The complete lack of a TSA would be better than what we have now. We don't need a TSA any more than we need a Bathtub Security Agency. You're a lot more likely to slip in the shower than die by terrorist attacks.
You assume the only reason people play games is because they are fun. That's not necessarily the case. They may be playing because it was fun in the past, and expect it to be fun in the future. Or they may be playing because it's easy and occupying which can be rewarding but falls short of fun.
What's your point? Holding these contractors accountable for promising more than they can deliver is the first step towards changing that. All government contractors should be sued if they overrun their budgets, otherwise they have no incentive not to.
You can use the same argument about doctors, or virtually any "profession" that claims to have standards.
As well you should. Anyone should be free to do any work someone wishes to pay them for. The only thing that should be illegal is claiming to have a qualification you do not.
. If you aren't a member of the guild then you can't do whatever it is the guild members do
Which is clearly incompatible with personal freedom.
The defense of this is that you are at least partially assured of competence when dealng with a guild member
Which is a good reason to choose guild members. It's not a good reason to punish non-guild members. If someone chooses to hire someone unqualified, that's their right and their risk to take.
In short, the existence of guilds is defensible. The legal monopoly granted to guilds is indefensible.
So sure, the laws are most definitely on the side of the guilds. It has been that way for around a thousand years or so.
Yes, corruption is as old as humanitity. That's no reason to keep at it.
The guilds exist for a reason and certainly a thousand years ago it was a very good reason
OK, so why does the US have more violent crime than other first world countries? What is it about being born in the US that makes people more likely to be criminal?
Whatever that factor is, can you blame individuals for it? Will punishing individuals change that factor? Wouldn't it be more effective to examine our society and figure out what that is and change it?
Which is why people don't take him seriously, because it's obvious the criminal is the one who did something wrong.
The important question isn't who did what wrong, it's how we can best make everything better. If you can show experimentally that punishment reduces crime, then it's a great idea. If not, then we should consider other options.
Considering that the US has more people in it's prisons than any other country on earth, and more violent crime than any other first world country, I'd have to say that the punishment thing isn't really working out. Our justice system is nothing but security theatre.
Of course it is. To the victim of an assault it doesn't matter whether the thugs were wearing red bandanas, or blue caps and badges. When an innocent person is taken away and locked up, that's wrong, and they deserve recourse.
What kind of authoritarian hell hole do you live in? Oh yeah, this one.
I've not known many marijuana users, or alcoholics for that matter who will harm someone to get money to acquire their drugs. Crack, Cocain, Meth, Pain Killers, Tranquilizer, etc users on the other hand, will go to great lengths to get their next high. I've seen many, many friends go down this path, and it's truly sad to see.
If that's their only choice, alcoholics will rob for booze. The difference is that alcohol is cheap enough that you can panhandle enough to get drunk regularly.
If you want to reduce the harm associated with addiction, you have to make it easy to maintain that addiction. Otherwise they will spend all their effort in getting their fix, hurting other people in the process. Better to just let them hurt themselves in peace, and offer treatment to those who want to change.
# When developing the kad.dll module for maintaining communication with the Kad network, code with a GPL license was used â" this means that the authors are in violation of a licensing agreement.
Somehow I think that's the least of their concerns.
I've never lived anywhere where bars weren't also live music venues. e.g. The Haunt in Ithaca NY, The Green Room in Iowa City, or the Slowdown here in Omaha. Just go wherever college age kids hang out, look for concert posters. Most of them will be at bars.
Never been to a bar that charged a cover when there wasn't a show. Seems like a crappy deal to me.
On Amazon, no matter how many glowing astroturf reviews there are, anybody can write a negative review that gives solid reasons why they didn't like it, and negate all the positive reviews if you're convinced those drawbacks are a dealbreaker for you.
You can write it, but there's no guarantee they'll post it.
Re:Looks like time to find a new search engine
on
Google's New Design
·
· Score: 1
but I don't know what words will be problematic until I submit the query once. So now I have to submit most queries twice, once as a test, and again with "" or +. You may be used to this if you mistype a lot, but I don't and I expect it to work the first time if I've constructed what should be a precise query.
In individual-scale studies, people often demonstrate that subjects primed with violent video games are somewhat more likely to act-out violent behaviors, answer ambiguous prompts with the more, rather than less, violent possibility, etc.
Yes, but no more so than those who are primed by watching sporting events, or participating in other competitions. Winning boosts testosterone which boosts aggressive behavior. The question isn't whether video games promote violence, it's whethery they do so more than any other typical behavior.
Slashdot Mirror
The complete lack of a TSA would be better than what we have now. We don't need a TSA any more than we need a Bathtub Security Agency. You're a lot more likely to slip in the shower than die by terrorist attacks.
It's not exactly formulaic when you invent the formula.
You assume the only reason people play games is because they are fun. That's not necessarily the case. They may be playing because it was fun in the past, and expect it to be fun in the future. Or they may be playing because it's easy and occupying which can be rewarding but falls short of fun.
This is an ontopic meta comment.
The preceeding part of your post was an on topic meta comment. The part I quoted was an off topic meta meta comment.
How is that any different from the Christian Science Monitor, one of the most objective news sources in the country?
Popular music has always been formulaic. Good music, on the other hand, is not.
The reason it's SOP to underbid the contract is that it's the only way to actually win the contract
Make lawsuits for budget overruns SOP, and that practice completely disappears.
Seriously. Put it in the state constitution that all government contracts will be completed on time and under budget or we get our money back.
What's your point? Holding these contractors accountable for promising more than they can deliver is the first step towards changing that. All government contractors should be sued if they overrun their budgets, otherwise they have no incentive not to.
You can use the same argument about doctors, or virtually any "profession" that claims to have standards.
As well you should. Anyone should be free to do any work someone wishes to pay them for. The only thing that should be illegal is claiming to have a qualification you do not.
. If you aren't a member of the guild then you can't do whatever it is the guild members do
Which is clearly incompatible with personal freedom.
The defense of this is that you are at least partially assured of competence when dealng with a guild member
Which is a good reason to choose guild members. It's not a good reason to punish non-guild members. If someone chooses to hire someone unqualified, that's their right and their risk to take.
In short, the existence of guilds is defensible. The legal monopoly granted to guilds is indefensible.
So sure, the laws are most definitely on the side of the guilds. It has been that way for around a thousand years or so.
Yes, corruption is as old as humanitity. That's no reason to keep at it.
The guilds exist for a reason and certainly a thousand years ago it was a very good reason
It's only a good reason if you're a guild member.
Don't be silly. We think the same of bankers too.
OK, so why does the US have more violent crime than other first world countries? What is it about being born in the US that makes people more likely to be criminal?
Whatever that factor is, can you blame individuals for it? Will punishing individuals change that factor? Wouldn't it be more effective to examine our society and figure out what that is and change it?
Yes. Very much like selective Capitalism.
Which is why people don't take him seriously, because it's obvious the criminal is the one who did something wrong.
The important question isn't who did what wrong, it's how we can best make everything better. If you can show experimentally that punishment reduces crime, then it's a great idea. If not, then we should consider other options.
Considering that the US has more people in it's prisons than any other country on earth, and more violent crime than any other first world country, I'd have to say that the punishment thing isn't really working out. Our justice system is nothing but security theatre.
Of course it is. To the victim of an assault it doesn't matter whether the thugs were wearing red bandanas, or blue caps and badges. When an innocent person is taken away and locked up, that's wrong, and they deserve recourse.
What kind of authoritarian hell hole do you live in? Oh yeah, this one.
As even in average, society roughly 40% of people will steal if they feel they can get away with it
Come on, our society isn't 40% bankers.
I've not known many marijuana users, or alcoholics for that matter who will harm someone to get money to acquire their drugs. Crack, Cocain, Meth, Pain Killers, Tranquilizer, etc users on the other hand, will go to great lengths to get their next high. I've seen many, many friends go down this path, and it's truly sad to see.
If that's their only choice, alcoholics will rob for booze. The difference is that alcohol is cheap enough that you can panhandle enough to get drunk regularly.
If you want to reduce the harm associated with addiction, you have to make it easy to maintain that addiction. Otherwise they will spend all their effort in getting their fix, hurting other people in the process. Better to just let them hurt themselves in peace, and offer treatment to those who want to change.
That's a real shame. Some people still appreciate old machines. You should give them a chance to play with them.
Somehow I think that's the least of their concerns.
I've never lived anywhere where bars weren't also live music venues. e.g. The Haunt in Ithaca NY, The Green Room in Iowa City, or the Slowdown here in Omaha. Just go wherever college age kids hang out, look for concert posters. Most of them will be at bars.
Never been to a bar that charged a cover when there wasn't a show. Seems like a crappy deal to me.
On Amazon, no matter how many glowing astroturf reviews there are, anybody can write a negative review that gives solid reasons why they didn't like it, and negate all the positive reviews if you're convinced those drawbacks are a dealbreaker for you.
You can write it, but there's no guarantee they'll post it.
There's a dick in every group.
but I don't know what words will be problematic until I submit the query once. So now I have to submit most queries twice, once as a test, and again with "" or +. You may be used to this if you mistype a lot, but I don't and I expect it to work the first time if I've constructed what should be a precise query.
the plain-text ads go almost un-noticed
Which mean's they're almost un-effective.
Copyright and plaigarism are two different things. Even if you expand upon and improve other peoples ideas, it's plaigarism if you do not credit them.
In individual-scale studies, people often demonstrate that subjects primed with violent video games are somewhat more likely to act-out violent behaviors, answer ambiguous prompts with the more, rather than less, violent possibility, etc.
Yes, but no more so than those who are primed by watching sporting events, or participating in other competitions. Winning boosts testosterone which boosts aggressive behavior. The question isn't whether video games promote violence, it's whethery they do so more than any other typical behavior.