From the Chinese govt's viewpoint, the US govt failed to squash anti-Chinese govt sentiments, therefore it is responsible for those sentiments. It's how they operate and how they expect the rest of the world to work as well.
To really engage them, you have to be able to understand the other side's point of view. Contrary to what some conservatives would say (esp regarding terrorism), understanding someone's motivation is not the same as agreeing with them.
I should have said that you can call them and get anything helpful that the forums can provide. I'm pretty sure that if you call them they won't tell you, "LOLZOMG UR GEER SUX! L2P NUB! UR CLASS IZ GAAAAAAY!"
No - you can call them and get anything the forums can provide. Sometimes it's faster to go to the forums, but usually that's in terms of searching for a fix for a known issue - no name-revealing required.
Read again. I'm not saying everyone should use their real names all the time. The course of action i'm advocating is choosing based on the individual forum and its terms whether or not you want to participate. In that sense, i am already leading by example.
To clarify: I'm not even saying i think that reversing the plan was the wrong move. I just don't like the way the opposition to this was painting it as people being "forced" to reveal their real names. It's one game forum among many - using it is neither required nor a god-given right.
I do think there's too much anonymity and too little accountability on the internet today. I'm not convinced that game forums are deserving of this level of protection.
False analogies conflating public and private speech aside, in this case, the citizens of Azeroth moving to another country looks a lot like typing a different address in the web browser, not uprooting your whole life.
At any rate, people do use immigration as an alternative to living under a repressive regime all the time.
Why does everyone dismiss the choice of NOT participating in Blizzard's forums as a way to protect your privacy and security. Plenty of people have made that same choice with regards to Facebook.
So many people seem to think that free speech means being free to walk into someone else's living room and call them a cocksucker without having to fear getting punched in the face.
PVRs also kind of legitimize the stance for cable as you can use those to skip ads.
That's a little like saying the prevalence of file-sharing legitimizes the RIAA/MPAA's stance.
My ability to use technology to subvert their programming does not legitimize their business model. On the contrary, it points out to a fundamental disconnect between what consumers want and what they provide.
Perhaps, in a painfully literal sense, but claiming that your desire to seek an adrenaline high is just as valid as their desire to do research that will save lives is high asshattery.
You just gave me a great idea: my new fashion design house is going to be named "Roulette"
Only the brashest, most outré young fashionistas will be wearing my stuff because it is designed to disintegrate at some random point, 4-24 hours after being put on. All eyes and cameras are guaranteed to be on the starlet wearing a Roulette dress on the red carpet!
Re:Fantasy Island (Lost spin-off)
on
Lost Ends
·
· Score: 1
I'm glad i'm not the only one who imagined this when Ben started talking about finding new ways to do things on the island.
You're right - they don't care now, but that's still the thing that's going to keep the product from evolving into the kind of ubiquitous machine that the PC has become.
The PC was revolutionary. This is just a toy. It's a fancy portal to AppleWorld. AppleWorld might be a nice place to visit, but people don't really want to live there.
That's true and it makes perfect sense if they're turning these into 5-year positions because they won't need IT people 5 years from now. Anyone think that's likely?
This is an end run around unions during a time when unions are at their weakest bargaining position. Whether or not your political perspective sees that as a good or bad move, the only question that needs to be asked is "Is this a necessary step given the current fiscal climate?" Perhaps it is, but it's also another step in the ongoing "race to the bottom."
It's not that they think no one wants them. It's that they know that not enough people want them for it to be profitable. You and your wife and the (relative) handful of other people who consist of the audience for Linux games aren't a significant market.
Hell, the PS3 and the Wii don't even make the cut in Valve's book.
I suspect that researchers on both sides of the fence would tell you that "violent" is not a binary state.
It's not a matter of flipping a switch from nonviolent to violent. If all your genetics and upbringing have resulted in a fairly nonviolent person, Mortal Kombat isn't going to turn you into a mass murderer.
On the other hand it's really pretty ridiculous to say that games have no effect whatsoever. Down that path lies the complete devaluation of all art and entertainment as a path to learning.
The real question is how much of an effect they have, and that's why people should keep an open mind when looking at these studies instead of dismissing them out of hand while at the same time, remaining skeptical of the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" alarmists.
It has actually been almost even, and aside from one Mr. Crankypants reply, i'm reasonably sure that both the "Insightful" and "Flamebait" mods i have received here are almost entirely based on the meat of the post and not the aside at the end. That is to say, i believe what i wrote to be both true and flamebait to the knee-jerk reaction of the typical slashdotter. In summation: the comment moderation system works!
(Though i liked the Crankypants so much that i made the aside my new sig.;)
How do AC flame replies that ignore the point of a post and focus only on one small irrelevant aside fit into your overall vision of comment moderation?
I'm not going to address the study, but i think a lot of the people here on Slashdot should take a look at their own gut reactions to this sort of thing, especially those of you who flame the research before rtfa'ing.
Slashdot readers are to videogame violence as Fox News viewers are to global warming.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah yes, i believe Malcolm X put it best when he said, "It's either a ballot or a raygun."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric
From the Chinese govt's viewpoint, the US govt failed to squash anti-Chinese govt sentiments, therefore it is responsible for those sentiments. It's how they operate and how they expect the rest of the world to work as well.
To really engage them, you have to be able to understand the other side's point of view. Contrary to what some conservatives would say (esp regarding terrorism), understanding someone's motivation is not the same as agreeing with them.
I should have said that you can call them and get anything helpful that the forums can provide. I'm pretty sure that if you call them they won't tell you, "LOLZOMG UR GEER SUX! L2P NUB! UR CLASS IZ GAAAAAAY!"
No - you can call them and get anything the forums can provide. Sometimes it's faster to go to the forums, but usually that's in terms of searching for a fix for a known issue - no name-revealing required.
Read again. I'm not saying everyone should use their real names all the time. The course of action i'm advocating is choosing based on the individual forum and its terms whether or not you want to participate. In that sense, i am already leading by example.
To clarify: I'm not even saying i think that reversing the plan was the wrong move. I just don't like the way the opposition to this was painting it as people being "forced" to reveal their real names. It's one game forum among many - using it is neither required nor a god-given right.
I do think there's too much anonymity and too little accountability on the internet today. I'm not convinced that game forums are deserving of this level of protection.
False analogies conflating public and private speech aside, in this case, the citizens of Azeroth moving to another country looks a lot like typing a different address in the web browser, not uprooting your whole life.
At any rate, people do use immigration as an alternative to living under a repressive regime all the time.
Security concerns are very real, but that's an argument for increased personal vigilance, not for universal anonymity.
Slippery Slope Fallacy has rarely been more clearly demonstrated. Thanks.
Why does everyone dismiss the choice of NOT participating in Blizzard's forums as a way to protect your privacy and security. Plenty of people have made that same choice with regards to Facebook.
So many people seem to think that free speech means being free to walk into someone else's living room and call them a cocksucker without having to fear getting punched in the face.
PVRs also kind of legitimize the stance for cable as you can use those to skip ads.
That's a little like saying the prevalence of file-sharing legitimizes the RIAA/MPAA's stance.
My ability to use technology to subvert their programming does not legitimize their business model. On the contrary, it points out to a fundamental disconnect between what consumers want and what they provide.
Perhaps, in a painfully literal sense, but claiming that your desire to seek an adrenaline high is just as valid as their desire to do research that will save lives is high asshattery.
View the presentation - they explain this. The reason they only care about trademarks is that they don't qualify for copyrights.
Moderators who do not RTFA are to /. as an orderly with unwashed hands is to an ER.
You just gave me a great idea: my new fashion design house is going to be named "Roulette"
Only the brashest, most outré young fashionistas will be wearing my stuff because it is designed to disintegrate at some random point, 4-24 hours after being put on. All eyes and cameras are guaranteed to be on the starlet wearing a Roulette dress on the red carpet!
I'm glad i'm not the only one who imagined this when Ben started talking about finding new ways to do things on the island.
You're right - they don't care now, but that's still the thing that's going to keep the product from evolving into the kind of ubiquitous machine that the PC has become.
The PC was revolutionary. This is just a toy. It's a fancy portal to AppleWorld. AppleWorld might be a nice place to visit, but people don't really want to live there.
And what is it that makes this a device instead of a computer?
The iron grip Apple holds on it.
Loosen that grip and you could have a truly revolutionary product. As-is, it's only revolutionary in their own PR. And also magical. Super magical.
Who was disappointed not to see Colm Meaney? Yeah, me too.
That's true and it makes perfect sense if they're turning these into 5-year positions because they won't need IT people 5 years from now. Anyone think that's likely?
This is an end run around unions during a time when unions are at their weakest bargaining position. Whether or not your political perspective sees that as a good or bad move, the only question that needs to be asked is "Is this a necessary step given the current fiscal climate?" Perhaps it is, but it's also another step in the ongoing "race to the bottom."
Graduation requirement: StudentScore of 4500+ and a minimum of 20 achievements from each class in your major.
It's not that they think no one wants them. It's that they know that not enough people want them for it to be profitable. You and your wife and the (relative) handful of other people who consist of the audience for Linux games aren't a significant market.
Hell, the PS3 and the Wii don't even make the cut in Valve's book.
I suspect that researchers on both sides of the fence would tell you that "violent" is not a binary state.
It's not a matter of flipping a switch from nonviolent to violent. If all your genetics and upbringing have resulted in a fairly nonviolent person, Mortal Kombat isn't going to turn you into a mass murderer.
On the other hand it's really pretty ridiculous to say that games have no effect whatsoever. Down that path lies the complete devaluation of all art and entertainment as a path to learning.
The real question is how much of an effect they have, and that's why people should keep an open mind when looking at these studies instead of dismissing them out of hand while at the same time, remaining skeptical of the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" alarmists.
It has actually been almost even, and aside from one Mr. Crankypants reply, i'm reasonably sure that both the "Insightful" and "Flamebait" mods i have received here are almost entirely based on the meat of the post and not the aside at the end. That is to say, i believe what i wrote to be both true and flamebait to the knee-jerk reaction of the typical slashdotter. In summation: the comment moderation system works!
(Though i liked the Crankypants so much that i made the aside my new sig. ;)
How do AC flame replies that ignore the point of a post and focus only on one small irrelevant aside fit into your overall vision of comment moderation?
I'm not going to address the study, but i think a lot of the people here on Slashdot should take a look at their own gut reactions to this sort of thing, especially those of you who flame the research before rtfa'ing.
Slashdot readers are to videogame violence as Fox News viewers are to global warming.
Mod away - i have karma to burn.