Christ.. another "there ought to be a law against (x)", or "(x) ought to be a crime"? Seriously, there are too many of your types out there screwing things up already. We keep making dumb laws that have rather nasty unforeseen consequences because some people get their panties in a twist over some distasteful, "deviant", or irksome behavior.
Yeah, those guys were assholes. They showed a severe lack of humanity and empathy. They are worthy of criticizing, shunning, and shaming. But that doesn't mean it should become illegal to be an unsavory prick. Putting people in prison because they are assholes hiding behind the anonymity of the internet is bullshit.
Exactly this. I find it perplexing that some people with a religious bent seem to think of "Science" as just another belief system. It's a method and process for attempting to find truth. If there is a fundamental belief in Science, then perhaps it is that effect follows cause, and that a model or theory can be verified as true or false through prediction compared with observation of whether that prediction matches reality.
Saying science is a belief system is like saying celibacy is a sex position.
I just want to mention that Kickstarter is also getting board games off the ground as well. I actually only first heard about Kickstarter after playing Alien Frontiers a couple months ago. It is an enjoyable and well received board game that is the result of a Kickstarter project. There are many board games in development because of Kickstarter as well.
its a large debate amongst paleontologist's whether or not dinosaurs were feathered, with some choosing to believe they were and others refuting the evidence as inconclusive, such as the apparent feathers simply being a tree branch or other anomaly, not feathers.
personally i prefer the past when dinosaurs weren't feathered its hard to think of raptor as kool and scary anymore when they look like retarded balding chickens
I think you are confusing science with something else.
I agree... I don't doubt that there was a physical confrontation that escalated into a shooting. There seems to be evidence to support that part of the story. The identity of the screamer is a bit of a moot point, considering that there wouldn't have been a confrontation in the first place if the over-zealous, paranoid, and armed Zimmerman had not pursued the kid and created the confrontation (against the instructions given to him by the 9-1-1 dispatcher).
I do wonder how this story would have turned out if Zimmerman had been the one killed in this. Would it have been dismissed as self-defense under the Stand Your Ground law (since Zimmerman was pursuing him in a way that could easily be perceived as threatening), or would he have been arrested at the scene? If he had been arrested, would there have been a public outcry? What if he had been released?
What if I said "Used Bookstores are leeches of the publishing industry"?
What if I were to say, "Thrift stores are leeches of the retail industry"?
Why should software (distributed on physical media) enjoy some special protection from being transferable to another person? Why should I be rendered unable to either transfer the the ability and right to enjoy my gamee, either temporarily (loan / share) or permanently (gift / sell)?
Many comments have already pointed out that PCs have effectively been doing this for years already, but why aren't more nobody questioning if maybe this is the reason that the console gaming industry is doing better than the PC gaming industry is?
Why does the gaming industry fail to acknowledge that just because a game is sold for $30 or $40 used does not mean that the customer would have been otherwise willing to pay $60 if the option of Used was removed?
Why is it that used games and piracy are always blamed for hurting the industry, rather than increases both in game prices (hurting demand) and game escalating budgets (reducing profit)?
Is the popularity of buying used a sign that people would buy more games if they were cheaper, or are these so many more used sales because people can trade-in and swap their existing games to cycle through a larger number of games than they could on the same game budget buying only new games?
I'm very surprised that this hasn't become standard. Even if not from the OS, but at least in video drivers. I recall a very nice multiple desktop tool was available with my video drivers on an old 4MB video card I was using with Windows 95. IIRC, it was an S3 Virge.
You are assuming that people using what AT&T considers an excess amount of data are abusing their unlimited data, and that's simply not completely true.
It is completely disingenuous for providers to paint users as abusers for using the very same high-bandwidth applications that they are constantly advertising in their ads! (Netflix, Pandora, movies on demand, etc). They are using it as advertised.
I easily hit over 1 GB a month on my phone, and I'm not a power user, I don't watch Netflix on my phone, I might stream maybe a youtube video once a week on my phone, and only stream audio a few times a month. If I only semi-regularly used the advertised features of my phone, I'd easily be in the top 5% "network abuser" category.
I suppose that if I opened a buffet style restaurant, and advertised that it is "all you can eat", but require that all customers eat off of a 1 inch plate, and they must take that plate back to the table to eat, then I suppose that is still "all you can eat", right?
I'm also reminded of the indignant arguments made in regards to cigarettes, and how that smokers are a drag (no pun intended) on the public, by causing additional healthcare costs. However, studies have shown that smokers actually incur *less* healthcare costs than non-smokers... because they die sooner.
Many laws and policies are enacted because they *sound right* and seem to be based on intuition of what is right or moral, but end up causing a huge mess. I'm tired of our entire society being dragged to hell to protect us from imaginary threats, or greatly exaggerated threats.
But unfortunately, there are a lot of wealthy and powerful people that have a lot riding on keeping us "safe" from boogeymen.
I think you are confusing the chicken and the egg, as you seem to be suggesting that "insane liabilities" for those practicing is a constraining force that encourage more people to be lawyers and sue people...
Ah, the Magic Candle... I couldn't play it today, but the game was ahead of it's time in many ways. I see it as the Elder Scrolls of the 80's. It had many player options, a lot of open-ended play, tons of in-game stories/songs for flavor, a dialogue system that included open keyword options, the ability to split the party and have each person doing their own thing/job, and many other features that were not seen in games of that time period (and some since).
Shorter work-days would result in many people having slightly less pay, however they would have more leisure hours, and overall unemployment would go down.
Though couldn't slightly less pay lead to slightly less consumption, which means slightly less demand, which could mean slightly less production (or slightly lower prices and profit), which means slightly less need for workers, which could increase unemployment?
I'm actually posing this as a sincere question, as I'm no economist.
Yes, if you possess it (even without your knowledge, consent, or intent), and you discover and report it, you are going to put yourself into a huge mess.
If you discover it, don't report it, and destroy it, and this is discovered later, you will be putting yourself into a huge mess.
If you discover it, don't report it, and don't destroy it, and this is discovered later, you will be putting yourself into a huge mess.
If you never discover it, and someone else does and reports it, you will be in a huge mess.
Obviously, the solution is to gouge out your own eyes, cut out your tongue, and not have any possessions (or pockets).
Why can't an effort to create reliable and safe self-driving cars be the "real solution"? I think in theory, not only could this increase safety, but it could also be implemented in ways that it could help overall congestion and efficiency.
Or why can't the "real solution" (to the texting/phone distraction problem) be to develop better interfaces to these gadgets in order to reduce the amount of interaction that is required to use them? Devices that are hands-free, voice activated, and give audio feedback could potentially be less distracting.
Those are off the top of my head, I imagine there are other approaches as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Christ.. another "there ought to be a law against (x)", or "(x) ought to be a crime"? Seriously, there are too many of your types out there screwing things up already. We keep making dumb laws that have rather nasty unforeseen consequences because some people get their panties in a twist over some distasteful, "deviant", or irksome behavior.
Yeah, those guys were assholes. They showed a severe lack of humanity and empathy. They are worthy of criticizing, shunning, and shaming. But that doesn't mean it should become illegal to be an unsavory prick. Putting people in prison because they are assholes hiding behind the anonymity of the internet is bullshit.
Sorry, is this company _asking_ people to be "asleep at the job"?
More like they are asking people to work in their sleep.
Ok, actually that analogy sucked... It would have worked with Atheism more than Science, lol... still, I maintain that Science isn't about "belief"
Exactly this. I find it perplexing that some people with a religious bent seem to think of "Science" as just another belief system. It's a method and process for attempting to find truth. If there is a fundamental belief in Science, then perhaps it is that effect follows cause, and that a model or theory can be verified as true or false through prediction compared with observation of whether that prediction matches reality.
Saying science is a belief system is like saying celibacy is a sex position.
I just want to mention that Kickstarter is also getting board games off the ground as well. I actually only first heard about Kickstarter after playing Alien Frontiers a couple months ago. It is an enjoyable and well received board game that is the result of a Kickstarter project. There are many board games in development because of Kickstarter as well.
its a large debate amongst paleontologist's whether or not dinosaurs were feathered, with some choosing to believe they were and others refuting the evidence as inconclusive, such as the apparent feathers simply being a tree branch or other anomaly, not feathers.
personally i prefer the past when dinosaurs weren't feathered its hard to think of raptor as kool and scary anymore when they look like retarded balding chickens
I think you are confusing science with something else.
I never saw "Obongo", but I do recall catching Fox News having captions referring to the First Lady as "Obama's Baby Mama".
"If I submit a sincere question to you, will I find myself on no-fly lists and be investigated as a subversive by my own government?"
I agree... I don't doubt that there was a physical confrontation that escalated into a shooting. There seems to be evidence to support that part of the story. The identity of the screamer is a bit of a moot point, considering that there wouldn't have been a confrontation in the first place if the over-zealous, paranoid, and armed Zimmerman had not pursued the kid and created the confrontation (against the instructions given to him by the 9-1-1 dispatcher).
I do wonder how this story would have turned out if Zimmerman had been the one killed in this. Would it have been dismissed as self-defense under the Stand Your Ground law (since Zimmerman was pursuing him in a way that could easily be perceived as threatening), or would he have been arrested at the scene? If he had been arrested, would there have been a public outcry? What if he had been released?
What if I said "Used Bookstores are leeches of the publishing industry"?
What if I were to say, "Thrift stores are leeches of the retail industry"?
Why should software (distributed on physical media) enjoy some special protection from being transferable to another person? Why should I be rendered unable to either transfer the the ability and right to enjoy my gamee, either temporarily (loan / share) or permanently (gift / sell)?
Many comments have already pointed out that PCs have effectively been doing this for years already, but why aren't more nobody questioning if maybe this is the reason that the console gaming industry is doing better than the PC gaming industry is?
Why does the gaming industry fail to acknowledge that just because a game is sold for $30 or $40 used does not mean that the customer would have been otherwise willing to pay $60 if the option of Used was removed?
Why is it that used games and piracy are always blamed for hurting the industry, rather than increases both in game prices (hurting demand) and game escalating budgets (reducing profit)?
Is the popularity of buying used a sign that people would buy more games if they were cheaper, or are these so many more used sales because people can trade-in and swap their existing games to cycle through a larger number of games than they could on the same game budget buying only new games?
That sounds disappointing, but it seems valid. It is obviously a fact that works from that time period are still protected by copyright.
Whether it is sane, or whether it promotes the progress of science and useful arts is another matter completely...
1974 was the year that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders removed homosexuality as a category of mental disorder.
I'm very surprised that this hasn't become standard. Even if not from the OS, but at least in video drivers. I recall a very nice multiple desktop tool was available with my video drivers on an old 4MB video card I was using with Windows 95. IIRC, it was an S3 Virge.
The biggest Doctor Who fan I ever met was female, in her mid 20's... and was a huge fan of the old shows too. Her favorite companion was Leela.
You are assuming that people using what AT&T considers an excess amount of data are abusing their unlimited data, and that's simply not completely true.
It is completely disingenuous for providers to paint users as abusers for using the very same high-bandwidth applications that they are constantly advertising in their ads! (Netflix, Pandora, movies on demand, etc). They are using it as advertised.
I easily hit over 1 GB a month on my phone, and I'm not a power user, I don't watch Netflix on my phone, I might stream maybe a youtube video once a week on my phone, and only stream audio a few times a month. If I only semi-regularly used the advertised features of my phone, I'd easily be in the top 5% "network abuser" category.
I suppose that if I opened a buffet style restaurant, and advertised that it is "all you can eat", but require that all customers eat off of a 1 inch plate, and they must take that plate back to the table to eat, then I suppose that is still "all you can eat", right?
I'm also reminded of the indignant arguments made in regards to cigarettes, and how that smokers are a drag (no pun intended) on the public, by causing additional healthcare costs. However, studies have shown that smokers actually incur *less* healthcare costs than non-smokers... because they die sooner.
Many laws and policies are enacted because they *sound right* and seem to be based on intuition of what is right or moral, but end up causing a huge mess. I'm tired of our entire society being dragged to hell to protect us from imaginary threats, or greatly exaggerated threats.
But unfortunately, there are a lot of wealthy and powerful people that have a lot riding on keeping us "safe" from boogeymen.
I think you are confusing the chicken and the egg, as you seem to be suggesting that "insane liabilities" for those practicing is a constraining force that encourage more people to be lawyers and sue people...
Ah, the Magic Candle... I couldn't play it today, but the game was ahead of it's time in many ways. I see it as the Elder Scrolls of the 80's. It had many player options, a lot of open-ended play, tons of in-game stories/songs for flavor, a dialogue system that included open keyword options, the ability to split the party and have each person doing their own thing/job, and many other features that were not seen in games of that time period (and some since).
Definitely an overlooked classic.
(I had to add some extra text here, else Slash thought I was "yelling").
G R W SW
M
T R
M
T L
A R
A R
A R
T A
M
M
M
M
ZLOAD
Shorter work-days would result in many people having slightly less pay, however they would have more leisure hours, and overall unemployment would go down.
Though couldn't slightly less pay lead to slightly less consumption, which means slightly less demand, which could mean slightly less production (or slightly lower prices and profit), which means slightly less need for workers, which could increase unemployment?
I'm actually posing this as a sincere question, as I'm no economist.
Yes, if you possess it (even without your knowledge, consent, or intent), and you discover and report it, you are going to put yourself into a huge mess.
If you discover it, don't report it, and destroy it, and this is discovered later, you will be putting yourself into a huge mess.
If you discover it, don't report it, and don't destroy it, and this is discovered later, you will be putting yourself into a huge mess.
If you never discover it, and someone else does and reports it, you will be in a huge mess.
Obviously, the solution is to gouge out your own eyes, cut out your tongue, and not have any possessions (or pockets).
...and people always forget that your exercising of your rights don't apply the moment you start infringing on the rights of others.
The right to not be hated? How do I exercise that one?
'No. The terrorist goal is to blow a plane, not an airport room '
So the goal is to make millions of people avoid flying planes?
I can let you in on a secret: They already won.
Actually... the terrorists haven't scared me away from flying. However, the TSA has.
I don't think that is the only "real solution".
Why can't an effort to create reliable and safe self-driving cars be the "real solution"? I think in theory, not only could this increase safety, but it could also be implemented in ways that it could help overall congestion and efficiency.
Or why can't the "real solution" (to the texting/phone distraction problem) be to develop better interfaces to these gadgets in order to reduce the amount of interaction that is required to use them? Devices that are hands-free, voice activated, and give audio feedback could potentially be less distracting.
Those are off the top of my head, I imagine there are other approaches as well.