Why would you want to play a 3d game in your browser when you could run a native app instead? Why should we use the web for anything other than hypertext, when a native app will always work better? All this is doing is turning your web browser into an OS, but you've already got an OS. More layers of abstraction means more bloat and more bugs. No thanks.
The government should make parents directly accountable for their kids actions: If your kid killed another kid then it is YOU who pays for the crime. If a kid robbed, then it is YOU who pay for the crime, as an adult.
The rest of the world raises their kids just fine without such draconian procedures. I'd suggest you find out how they do it and copy them instead.
He's talking about OGG the container, not vorbis, theora, flac, or speex, which are codecs any of which may be used in the ogg container. MKV is the usual alternative.
I'm not sure what the use case for this would be anyway. Sure you can access your desktop from everywhere, but where are you going to go that has terminals set up for NX? If you're hauling around a netbook anyway, why not just run a local desktop?
The girly drinks contain a lot of sugar. Sugar which leads to radicals which can increase your hangover. If they're really syrupy they can even be hyperosmotic, which wouldn't help hydrate you at all.
I generally agree with you, but pricing tickets at market value does have its problems. If all tickets were priced at market value, that would price a lot of average people out of the market. The problem comes when you have a big name act who really wants average people to be able to attend their events.
The way I like to think of it is like cake. No one would argue that cake isn't a causal factor in obesity. Likewise no one would argue that a healthy child can't have any cake.
Even if this study is 100% accurate, you can't extrapolate that into "no child should play violent video games", any more than you can say "no child should ever eat cake". But given the political reality of the world, that is exactly how it will be used.
I'm frankly suspicious of anyone who isn't actually doing research but merely doing another analysis of research that is known to be flawed in one way or another.
Yes, you should be. If you have two studies that contradict each other, you should find out why they contradict each other. Then you do a new study that takes that into account. What you don't do is average the two studies (at least one of which is flawed) and call that a new result.
Yep, the context here is important. Which is worse, a parent who plays CoD with his kid, explains to him the difference between reality and games, takes the opportunity to explain some things about politics and war and maybe even a little history, in the process actually developing a relationship with their kid, or a parent who just says "no violent video games!" and sits little johnny in front of the TV?
I'm willing to attack any and all meta-analyses. Either the research out there is good, in which case you can just look at the results, or it's bad, in which case you need to fix it and discard it. Averaging a bunch of flawed studies is just going to give you a flawed average.
Also, I've been looking through the preprint of this paper and I'm finding very few instances of the string "causa", none of which have anything to do with how he can actually show causation.
You should be able to find his methods in the preprint of this paper on his university website. I haven't had a chance to read it so I have nothing more to add.
Yes, this is always trotted out, but I think it's applicable here. How can you demonstrate causation through a meta-analysis? Without randomizing your subjects, and subjecting them to different treatments you can't prove that any given effect is caused by that treatment and not a 3rd variable.
Also, how big is this effect compared to other things we tolerate as a society? Watching sports for instance causes an increase in testosterone, and testosterone is linked to aggressive behavior. We need this kind of context in order to prioritize how we treat these issues.
The gas and temperature guages are nothing like error messages; the light that says your brakes aren't working is. But cars have mechanical parts that wear out or break, software doesn't.
Software does have mechanical parts that break. They have hard drives that fill up. They have network connections that may go down. They have input devices that may need to be plugged in.
You have a point there. Even if you are allowed to make a copy for use on a machine, actually using it on the machine may be illegal. Modding the Wii probably violates the DMCA for instance. But at least there are many modern machines that you can use your old games with legally. PCs, smartphones, the Dingoo, etc.
I still own the cartridges to many older video games. It doesn't make sense to me to have to buy them again to be able to play them legally on, say, my Wii.
You don't have to buy them again to play them legally on your Wii. 17 USC 117 reads:
Making of additional copy or adaptation by owner of copy. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 [17 USC 106], it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1)
that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
Since you own a copy of a computer program (a video game on cartridge) it is not an infringement to make a copy in order to use that program on a machine (the Wii). Further, nothing says where that copy must come from. If you own a copy of Super Mario Bros. then you have the right to make a copy of Super Mario Bros. Downloading that copy is the easiest way to do that.
Slashdot Mirror
When you're the government.
Your OS should provide privilege separation. A wise choice of language and libraries will provide portability.
Why would you want to play a 3d game in your browser when you could run a native app instead? Why should we use the web for anything other than hypertext, when a native app will always work better? All this is doing is turning your web browser into an OS, but you've already got an OS. More layers of abstraction means more bloat and more bugs. No thanks.
Sounds like a self fulfilling prophesy to me.
Indeed.
The government should make parents directly accountable for their kids actions: If your kid killed another kid then it is YOU who pays for the crime. If a kid robbed, then it is YOU who pay for the crime, as an adult.
The rest of the world raises their kids just fine without such draconian procedures. I'd suggest you find out how they do it and copy them instead.
Does North Korea actually provide any of the software freedoms to its users though?
He's talking about OGG the container, not vorbis, theora, flac, or speex, which are codecs any of which may be used in the ogg container. MKV is the usual alternative.
I'm not sure what the use case for this would be anyway. Sure you can access your desktop from everywhere, but where are you going to go that has terminals set up for NX? If you're hauling around a netbook anyway, why not just run a local desktop?
This should be obviously be in the Your Rights Onlawn section.
The Grateful Dead had a good way of doing it. Mail order, with a lottery. One entry per household.
The girly drinks contain a lot of sugar. Sugar which leads to radicals which can increase your hangover. If they're really syrupy they can even be hyperosmotic, which wouldn't help hydrate you at all.
These guys will have no problem getting another job, and they won't have to work under Activision anymore.
I generally agree with you, but pricing tickets at market value does have its problems. If all tickets were priced at market value, that would price a lot of average people out of the market. The problem comes when you have a big name act who really wants average people to be able to attend their events.
The way I like to think of it is like cake. No one would argue that cake isn't a causal factor in obesity. Likewise no one would argue that a healthy child can't have any cake.
Even if this study is 100% accurate, you can't extrapolate that into "no child should play violent video games", any more than you can say "no child should ever eat cake". But given the political reality of the world, that is exactly how it will be used.
I'm frankly suspicious of anyone who isn't actually doing research but merely doing another analysis of research that is known to be flawed in one way or another.
Yes, you should be. If you have two studies that contradict each other, you should find out why they contradict each other. Then you do a new study that takes that into account. What you don't do is average the two studies (at least one of which is flawed) and call that a new result.
Yep, the context here is important. Which is worse, a parent who plays CoD with his kid, explains to him the difference between reality and games, takes the opportunity to explain some things about politics and war and maybe even a little history, in the process actually developing a relationship with their kid, or a parent who just says "no violent video games!" and sits little johnny in front of the TV?
I'm willing to attack any and all meta-analyses. Either the research out there is good, in which case you can just look at the results, or it's bad, in which case you need to fix it and discard it. Averaging a bunch of flawed studies is just going to give you a flawed average.
Also, I've been looking through the preprint of this paper and I'm finding very few instances of the string "causa", none of which have anything to do with how he can actually show causation.
You should be able to find his methods in the preprint of this paper on his university website. I haven't had a chance to read it so I have nothing more to add.
Yes, this is always trotted out, but I think it's applicable here. How can you demonstrate causation through a meta-analysis? Without randomizing your subjects, and subjecting them to different treatments you can't prove that any given effect is caused by that treatment and not a 3rd variable.
Also, how big is this effect compared to other things we tolerate as a society? Watching sports for instance causes an increase in testosterone, and testosterone is linked to aggressive behavior. We need this kind of context in order to prioritize how we treat these issues.
Patient: Doctor, doctor! It hurts when I do this.
Doctor: Well, don't do that.
That's not exactly the kind of problem solving we're interested in.
The gas and temperature guages are nothing like error messages; the light that says your brakes aren't working is. But cars have mechanical parts that wear out or break, software doesn't.
Software does have mechanical parts that break. They have hard drives that fill up. They have network connections that may go down. They have input devices that may need to be plugged in.
You have a point there. Even if you are allowed to make a copy for use on a machine, actually using it on the machine may be illegal. Modding the Wii probably violates the DMCA for instance. But at least there are many modern machines that you can use your old games with legally. PCs, smartphones, the Dingoo, etc.
I think in the larger scheme of things, people really don't give a shit what happens with some guys hobby sequel to a 20 year old game.
I still own the cartridges to many older video games. It doesn't make sense to me to have to buy them again to be able to play them legally on, say, my Wii.
You don't have to buy them again to play them legally on your Wii. 17 USC 117 reads:
Since you own a copy of a computer program (a video game on cartridge) it is not an infringement to make a copy in order to use that program on a machine (the Wii). Further, nothing says where that copy must come from. If you own a copy of Super Mario Bros. then you have the right to make a copy of Super Mario Bros. Downloading that copy is the easiest way to do that.