He wears the stuff everywhere all the time. It alters the way he thinks and behaves. It even screws him up when he takes it off. It is a part of what he is.
Yes, bit you could say the same about my underwear.
Uh... since when is someone who wears computer a cyobrg? I was expecting to read about a guy's numerous electronic implants, but...what the hell? Use of computers, whether worn or not, does not qualify one as a "cybernetic organism." Having them as an integrated component of one's being does.
If you can have at most three clicks... and only seven choices at each point... then your site can hold only 7 ** 3 == 343 pages! So clearly at least one of the two rules is bogus.
Incorrect. Obviously, both rules are valid, and there exists simply the (correct) corrolary that sites with more than 343 pages are improperly desinged.
Don't they just mean more than 9 choices? Why don't they just call it the 9 rule, instead of the 7 +/- 2 rule? I mean obviously, when there are only 2 or 3 logical options it makes no sense and leads to increased confusion and frustration to offer users 5.
I especially like the implication that a 5% decrease in server users is what would cause us to jump ship...including those of us who are only desktop users...and those of us who were using linux when it had half the users it has now...go figure.
That reminds me of an incident that happened at work. Somebody told us that The Amazing Kreskin, the world's foremost mentalist, was involved in some sort of weird conspiracy. None of us had heard of The Amazing Kreskin, the world's foremost mentalist, previously, so my friend Joe went to amazingkreskin.com from one of the computers in our break room to find out what he was all about. The next day, he again attempted to visit amazingkreskin.com, only to find out that it had been blocked by our administrator.
Will what we're trying to teach him stick? I don't know...but we're trying, we really really are. It's hard to do with the media overblowing violence and crime most of the time.
It may not seem like it now, but having parents who have an attitude that element x is bad, who adamantly stick to this presumption, and who explain it rationally to their kids really has a big effect on the kids. Especially if it's something that really makes sense, like non-violence. My parents always wanted me to respect authority, but I never did, and still don't because authority is stupid. However, I've always stayed away from drugs, including cigarettes, which my friends regularly indulged in, because I was always under the assumption they were evil. I was never exposed to the idea that smoking might be cool or fun until I was in high school, and by then I could figure it out for myself. Being in an environment where it's just assumed that violence is stupid is the kind of thing that will stick with a kid more or less automatically. It may seem like you need to try hard to avoid exposing your kids to violence, but merely having a household that carries the attitude that violence is implicitly stupid is more than likely enough. I wouldn't worry about it, as long as you're setting a good example for your kids and are talking to them about it, it will stick.
bah, sci-fi doesn't even mean anything anymore anyways. Haven't you seen how many books about wizards and dragons are in the sci fi section of the bookstore?
Point 2) Where did they get the gun? Notice how everyone is 100% ready to jump on the video game... my question... WHERE THE FUCK DID THEY GET THE GUN?
Why, it was packaged with the video game, of course.
This is rated funny, but it does raise a valid issue, namely, it's only because parents' groups raise a big stink about the newest violent game that comes out that kids think they can get away with blaming their actions on the game(/tv show/rapper/whatever). If people would just stop claiming that games are going to make kids violent, kids would stop using it as an excuse and probably not pull this shit half as often.
Yes, I agree that the parents probably weren't doing their job. But at some point you have to blame kids for what kids do. These weren't little 6-year-olds with no conception of the permanence of death, or the lethality of bullets. They were teenagers. They knew what they were doing, and they did it. You say "people are once again looking for the scapegoat to blame" yet yourself blame the parents. Sounds like scapegoating to me. The blame for this rests on the shoulders of the perpetrators.
Is there a danger of reaching a point where we go from "The movie studios can shut down your website if they think you're letting people download movies" to "If you think the neighbor stole your mailbox, you can break into his house to get it back"?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but it's a little different when you're both gamers, as opposed to a situation wherein "I like games, she likes to talk."
He wears the stuff everywhere all the time. It alters the way he thinks and behaves. It even screws him up when he takes it off. It is a part of what he is.
Yes, bit you could say the same about my underwear.
Uh... since when is someone who wears computer a cyobrg? I was expecting to read about a guy's numerous electronic implants, but...what the hell? Use of computers, whether worn or not, does not qualify one as a "cybernetic organism." Having them as an integrated component of one's being does.
What do you mean, African or European swallow wire?
So you are saying that Amazon, like it or not the most popular ecommerce site, is improperly designed?
To be honest, I was being facetious.
If you can have at most three clicks... and only seven choices at each point... then your site can hold only 7 ** 3 == 343 pages! So clearly at least one of the two rules is bogus.
Incorrect. Obviously, both rules are valid, and there exists simply the (correct) corrolary that sites with more than 343 pages are improperly desinged.
Don't they just mean more than 9 choices? Why don't they just call it the 9 rule, instead of the 7 +/- 2 rule? I mean obviously, when there are only 2 or 3 logical options it makes no sense and leads to increased confusion and frustration to offer users 5.
Everybody respects a tough competitor nobody respects whiners.
Everybody respects someone with a grasp of grammar nobody respects fools.
This all comes down to one thing. What is Microsofts business plan?
...
1. Control some software markets
2.
3. Profit!
Have you quit using Linux yet?
- Yes
- No
I especially like the implication that a 5% decrease in server users is what would cause us to jump ship...including those of us who are only desktop users...and those of us who were using linux when it had half the users it has now...go figure.
something of a bohemian location - possibly Europe.
That would make since, given that Bohemia is in Europe.
That reminds me of an incident that happened at work. Somebody told us that The Amazing Kreskin, the world's foremost mentalist, was involved in some sort of weird conspiracy. None of us had heard of The Amazing Kreskin, the world's foremost mentalist, previously, so my friend Joe went to amazingkreskin.com from one of the computers in our break room to find out what he was all about. The next day, he again attempted to visit amazingkreskin.com, only to find out that it had been blocked by our administrator.
Hmmm...
...when they discovered she thought 'Kazaa' was a magician playing at local kids' birthday parties.
That's a good one, I'll have to remember to use it some time.
Will what we're trying to teach him stick? I don't know...but we're trying, we really really are. It's hard to do with the media overblowing violence and crime most of the time.
It may not seem like it now, but having parents who have an attitude that element x is bad, who adamantly stick to this presumption, and who explain it rationally to their kids really has a big effect on the kids. Especially if it's something that really makes sense, like non-violence. My parents always wanted me to respect authority, but I never did, and still don't because authority is stupid. However, I've always stayed away from drugs, including cigarettes, which my friends regularly indulged in, because I was always under the assumption they were evil. I was never exposed to the idea that smoking might be cool or fun until I was in high school, and by then I could figure it out for myself. Being in an environment where it's just assumed that violence is stupid is the kind of thing that will stick with a kid more or less automatically. It may seem like you need to try hard to avoid exposing your kids to violence, but merely having a household that carries the attitude that violence is implicitly stupid is more than likely enough. I wouldn't worry about it, as long as you're setting a good example for your kids and are talking to them about it, it will stick.
bah, sci-fi doesn't even mean anything anymore anyways. Haven't you seen how many books about wizards and dragons are in the sci fi section of the bookstore?
Point 2) Where did they get the gun? Notice how everyone is 100% ready to jump on the video game... my question... WHERE THE FUCK DID THEY GET THE GUN?
Why, it was packaged with the video game, of course.
This is rated funny, but it does raise a valid issue, namely, it's only because parents' groups raise a big stink about the newest violent game that comes out that kids think they can get away with blaming their actions on the game(/tv show/rapper/whatever). If people would just stop claiming that games are going to make kids violent, kids would stop using it as an excuse and probably not pull this shit half as often.
Yes, I agree that the parents probably weren't doing their job. But at some point you have to blame kids for what kids do. These weren't little 6-year-olds with no conception of the permanence of death, or the lethality of bullets. They were teenagers. They knew what they were doing, and they did it.
You say "people are once again looking for the scapegoat to blame" yet yourself blame the parents. Sounds like scapegoating to me. The blame for this rests on the shoulders of the perpetrators.
on developing a robot with capabilities of a 5-year-old...Perhaps the U.S. Government should consider funding such a program over here?
Just what we need. More 5-year-olds.
When hanging out with International Eric Conspiracy members, do you get confused when they call each other Bruce?
Do you remember that time I called you just to say I saw your number on slashdot?
And who would want the damn thing to order another beer when you've had enough? Perhaps this guy should go and get a life (or at least a job).
I think this device is intended for people who don't believe that it's possible to have had enough.
A wireless beer glass...
As opposed to the multitudes of beer glasses that aren't wireless?
Is there a danger of reaching a point where we go from "The movie studios can shut down your website if they think you're letting people download movies" to "If you think the neighbor stole your mailbox, you can break into his house to get it back"?
My question is, what's the difference?