertainment and/or religion don't make you a good person, GTA will not make you a good person. Won't make you a bad person either, obviously, but it's true that violent games cannot take the place of good parenting and/or morality.
I didn't understand that about orbits, modules, or fuel, and I am ambivalent about the moon or mars, but I like -something- about your post.
I know we hate sony for the rootkit thing and for taking away other OS (I mean, it was LINUX!) but that's absurd. Removing other OS justifies at most a boycott, not theft, especially not stealing from CUSTOMERS, not sony.
All we need is about a quadrillion of them for a brain.
Who wants to make brains out of these? I'm guessing not the researchers, since we can already make brains the natural way, and there's little advantage that I could see to making one synthetically.
I dread to think of all the unintended consequences resulting from this nonsense.
So instead you skipped right to the most absurd... borg. Skipped right over accidental contamination of workers and the environment, cancer, poisoning... took for granted that AI will be invented right around the corner... assumed sentient androids hellbent on the destruction of the human race was next.
Amazing how many luddites and technophobes are cruising around on slashdot. I'm assuming they're trying to get to Amish slashdot, using stone and straw computer boxes, because, you know, skynet.
Am I bitter? YES I AM!
I'm curious as to why, and what you think degraded life sciences that much.
Most computers built within the past 5 years can run it and you can get one of those off Craigsist for LESS than the cost of the PS3.
Again, most of my gamer friends have 5 year old -laptops- which somehow seem to not count as computers in the eyes of most PC gamers. And again, cheaper than the cost of a PS3 doesn't matter to the gamers OP was talking to, their PS3s are already paid for. If you could get a computer that could run portal 2 for zero dollars, then yes, it would make sense for them.
And that's why it was a stupid suggestion.
You and I have different impressions of console fanboys then. I see console fanboys as generally being unconcerned with PC gamers. Consolers mainly seem to justify sony/ms/nintendo's every action and attack the "other" consoles. Furthermore, PC gamers are more vocal. I can't remember the last time I saw a PS3 or XBOX fan predicting the demise of PC gaming. PC fanboys conversely take every opportunity to preach their religion. Gaming article on slashdot? Two things are assured: 1. PC fanboy telling everyone they should throw away their consoles 2. Discussion of DRM.
Lastly, there's something much more arrogant about suggesting that -everyone- should do things exactly as they do (which is what PC fanboys like Dan667 are doing) than there is about making false predictions about the PC gaming industry (console fanboys).
Portal 2 doesn't require hundreds of dollar to run.
That depends entirely on what hardware you have already. Plenty of people have laptops that are more than 5 years old, and that work fine for anything besides gaming. Out of my gamer friends, only one has a computer capable of running portal 2.
I'm interested in this. Not interested enough to watch a 50 minute segment on it. Is there a transcript somewhere?
If this is about open vs closed access journals
1. The situation is rapidly improving. While it's not where it needs to be, in the last few years we've seen a lot more journals providing open access.
2. The practice has been going on quite a while and we have yet to see science die. I don't think it can possibly be "killing" science. Limiting its potential, sure, but there's no way pay-for-access is having nearly as much effect as cutting funding for basic research.
Spend hundreds of dollars at least to get a gaming PC, ignore the sunken cost of their PS3s, all to play portal 2 a few days sooner?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: PC fanboys really are the worst.
Disclaimer: I am a PC gamer, and do not have a PS3.
Senators and Representatives going after Apple, now Sony, aren't there other goddamned things they should be working on?
Than writing a letter? We're not talking about a $5 million investigation.
I understand that the slashdot community might be anxious to see the PSN come back up, but do we seriously have to start publishing nothing more substantial than speculation?
When it's that interesting, when there's not much other information to go on, when it's explicitly marked as speculation/hypothesis without any pretense that it's more authoritative than that, AND when the speculation is over something as inconsequential as a videogame network, I don't see any harm.
-It is exactly the type of story that we would be interested in, moreso if and when it becomes more than speculation.
-Sony is basically encouraging speculation by keeping tight-lipped about it.
-Doesn't degrade slashdot's credibility, since it was marked as speculation and this is slashdot...
-Unlike speculation about, say, the situation with the Fukushima reactor in Japan, publishing speculation is never going to create a dangerous situation
I see nothing wrong here.
Maybe you think those ideas in the sciences grow on trees?
They definitely do... at least in plant biology...
One gets the impression that at the PhD level people might be researching things that are, well, useless. Nobody knows what it is, nobody knows what it's for ... and other than an exhaustive analysis of the difference between the masturbation techniques of left handed invertebrates vs right hand ones
...there are invertebrates with hands? And they pleasure themselves? I'm sorry, how is that not important? If bugs, which dramatically outnumber us, have developed hands, and they're masturbating, THAT MAY BE THE ONLY THING KEEPING THEM FROM DESTROYING US!
Hell, we need to be researching invertebrate television, invertebrate heroin, and invertebrate religion.
If by "take advantage of all of them" you mean something like "pay them a living wage" then you are correct, we can not do that. There are simply too many.
Take all that money we're spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, pour it into the sciences. Every PhD's bank account would be happy. Good chance we'd beat some cancers and or AIDS. At least until the tea partiers start burning scientists at the stake.