This would prove that IBM is interested in making technology for use in its embedded markets, and is willing to throw Apple and Motorola a bone every once in a while to justify their position in the AIM alliance. Nothing more.
The G4 spec allows a single G4 chip to have MULTIPLE CORES; which means, that a single processing chip can have multiple processors ON THE SAME CHIP. Why should Apple make a multiple processor machine when they can simply get a multiple core processor from Motorola and stick it on a board?
I didn't have a problem with AOL before. Time Warner merger? Heck, that just means we'll get better content (maybe), that's all. But this? AOL owning nearly every domain name? That's the last draw. When I buy a domain name, I don't want it to have ANYTHING to do with AOL. PERIOD. O.K., DOJ, STEP IN NOW!!! (I mean heck, would you want your webpage known as having anything to do with the most laggy ISP known to man? Not to mention the most offensive???)
If Microsoft opens up its APIs, that means that games using Direct X can have versions on other platforms. Formerly, if you used Direct X as your internet multiplayer API, since you had no idea how it worked, and since Direct X wasn't available on other platforms, there was no way to make compatible cross platform multiplayer for a game. Meaning a cross platform version was essentially not worth it.
Assuming that you are the kind of music person who is happy to just push the play button, you could simply hook up your computer to wireless speakers. This would work with any room in the house. If you want to select from where you are listening, however, you are probably better off with either one of these machines; either that, or a more sophisticated setup arranged from home automation components.
Sounds like it is almost a Leggo computer; you can add any crazy parts to it you want, and come out with something really nifty. Imagine having an MP3 player as thin as a credit card, or maybe an e-book. Unfortunately, nothing is said about the memory capacity though. Or maybe that's another layer altogether.
Just read that bit on mechanical profiling; Netscape should sue the company that makes Mosaic 2000 because of the adverse affects it will have on Netscape's business because of their previous Mosaic browser.
"The Humane Interface" by Jef Raskin. Excellent book. Goes into interface design of all kinds. It will be very helpful to you if you but read and understand. It expresses ideas I have always felt (and some that I genuinely understood) in a very easy to understand way. EVERYONE should use this book when designing their UIs!!!
They will probably just throw in what would have been an add on later into the crate. They probably aren't going to modify the plastic just to fit in a new piece of hardware; the development time alone on a new shaped box would be too much and too long.
I think a better idea would be to have the wizes take players who "farm" like this, beat them until they can't get up, and then have newbies PK them for experience. Now THAT is justice! Then again, if PK-ing was on, this wouldn't happen so often; people would build their characters up enough to thrash people who farm like this, camping in order to get a certain item when it appears in the game (if they wanted it that badly). What should be allowed (EverQuest may not have this functionality) is to have weapons and items that you have crafted/created yourself be sold. If you made it, it should be yours. For example, buying land and then building a castle on it to sell later should be completely allowable. You earned that land. But items that you can casually pick up, or get for defeating characters that materialize, they should not be sellable.
The company that is running this Lunar Land Rush (whether it is legal or not) does not allow you to buy specific plots of land; you can buy consecutive lots, but you cannot buy THE lots you want. They do not even have a system for keeping track of which lots are available and which are not; they just grab one lot out of one bag and stuff it in the other, and whichever is in whichever bag has been bought or sold. Furthermore, the land they have available is right next to a crater. Which means it will be in SHADOW a significant portion of the time. You better have some FINE solar generators for any land you buy up there. Also, being next to a crater precludes you building much of a starport. You already have a mountainous obstacle in the way; and since space travel will be very likely to have many kinks in its execution, you are better off buying completely planar land for that purpose. There is no deal here, there is no value here, this is only a novelty thing, and you will most likely not make any profit from it (although I would rather it were not so).
Now excuse me for being totally ignorant about the topic of Read/Write times, ESPECIALLY for this newfangled thingie (I always wanted to say that!:P), but what are the Read/Write times for this sort of thing, huh? What if they are so completely useless that it's not worth the effort? Not entirely likely (mostly playing Devil's advocate here), but seriously; what kind of Read/Write times would a thing like this have? They don't address that. It is all well and good to have lots of memory, but if you can't access it at significant speed, then what good is it? Now the thing may turn on fine, but how fast does it actually take to read some data? Probably the usual, considering the "Oohs" and "Ahs" The millitary is giving it, but I'd just like to know (because we might just need faster busses to handle it, ya know).
Can Netscape open source the interface so some people who are decent at interface design can fix this problem since Netscape isn't going to? I'm sure that some of us out here know what the hell we are doing in that regard. Someone should mail the people at Netscape "The Humane Interface" by Jef Raskin; at least then they can get a clue.
This is to continue my idea on multiple student governments and how it could be feasibly implemented. Multiple student governments should exist at one time, if only for the purposes of giving particular groups of students powerful enough voices so that other groups will have no choice but to consider them and their feelings seriously. Governments should be grade independent (if so chosen) to make this much more realistic; it adds to the possible population that can make up a new government, and it allows groups that are generally grade independent (and most groups are) to have a legitimate voice. Multiple governments (in my suggested implementation) are to be created for the purpose of maintaining justice. There will never be enough school officials to adequately deal with social problems, and even if there were, only the very trusting would believe that they were genuinely helping the student body maintain social order (even if it were true). Issues relating to money matters (fundraisers and so on and so forth) are handled by the school; each class participates in its own fundraising, and class specific events are withdrawn from class specific funds, while class independent events are withdrawn from either the overall class pool, or fairly between each class (farily being determined on the occasion). These fundraisers should be organized through the school itself, not the student governments; student governments can organize their own private funds (managed through the school), and can contribute to the class dependent pools if they choose. Each government is responsible for dealing with social conflicts within their own group; they determine their own private rules, as well as rules with outsiders participating in their government's activities; they may alternatively opt to allow the school to pass judgement. Only in particularly nasty cases will decision by the school be mandatory (these would be cases that are fairly obvious to most readers). If a person in one government thinks he will be/is being mistreated by his peers, he can seek Asylum from another government, or the school until he can adequately choose another government. Conflicts involving participants from multiple governments are determined in multiple possible ways; either by the governments involved, or with the governments choosing an independent outside party (either another government, or the school), who can add to the voting structure or decide entirely by themselves (this would be decided before any resolution would take place). Again, in particularly nasty situations, the school can override any authority the acting governments have. There are some requirements for a legitimate government to be formed. Each government must have a means of transmitting authority (as in saying "We have decided this"). They must have a means of assigning and taking back leadership. They must have a means of assigning and taking back membership. And finally, they must have some means by which to deal with outsiders. Legitimate forms of government include (and include variations on) Democracy (Who doesn't love Democracy?:P), Dictatorship/Monarchy/Hegemony/Imperial rule, and even Anarchy, properly done (I would include Socialism if I could think of a case for it). Rather than run through a Democratic example, we will run through an example of a Anarchic government. Anyone can become part of the government at any time (with an option to exclude cases where they are part of another government). Everyone in the government gets a say in how things are done. Anyone can propose any idea for discussion, debate, and to be voted on. No one can propose the same thing over and over again (to prevent fillabusters; they'd just work around it if someone was being a jerk). Any time something must be decided on, it does not pass until everyone signs a document (our means of transmitting authority). If people do not want to sign a document, they do not have to; however, at any time, everyone besides that person can vote to oust that person (this allows things to be passed which really should be, and it allows people to be forced out). If someone still wants back in after they have been cast out, and they let him in, then it must not have been too important why he didn't sign (or he just didn't want legal liability). So even Anarchy can be a suitable form of government; provided all the necessary requirements for government in this environment are met. (If this particular kind of Anarchy has a name, please let me know; otherwise, it shall forever be known as Bladetooth's Anarchy!). In this kind of environment, students will feel more powerful, and will feel that there are people on their side. And if they are alone, it will be noticed they are alone, and something will be done if necessary (let's hope the school can manage to keep ONE KID safe...). If problems between governments erupt, then the school will be able to recognize the problem more immediately than if there were problems between other kinds of groups in a traditional school. Because the groups are organized, what one group does will be more expected than otherwise; problems that would have gotten lost through the cracks are now out in the open. Schools can take advantage of this, and have less to police than before; they are thus more managable. Also, they can pay closer attention on education.
This may be a little off topic, but I think it is related; please forgive me if it is not.
People have been over-reacting on the topic of violent video games; it is understandable. They do not like seeing such violence in any form, and they are of the opinion that young children might suffer if they are exposed to it. However, witnessing violence in such mediums as video games, television, and movies is rarely such an experience that might do actual damage. Most of the time, these experiences are "all in fun", and harmless. The real dangers of exposing children to violence is when particular children do not understand life to the extent that an adult does; what you do can either cause happiness or sadness in other people, just as what they do affects you; if you feel pain because someone has harmed you, others feel pain, that is only because others feel pain when you harm them; and if you kill someone, they do not come back (or respawn or whatnot). Young children do not realize this give and take, and so often do not think about what happens around them, and merely react throughout almost all of their lives. When this happens, that a child does not truly understand what is going on around them, then yes, putting one more thing in front of them to react to could be very damaging, especially if they start to think that what goes on in the screen is one more way they can react to the world around them. Most children can usually understand that what happens in fiction and fantasy do not always equate to real life on a one to one basis, and that there are always exceptions. However, when you have been reacting your entire life, you are just looking for that one thing you can do to make the hurting stop. It is of course up to parents and teachers to show children the relationships that govern our everyday lives. People generally assume that this is picked up by everyone, but that is not always the case. Everyone will always miss some nuances of the give and take between people, and the earlier that all of these missing pieces are learned, the better off emotionally a child will be. Children who are very shy (which is quite natural) will generally have less to operate on to start with, and parents should take every opportunity to see that their child can interact with people. Of course, today's parents have an insane number of things to think about; even if they had enough free time to spend with their child on these things, they may not even realize it, and spend whittle their time away worrying about other things. Even parents who do have enough time to spend with their children will have to deal with parents who do not, and the psychological mess that results between a poorly raised child and a properly raised one. And unfortunately, we live in a society where proper parenting is sometimes impossible; death, divorce, and other disasters abound, and the child not necessarily being able to cope with these problems may have a cascade effect into other areas. Then there are parents who are so terribly developed themselves they could not possibly parent their child correctly. Let's add in the harsh environment of modern schools: We have people who have been wasting their lives working hard to get to the top of their respective heaps that inevitably collapse perhaps two or three times, depending. The transition from Elementary school to Middle School (or Junior High School), and to High School always means that you were hot, and now are not. Whether they know this or not, they try to be at the top only to make sure that they do not get hurt. A great many people do not realize the damage they do trying to become king of their respective hill, and they only do it so they can have an extra measure of safety. But it is done, and there are always the inevitable downtrodden. The damage is extensive. Everyone knows who the kings and queens of the hills are. The popular, the fashionable, the athletic; maybe the cool rogue. Everyone treats them well, because maybe if they do, they can get close enough to pull the other down and themselves up to the top; wait for the opportunity, and take advantage for your own. Never mind if the king or queen gets beheaded, the kingdom is yours now. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer, as they always say. People who are just the slightest bit different are already smashed down to the bottom; they are just leverage enough to make the climb that much easier. And they always scramble back for more, so you can always keep yourself up by putting them down. It is no wonder that people who just react and are among the downtrodden often become victims. Of course, what happens to the victims from here depends very much on themselves. Some feel so powerless that they commit suicide. Some that can actually see the vicious cycle of abuse, but are too gentle to do anyone any harm would likely to commit suicide also. Those with enough determination and skill can break free from the situation enough to make a place of their own, where the rules don't have to apply (Drama Club, Chess Club, AV Club, Industrial/Design Technology, we all had our "safe havens"). Then there are those that simply do not understand, and are merely reacting; or, they do understand, but they do not care about how they hurt because they are deluded into thinking what they do is justified, or they are even so twisted that they do not care. They are so furious with all of it that they decide they will not take it anymore. And these, without the vision to discriminate those who hurt them and those that would not, are the Columbine Kids. They are the product of society in that their pain was not justified; they are the product of their parents and teachers in that they were not taught to recognize the difference between right and wrong, and those that would and would not hurt them; and they are the product of their own ignorance, and of their own determination to see only what they find convenient (a world filled with monsters), rather than what really exists. People who have these problems play violent video games not merely because they are fun (although this does add to it, I'm sure), but because they want to see people's heads pop off, preferably the ones of their classmates, and their dictators (the Kings, Queens, and the institution through which they have no choice but to pass). If your child wants to play violent video games for this reason, you are entirely justified to utterly remove his computer priviliges until he has developed and dealt with his problems enough that he realizes that it is only a game, and that very few people (if any at all) are worthy of the fates of players in the game. Of course, you yourself are also responsible for making sure this does become reality. However, many people will play these games solely because they are fun, to relieve stress, for competitiveness, and for camaraderie. No assumptions should be made about people who play video games such as these; just as no assumption should be made about people who drive cars, such as "People who drive cars want to kill people with them!". Any such statement for either case is totally ridiculous.
If Mr. Pinkerton wants to do some good, he can start by removing the crowns from the Kings and Queens. No one person should be valued above any other without suitable reason. With no hill to stand on, they have no advantage, and thus anyone they push can push back just as hard. It is in this environment that people can truly learn to get along with one another. Meanwhile, people will seek leadership and power elsewhere; I would hope that they look to student government (I wouldn't, but it's the only thing I can think of). What I would suggest to further enhance this idea is to allow entirely separate student governments to coexist within a single school, and even a single grade (I would say that they should be independent of grade also). In this way everyone has a chosen and valid voice, and everyone feels they have sufficient power to accomplish their goals.
The code itself is communication; you can compile the code and still not be doing anything wrong; but if you decide to use the code, THEN you are doing something wrong. This doesn't bode well for Police and FBI; this means that every person on the planet has a right to have potentially damaging code on their computer, which would mean that someone knowing you have such code would no longer be sufficient reason for them to investigate your computer. A compiled program, however, might still be enough.
Slashdot Mirror
This would prove that IBM is interested in making technology for use in its embedded markets, and is willing to throw Apple and Motorola a bone every once in a while to justify their position in the AIM alliance. Nothing more.
Someone needs to make a piece of software to short out pixels so that we can get to the 6 pixel limmit and get our displays fixed! :P
The G4 spec allows a single G4 chip to have MULTIPLE CORES; which means, that a single processing chip can have multiple processors ON THE SAME CHIP. Why should Apple make a multiple processor machine when they can simply get a multiple core processor from Motorola and stick it on a board?
I didn't have a problem with AOL before. Time Warner merger? Heck, that just means we'll get better content (maybe), that's all.
But this? AOL owning nearly every domain name? That's the last draw. When I buy a domain name, I don't want it to have ANYTHING to do with AOL. PERIOD. O.K., DOJ, STEP IN NOW!!!
(I mean heck, would you want your webpage known as having anything to do with the most laggy ISP known to man? Not to mention the most offensive???)
If Microsoft opens up its APIs, that means that games using Direct X can have versions on other platforms. Formerly, if you used Direct X as your internet multiplayer API, since you had no idea how it worked, and since Direct X wasn't available on other platforms, there was no way to make compatible cross platform multiplayer for a game. Meaning a cross platform version was essentially not worth it.
Dang, that brings back memories! Eat oil slick, spy guys!
Assuming that you are the kind of music person who is happy to just push the play button, you could simply hook up your computer to wireless speakers. This would work with any room in the house. If you want to select from where you are listening, however, you are probably better off with either one of these machines; either that, or a more sophisticated setup arranged from home automation components.
Sounds like it is almost a Leggo computer; you can add any crazy parts to it you want, and come out with something really nifty. Imagine having an MP3 player as thin as a credit card, or maybe an e-book. Unfortunately, nothing is said about the memory capacity though. Or maybe that's another layer altogether.
Just read that bit on mechanical profiling; Netscape should sue the company that makes Mosaic 2000 because of the adverse affects it will have on Netscape's business because of their previous Mosaic browser.
"The Humane Interface" by Jef Raskin.
Excellent book. Goes into interface design of all kinds. It will be very helpful to you if you but read and understand. It expresses ideas I have always felt (and some that I genuinely understood) in a very easy to understand way. EVERYONE should use this book when designing their UIs!!!
You clearly underestimate the value of annoying the military and doing illegal activities... :)
Wireless networking! DUH!
Sony has been known for developing a new kind of hard drive with a plastic based platter...
They will probably just throw in what would have been an add on later into the crate. They probably aren't going to modify the plastic just to fit in a new piece of hardware; the development time alone on a new shaped box would be too much and too long.
3 words: No loading time.
I think a better idea would be to have the wizes take players who "farm" like this, beat them until they can't get up, and then have newbies PK them for experience. Now THAT is justice! Then again, if PK-ing was on, this wouldn't happen so often; people would build their characters up enough to thrash people who farm like this, camping in order to get a certain item when it appears in the game (if they wanted it that badly). What should be allowed (EverQuest may not have this functionality) is to have weapons and items that you have crafted/created yourself be sold. If you made it, it should be yours. For example, buying land and then building a castle on it to sell later should be completely allowable. You earned that land. But items that you can casually pick up, or get for defeating characters that materialize, they should not be sellable.
The company that is running this Lunar Land Rush (whether it is legal or not) does not allow you to buy specific plots of land; you can buy consecutive lots, but you cannot buy THE lots you want. They do not even have a system for keeping track of which lots are available and which are not; they just grab one lot out of one bag and stuff it in the other, and whichever is in whichever bag has been bought or sold. Furthermore, the land they have available is right next to a crater. Which means it will be in SHADOW a significant portion of the time. You better have some FINE solar generators for any land you buy up there. Also, being next to a crater precludes you building much of a starport. You already have a mountainous obstacle in the way; and since space travel will be very likely to have many kinks in its execution, you are better off buying completely planar land for that purpose. There is no deal here, there is no value here, this is only a novelty thing, and you will most likely not make any profit from it (although I would rather it were not so).
Now excuse me for being totally ignorant about the topic of Read/Write times, ESPECIALLY for this newfangled thingie (I always wanted to say that! :P), but what are the Read/Write times for this sort of thing, huh? What if they are so completely useless that it's not worth the effort?
Not entirely likely (mostly playing Devil's advocate here), but seriously; what kind of Read/Write times would a thing like this have? They don't address that. It is all well and good to have lots of memory, but if you can't access it at significant speed, then what good is it? Now the thing may turn on fine, but how fast does it actually take to read some data? Probably the usual, considering the "Oohs" and "Ahs" The millitary is giving it, but I'd just like to know (because we might just need faster busses to handle it, ya know).
Can Netscape open source the interface so some people who are decent at interface design can fix this problem since Netscape isn't going to? I'm sure that some of us out here know what the hell we are doing in that regard. Someone should mail the people at Netscape "The Humane Interface" by Jef Raskin; at least then they can get a clue.
This is to continue my idea on multiple student governments and how it could be feasibly implemented. Multiple student governments should exist at one time, if only for the purposes of giving particular groups of students powerful enough voices so that other groups will have no choice but to consider them and their feelings seriously. Governments should be grade independent (if so chosen) to make this much more realistic; it adds to the possible population that can make up a new government, and it allows groups that are generally grade independent (and most groups are) to have a legitimate voice. Multiple governments (in my suggested implementation) are to be created for the purpose of maintaining justice. There will never be enough school officials to adequately deal with social problems, and even if there were, only the very trusting would believe that they were genuinely helping the student body maintain social order (even if it were true). Issues relating to money matters (fundraisers and so on and so forth) are handled by the school; each class participates in its own fundraising, and class specific events are withdrawn from class specific funds, while class independent events are withdrawn from either the overall class pool, or fairly between each class (farily being determined on the occasion). These fundraisers should be organized through the school itself, not the student governments; student governments can organize their own private funds (managed through the school), and can contribute to the class dependent pools if they choose. Each government is responsible for dealing with social conflicts within their own group; they determine their own private rules, as well as rules with outsiders participating in their government's activities; they may alternatively opt to allow the school to pass judgement. Only in particularly nasty cases will decision by the school be mandatory (these would be cases that are fairly obvious to most readers). If a person in one government thinks he will be/is being mistreated by his peers, he can seek Asylum from another government, or the school until he can adequately choose another government. Conflicts involving participants from multiple governments are determined in multiple possible ways; either by the governments involved, or with the governments choosing an independent outside party (either another government, or the school), who can add to the voting structure or decide entirely by themselves (this would be decided before any resolution would take place). Again, in particularly nasty situations, the school can override any authority the acting governments have. There are some requirements for a legitimate government to be formed. Each government must have a means of transmitting authority (as in saying "We have decided this"). They must have a means of assigning and taking back leadership. They must have a means of assigning and taking back membership. And finally, they must have some means by which to deal with outsiders. Legitimate forms of government include (and include variations on) Democracy (Who doesn't love Democracy? :P), Dictatorship/Monarchy/Hegemony/Imperial rule, and even Anarchy, properly done (I would include Socialism if I could think of a case for it). Rather than run through a Democratic example, we will run through an example of a Anarchic government. Anyone can become part of the government at any time (with an option to exclude cases where they are part of another government). Everyone in the government gets a say in how things are done. Anyone can propose any idea for discussion, debate, and to be voted on. No one can propose the same thing over and over again (to prevent fillabusters; they'd just work around it if someone was being a jerk). Any time something must be decided on, it does not pass until everyone signs a document (our means of transmitting authority). If people do not want to sign a document, they do not have to; however, at any time, everyone besides that person can vote to oust that person (this allows things to be passed which really should be, and it allows people to be forced out). If someone still wants back in after they have been cast out, and they let him in, then it must not have been too important why he didn't sign (or he just didn't want legal liability). So even Anarchy can be a suitable form of government; provided all the necessary requirements for government in this environment are met. (If this particular kind of Anarchy has a name, please let me know; otherwise, it shall forever be known as Bladetooth's Anarchy!). In this kind of environment, students will feel more powerful, and will feel that there are people on their side. And if they are alone, it will be noticed they are alone, and something will be done if necessary (let's hope the school can manage to keep ONE KID safe...). If problems between governments erupt, then the school will be able to recognize the problem more immediately than if there were problems between other kinds of groups in a traditional school. Because the groups are organized, what one group does will be more expected than otherwise; problems that would have gotten lost through the cracks are now out in the open. Schools can take advantage of this, and have less to police than before; they are thus more managable. Also, they can pay closer attention on education.
This may be a little off topic, but I think it is related; please forgive me if it is not.
People have been over-reacting on the topic of violent video games; it is understandable. They do not like seeing such violence in any form, and they are of the opinion that young children might suffer if they are exposed to it. However, witnessing violence in such mediums as video games, television, and movies is rarely such an experience that might do actual damage. Most of the time, these experiences are "all in fun", and harmless.
The real dangers of exposing children to violence is when particular children do not understand life to the extent that an adult does; what you do can either cause happiness or sadness in other people, just as what they do affects you; if you feel pain because someone has harmed you, others feel pain, that is only because others feel pain when you harm them; and if you kill someone, they do not come back (or respawn or whatnot). Young children do not realize this give and take, and so often do not think about what happens around them, and merely react throughout almost all of their lives.
When this happens, that a child does not truly understand what is going on around them, then yes, putting one more thing in front of them to react to could be very damaging, especially if they start to think that what goes on in the screen is one more way they can react to the world around them. Most children can usually understand that what happens in fiction and fantasy do not always equate to real life on a one to one basis, and that there are always exceptions. However, when you have been reacting your entire life, you are just looking for that one thing you can do to make the hurting stop.
It is of course up to parents and teachers to show children the relationships that govern our everyday lives. People generally assume that this is picked up by everyone, but that is not always the case. Everyone will always miss some nuances of the give and take between people, and the earlier that all of these missing pieces are learned, the better off emotionally a child will be. Children who are very shy (which is quite natural) will generally have less to operate on to start with, and parents should take every opportunity to see that their child can interact with people.
Of course, today's parents have an insane number of things to think about; even if they had enough free time to spend with their child on these things, they may not even realize it, and spend whittle their time away worrying about other things. Even parents who do have enough time to spend with their children will have to deal with parents who do not, and the psychological mess that results between a poorly raised child and a properly raised one. And unfortunately, we live in a society where proper parenting is sometimes impossible; death, divorce, and other disasters abound, and the child not necessarily being able to cope with these problems may have a cascade effect into other areas. Then there are parents who are so terribly developed themselves they could not possibly parent their child correctly.
Let's add in the harsh environment of modern schools: We have people who have been wasting their lives working hard to get to the top of their respective heaps that inevitably collapse perhaps two or three times, depending. The transition from Elementary school to Middle School (or Junior High School), and to High School always means that you were hot, and now are not. Whether they know this or not, they try to be at the top only to make sure that they do not get hurt. A great many people do not realize the damage they do trying to become king of their respective hill, and they only do it so they can have an extra measure of safety. But it is done, and there are always the inevitable downtrodden. The damage is extensive.
Everyone knows who the kings and queens of the hills are. The popular, the fashionable, the athletic; maybe the cool rogue. Everyone treats them well, because maybe if they do, they can get close enough to pull the other down and themselves up to the top; wait for the opportunity, and take advantage for your own. Never mind if the king or queen gets beheaded, the kingdom is yours now. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer, as they always say.
People who are just the slightest bit different are already smashed down to the bottom; they are just leverage enough to make the climb that much easier. And they always scramble back for more, so you can always keep yourself up by putting them down. It is no wonder that people who just react and are among the downtrodden often become victims.
Of course, what happens to the victims from here depends very much on themselves. Some feel so powerless that they commit suicide. Some that can actually see the vicious cycle of abuse, but are too gentle to do anyone any harm would likely to commit suicide also. Those with enough determination and skill can break free from the situation enough to make a place of their own, where the rules don't have to apply (Drama Club, Chess Club, AV Club, Industrial/Design Technology, we all had our "safe havens"). Then there are those that simply do not understand, and are merely reacting; or, they do understand, but they do not care about how they hurt because they are deluded into thinking what they do is justified, or they are even so twisted that they do not care. They are so furious with all of it that they decide they will not take it anymore. And these, without the vision to discriminate those who hurt them and those that would not, are the Columbine Kids.
They are the product of society in that their pain was not justified; they are the product of their parents and teachers in that they were not taught to recognize the difference between right and wrong, and those that would and would not hurt them; and they are the product of their own ignorance, and of their own determination to see only what they find convenient (a world filled with monsters), rather than what really exists.
People who have these problems play violent video games not merely because they are fun (although this does add to it, I'm sure), but because they want to see people's heads pop off, preferably the ones of their classmates, and their dictators (the Kings, Queens, and the institution through which they have no choice but to pass). If your child wants to play violent video games for this reason, you are entirely justified to utterly remove his computer priviliges until he has developed and dealt with his problems enough that he realizes that it is only a game, and that very few people (if any at all) are worthy of the fates of players in the game. Of course, you yourself are also responsible for making sure this does become reality.
However, many people will play these games solely because they are fun, to relieve stress, for competitiveness, and for camaraderie. No assumptions should be made about people who play video games such as these; just as no assumption should be made about people who drive cars, such as "People who drive cars want to kill people with them!". Any such statement for either case is totally ridiculous.
If Mr. Pinkerton wants to do some good, he can start by removing the crowns from the Kings and Queens. No one person should be valued above any other without suitable reason. With no hill to stand on, they have no advantage, and thus anyone they push can push back just as hard. It is in this environment that people can truly learn to get along with one another.
Meanwhile, people will seek leadership and power elsewhere; I would hope that they look to student government (I wouldn't, but it's the only thing I can think of). What I would suggest to further enhance this idea is to allow entirely separate student governments to coexist within a single school, and even a single grade (I would say that they should be independent of grade also). In this way everyone has a chosen and valid voice, and everyone feels they have sufficient power to accomplish their goals.
The code itself is communication; you can compile the code and still not be doing anything wrong; but if you decide to use the code, THEN you are doing something wrong. This doesn't bode well for Police and FBI; this means that every person on the planet has a right to have potentially damaging code on their computer, which would mean that someone knowing you have such code would no longer be sufficient reason for them to investigate your computer. A compiled program, however, might still be enough.