There is also the fact that Napster allowed you to walk away with your own copy of whatever it was you wanted. You didn't have to keep going back to Napster every time you wanted to listen to a song. With Youtube, you don't get the option to download something to keep it with you. Not that I think that's going to save them, of course.
Depends on whether or not they have distribution rights on those titles in the US, I would think. If they do, then I think they can. If not, then they'll probably rat you out to whatever their Japanese equivalent is
Maybe they aren't the only store, but they can sure reduce the number of local businesses a lot. I've seen it happen where my wife is from, which is a small town that has had many grocery stores and hardware stores close down since WalMart moved in. I've heard rumors (sorry, too lazy to find a source at the moment) about WalMart moving into a new area, usually a smallish town, and having prices so low that they're barely breaking even or even working at a loss. Local businesses can't compete, because they don't have a multi-billion-dollar international chain backing up their losses. Once enough of the local businesses go under, WalMart raises the prices again, having signifigantly reduced competition. If this is true, it's very dirty and underhanded.
The ultimate blame falls on those who shop there, though, instead of supporting local business. These same morons then wonder why their quaint little town suddenly lost all it's charm, sighing in regret about the closing of the old hardware store that had been around since their great-grandfather was a kid. If it's important to you, pay the extra cost and support the local guys. That's what I do where I live. Of course, in Minneapolis, there is pretty much no way for any one company to dominate the entire retail scene, so it's easier for me.
I think I understand what you mean, though I don't necessarily believe that I'd say that "it's usually their fault when they are the victims." I don't have kids yet, but what I've learned, and what I will pass on to them, is the following:
1. Sometimes people are jerks. They may mess with you because they've had a bad day, a rough childhood, are bored or whatever. They may target you because you look like an easy target, or are just available, or maybe did something (even unintentionally) to annoy them.
2. When someone messes with you, bullies you, or whatever, the correct response isn't passivity, fear, self-pity, or self blame. The correct response is indignation to anger, depending on the transgression.
3. Don't escalate a situation without analyzing first. Remain calm if possible. If this is some random stranger on the street, it's probably not worth doing anything more then walking away. If this is someone who you will have to deal with on a somewhat regular basis, determine why there is a conflict. If you did something unintentionally that angered them, an apology will usually deflate the situation. If it's just a matter of them acting out, or if they are angry at you over something stupid, let them know (calmly but forcefully) that their actions are unwarranted and not appreciated. If you are being harassed in spite of standing up for yourself, take it to an authority (parent, teacher, police, Human resources, etc.) because this is obviously not a situation you can fix without resorting to force.
If the authority doesn't fix the problem, go to their boss. If it still doesn't get resolved, then you need to either remove yourself from the situation, or decide on whether or not to resort to violence. For the record, there are some people who simply won't respond to anything less then a punch in the face. Violence is a last resort, though, since it can escalate very quickly, and you will most likely get into just as much trouble as the aggressor. Not to mention it is also risky. People have died in fist-fights, and the aggressor may also have a weapon of some kind. Removing yourself from the situation is almost always preferable to violence.
4. Never let the aggressor determine your actions. Never just be reactionary. Always THINK. Of course, if the incident in question is someone physically attacking you, defend yourself as well as you can, and remove yourself from the situation as soon as possible.
5. Never put yourself in a situation where you won't be able to protect yourself. A key example of this is at a party where people are getting high/drunk. Getting wasted makes you extremely vulnerable. Get into the habit of determining risks, what to avoid, and how to protect yourself for any situation.
Obviously, if someone is attacking you or threatening you with a gun or a knife, that limits your options. It's never the time to "Stand up for yourself" when someone is threatening to shoot you unless you hand over your wallet.
Honestly, it is really hard to pick on someone who has a clear idea of their own self-worth. The problem is, kids feel stupid, awkward, and overwhelmed, and they tend to believe their peers when they are told something negative about themselves. The problem with that is, their peers are just as stupid, awkward and overwhelmed as they are, and don't know any more about life then they do. I really wish I understood when I was in school that, if someone calls you names or picks on you, it doesn't mean that you're worthless, it means that they're an asshole, and you should respond accordingly.
I play some against adults, and against kids. Most of the time, when I'm against a kid, he's usually using some "unbeatable" deck he found off the internet. I really hate that. In my opinion, playing the game is only half of it. The other half of the game comes from building a functional deck. To simply copy a killer deck found online takes a good chunk of the fun out of it.
I may lose a few, but I build my decks myself, from cards I get either from lots, pre-built decks from WotC (which I buy to get used to new mechanics, and usually rip apart after a few games) or booster packs. When I beat someone, it's with a deck I built, not one I copied from someone else.
However, if they want to guarantee a success, they could always have someone dressed as a Wookiee beat the crap out of someone dressed as a Vulcan. I can think of lots of fans (of both series, actually) that would enjoy watching that. Including me:)
My father-in-law had this disease in the last few years of his life, and it was pretty horrible. I have no intention to slam nursing homes (you guys have one hell of a hard job to do) but most of them are just not set up to deal with Alzheimer's or dementia. Many we talked refused to admit patients with Alzheimer's, since the confusion and fear the disease causes can lead to anger and violence. I understand and sympathize with nursing home staff. But, when we were dealing with my father-in-law, it became very clear to me that we needed actual Alzheimer's wards where they could specialize in their care.
For the most part (at least where I live) patients with Alzheimer's got shipped off to mental wards. That's where my father-in-law ended up for a while, before he became vegetative. He was convinced that he was in jail for something, and got angry because nobody would tell him why. He kept trying to get out, and pushed the orderlies when they tried to stop him. They ended up placing him in leather restraints (which, I understand, is NOT something they're supposed to do, especially long-term). We went to visit him one day and found him locked in a sweltering room with no air-conditioning or fans, strapped to a table, wearing nothing but an adult diaper, and screaming in rage and terror, because he didn't know why he was locked up.
I used to make Alzheimer's jokes, before I actually knew someone who had it. I feel bad about that now. This is a terrible disease. I'll throw a huge party the day they actually come up with a cure for it.
When Zap Rowsdower talks, people listen... only to become intoxicated by the alcohol fumes from his breath
There are no endagered animals, only animals that Zap Rowsdower hasn't eaten... yet.
Zap Rowsdower once killed an entire cult with a single roundhouse kick. They died laughing.
Bullets are deflected by Zap Rowsdower's hockey hair
In the unlikely event that Canada ever runs out of beer, they can drink Zap Rowsdower's blood, which is 120 proof.
You are what you eat, and Zap Rowsdower is 200 pounds of bacon fat
The only force known to withstand the force of a Chuck Norris Roundhouse Kick (tm) is Zap Rowsdower's doughy gut
What you have to understand is that your typical "Western Otaku" (heh) has no real idea of what Japan is like, has never visited the country, and likely never will. I mean, if you base your entire opinion of a country on a very small set of media exported from it, you're going to have a skewed vision of the society. Watching the entire run of Urutsei Yatsura twenty times through is not going to make anyone an expert in Japanese culture.
Re:A Duality.... Pretentious writing
on
Remaking The World
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
To sum up, both the game and the anime are about a fictional MMORPG called "The World". The anime is mainly about a person who is somehow trapped in the game and can't log out, and the game is about a player who is investigating why some players of the game are rendered comatose while playing. So, in the game you are role-playing a character who is role-playing in an MMORPG. The game itself is sort of a virtual MMO, with all the other "PC's" being computer-controlled.
It's actually a kind of neat concept, and a fun enough game, though the endless repetative dungeon-crawling takes its toll.
"Statistically you are much less likely to be murdered than you are to die in a car accident. Does that mean we shouldn't put murders in jail, or allocate resources to capture them?"
Of course not. When someone breaks the law, every resource that could be beneficially applied should be utilized to bring that person to justice, within the law.
What we don't do is generate a profile of someone who is more likely to murder someone (for example, poorly educated, low income, whatever criteria you want), and detain everyone who meets that profile "just in case", when they have commited no crime. We don't have police going around collecting fingerprints and DNA from everyone in the US. We don't have people listening in on phonecalls just in case someone wants to hire a hitman. We don't go around doing door to door searches for firearms and confiscating any that we find. There are plenty of things we could do to cut down on the number of murders in this country, but many of them would be invasive and counter to the principles of freedom and liberty that define our nation.
Add to that the fact that these problems are often social, and government restrictions simply plaster over the problems rather then fix them. If we found some way to 100% terror-proof the US, that wouldn't stop the terrorists from wanting to do us harm. If those anti-terror controls ever went away, we'd still be a target. Instead of taking away liberties, the government's resources would be better utilized trying to fix the problem at the source... and no, I'm not talking about capitulation. I'm talking about building an international infrastructure that actually works, foreign aid when it's asked for, and minding our own damned business when not. And yes, the occasional use of force if needed, but only when the result is worth the risk of those soldier's lives.
I never have mod points when I need them. Maybe IGE could get into the "instant rate-up" biz.
I've played FFXI since the NA release. I've never bought gil. I've never farmed excessively, I have one job at 75, and my highest craft skill is 60. And that's in cooking, hardly the best profit maker in the game. And I've always been able to buy what I needed. You don't NEED the best gear, you can get along fine without it, and decent gear for your level is very easy to obtain. The best of the best gear is SUPPOSED to be hard to get, that's what makes it valuable.
SE didn't make things expensive. Players supply almost all the high-end gear. Players set the prices, players pay the prices. Why go and blame SE for something that we did to ourselves?
To the grandparent post, and to anyone else who thinks that you need to zip through this game as fast as possible, and feel the need to buy gil so you never have to be without the best equipment... Maybe this is not the game for you. SE set the rules to the game, and instead of playing by those rules, you cheat. Nobody forces you to cheat or to play this game. Go elsewhere if you can't hack it. And anyone who buys gil/gold/platinum can go straight to hell.
No, but Left vs. Right serves as an excellent distraction for those trying to extend their power base without people noticing. You'll hide a lot of the finer detail and history of an issue if you can polarize it between political extremes.
This is true, and I don't blame my dad for being concerned. Parents need to know what their kids are into, if only to provide proper context for them. I blame the irresponsible people in the media who put out frantic warnings about cults, suicides and violence, which led my father into thinking that this game might be seriously messing me up. As we all know, it's not the game itself that has these effects... it's the Cheetos and Mountain Dew.
Speaking of D&D... this type of argument has gotten under my skin since the early 1980's, when I started playing D&D. That's when I first started getting irked by the whole "[blank] makes kids violent/drug users/satanists" thing. My own father, a smart enough man normally, felt the need to sit me down and ask me if I understood that I wasn't really casting spells and fighting monsters. All because of the stupid hype generated by people who grossly misrepresented a pretty harmless hobby.
I think the main reason that people resist this type of research is because studies like this are typically either exaggerated or spun in a way that supports the conclusions of the people pushing the study, in this case Lieberman and Clinton. The bias of a very small number of people can be quickly turned into "scientific fact" by politicians and the media. It's better not to do the research at all unless we can guarantee that the research is performed and distributed in an unbiased fashion.
Reminds me of that line from the song Precious Things, by Tori Amos: "He said you're really an ugly girl
But I like the way you play"
It's really sad that, for a lot of people, attractiveness is more important for a woman then any skills she might have. If she's pretty, additional skills are a bonus. If she's not, then whatever skills she has are considered a waste. I've discussed this with my wife many times, about how its really no wonder that so many geeks have a hard time getting a girlfriend. They can't understand why women want only the attractive guys, and want all those really hot women to see through their pimply, overweight, geek exterior and see the wonderful human being inside; at the same time, they consider themselves too good for a not-so-attractive girl. It's a fine irony.
Blizzard does nothing, probably because nobody lets them know about it. How many people who are offended by the word "Fag" or "Gay" actually report the incident to a GM? There is no other way for them to know about the infraction, unless they put a filter in to automagically review all usage of that word. It would then need GM-review to determine if the usage of the word was offensive or not ("I'm gay" vs. "omg, UR gay!!") which would be very manpower-intesive, not to mention intrusive. Would you really want the GMs to be policing everything you say?
What I remember of this incident (too lazy to look it up at the moment), someone was recruiting over open chat in a busy area. All it would take is one person to get offended and call a GM, who would see that such recruitment is, at the very least, in a grey area in their TOS. This would be why, when/if you see someone shouting for a Christian guild, they don't get stopped... odds are, nobody has called a GM. Now, if someone called a GM on a Christian recruiter and nothing happened, then there would be a clear bias on their part.
Slashdot Mirror
There is also the fact that Napster allowed you to walk away with your own copy of whatever it was you wanted. You didn't have to keep going back to Napster every time you wanted to listen to a song. With Youtube, you don't get the option to download something to keep it with you. Not that I think that's going to save them, of course.
Depends on whether or not they have distribution rights on those titles in the US, I would think. If they do, then I think they can. If not, then they'll probably rat you out to whatever their Japanese equivalent is
The ultimate blame falls on those who shop there, though, instead of supporting local business. These same morons then wonder why their quaint little town suddenly lost all it's charm, sighing in regret about the closing of the old hardware store that had been around since their great-grandfather was a kid. If it's important to you, pay the extra cost and support the local guys. That's what I do where I live. Of course, in Minneapolis, there is pretty much no way for any one company to dominate the entire retail scene, so it's easier for me.
Yes, but now this "David" character can pull giant robots from his head. Doesn't really sound like an effective punishment to me.
1. Sometimes people are jerks. They may mess with you because they've had a bad day, a rough childhood, are bored or whatever. They may target you because you look like an easy target, or are just available, or maybe did something (even unintentionally) to annoy them.
2. When someone messes with you, bullies you, or whatever, the correct response isn't passivity, fear, self-pity, or self blame. The correct response is indignation to anger, depending on the transgression.
3. Don't escalate a situation without analyzing first. Remain calm if possible. If this is some random stranger on the street, it's probably not worth doing anything more then walking away. If this is someone who you will have to deal with on a somewhat regular basis, determine why there is a conflict. If you did something unintentionally that angered them, an apology will usually deflate the situation. If it's just a matter of them acting out, or if they are angry at you over something stupid, let them know (calmly but forcefully) that their actions are unwarranted and not appreciated. If you are being harassed in spite of standing up for yourself, take it to an authority (parent, teacher, police, Human resources, etc.) because this is obviously not a situation you can fix without resorting to force.
If the authority doesn't fix the problem, go to their boss. If it still doesn't get resolved, then you need to either remove yourself from the situation, or decide on whether or not to resort to violence. For the record, there are some people who simply won't respond to anything less then a punch in the face. Violence is a last resort, though, since it can escalate very quickly, and you will most likely get into just as much trouble as the aggressor. Not to mention it is also risky. People have died in fist-fights, and the aggressor may also have a weapon of some kind. Removing yourself from the situation is almost always preferable to violence.
4. Never let the aggressor determine your actions. Never just be reactionary. Always THINK. Of course, if the incident in question is someone physically attacking you, defend yourself as well as you can, and remove yourself from the situation as soon as possible.
5. Never put yourself in a situation where you won't be able to protect yourself. A key example of this is at a party where people are getting high/drunk. Getting wasted makes you extremely vulnerable. Get into the habit of determining risks, what to avoid, and how to protect yourself for any situation.
Obviously, if someone is attacking you or threatening you with a gun or a knife, that limits your options. It's never the time to "Stand up for yourself" when someone is threatening to shoot you unless you hand over your wallet.
Honestly, it is really hard to pick on someone who has a clear idea of their own self-worth. The problem is, kids feel stupid, awkward, and overwhelmed, and they tend to believe their peers when they are told something negative about themselves. The problem with that is, their peers are just as stupid, awkward and overwhelmed as they are, and don't know any more about life then they do. I really wish I understood when I was in school that, if someone calls you names or picks on you, it doesn't mean that you're worthless, it means that they're an asshole, and you should respond accordingly.
I may lose a few, but I build my decks myself, from cards I get either from lots, pre-built decks from WotC (which I buy to get used to new mechanics, and usually rip apart after a few games) or booster packs. When I beat someone, it's with a deck I built, not one I copied from someone else.
However, if they want to guarantee a success, they could always have someone dressed as a Wookiee beat the crap out of someone dressed as a Vulcan. I can think of lots of fans (of both series, actually) that would enjoy watching that. Including me :)
For the most part (at least where I live) patients with Alzheimer's got shipped off to mental wards. That's where my father-in-law ended up for a while, before he became vegetative. He was convinced that he was in jail for something, and got angry because nobody would tell him why. He kept trying to get out, and pushed the orderlies when they tried to stop him. They ended up placing him in leather restraints (which, I understand, is NOT something they're supposed to do, especially long-term). We went to visit him one day and found him locked in a sweltering room with no air-conditioning or fans, strapped to a table, wearing nothing but an adult diaper, and screaming in rage and terror, because he didn't know why he was locked up.
I used to make Alzheimer's jokes, before I actually knew someone who had it. I feel bad about that now. This is a terrible disease. I'll throw a huge party the day they actually come up with a cure for it.
When Zap Rowsdower talks, people listen... only to become intoxicated by the alcohol fumes from his breath
There are no endagered animals, only animals that Zap Rowsdower hasn't eaten... yet.
Zap Rowsdower once killed an entire cult with a single roundhouse kick. They died laughing.
Bullets are deflected by Zap Rowsdower's hockey hair
In the unlikely event that Canada ever runs out of beer, they can drink Zap Rowsdower's blood, which is 120 proof.
You are what you eat, and Zap Rowsdower is 200 pounds of bacon fat
The only force known to withstand the force of a Chuck Norris Roundhouse Kick (tm) is Zap Rowsdower's doughy gut
"Dr. Slashdot"
or
"How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Screwing Around at Work All Day"
Steal? No. Borrow? Yes, please.
What you have to understand is that your typical "Western Otaku" (heh) has no real idea of what Japan is like, has never visited the country, and likely never will. I mean, if you base your entire opinion of a country on a very small set of media exported from it, you're going to have a skewed vision of the society. Watching the entire run of Urutsei Yatsura twenty times through is not going to make anyone an expert in Japanese culture.
To sum up, both the game and the anime are about a fictional MMORPG called "The World". The anime is mainly about a person who is somehow trapped in the game and can't log out, and the game is about a player who is investigating why some players of the game are rendered comatose while playing. So, in the game you are role-playing a character who is role-playing in an MMORPG. The game itself is sort of a virtual MMO, with all the other "PC's" being computer-controlled.
It's actually a kind of neat concept, and a fun enough game, though the endless repetative dungeon-crawling takes its toll.
Of course not. When someone breaks the law, every resource that could be beneficially applied should be utilized to bring that person to justice, within the law.
What we don't do is generate a profile of someone who is more likely to murder someone (for example, poorly educated, low income, whatever criteria you want), and detain everyone who meets that profile "just in case", when they have commited no crime. We don't have police going around collecting fingerprints and DNA from everyone in the US. We don't have people listening in on phonecalls just in case someone wants to hire a hitman. We don't go around doing door to door searches for firearms and confiscating any that we find. There are plenty of things we could do to cut down on the number of murders in this country, but many of them would be invasive and counter to the principles of freedom and liberty that define our nation.
Add to that the fact that these problems are often social, and government restrictions simply plaster over the problems rather then fix them. If we found some way to 100% terror-proof the US, that wouldn't stop the terrorists from wanting to do us harm. If those anti-terror controls ever went away, we'd still be a target. Instead of taking away liberties, the government's resources would be better utilized trying to fix the problem at the source... and no, I'm not talking about capitulation. I'm talking about building an international infrastructure that actually works, foreign aid when it's asked for, and minding our own damned business when not. And yes, the occasional use of force if needed, but only when the result is worth the risk of those soldier's lives.
I'm sure the criminals, paedophiles, and terrorists will just be lining up to hand over their keys, too.
I've played FFXI since the NA release. I've never bought gil. I've never farmed excessively, I have one job at 75, and my highest craft skill is 60. And that's in cooking, hardly the best profit maker in the game. And I've always been able to buy what I needed. You don't NEED the best gear, you can get along fine without it, and decent gear for your level is very easy to obtain. The best of the best gear is SUPPOSED to be hard to get, that's what makes it valuable.
SE didn't make things expensive. Players supply almost all the high-end gear. Players set the prices, players pay the prices. Why go and blame SE for something that we did to ourselves?
To the grandparent post, and to anyone else who thinks that you need to zip through this game as fast as possible, and feel the need to buy gil so you never have to be without the best equipment... Maybe this is not the game for you. SE set the rules to the game, and instead of playing by those rules, you cheat. Nobody forces you to cheat or to play this game. Go elsewhere if you can't hack it. And anyone who buys gil/gold/platinum can go straight to hell.
No, but Left vs. Right serves as an excellent distraction for those trying to extend their power base without people noticing. You'll hide a lot of the finer detail and history of an issue if you can polarize it between political extremes.
This is true, and I don't blame my dad for being concerned. Parents need to know what their kids are into, if only to provide proper context for them. I blame the irresponsible people in the media who put out frantic warnings about cults, suicides and violence, which led my father into thinking that this game might be seriously messing me up. As we all know, it's not the game itself that has these effects... it's the Cheetos and Mountain Dew.
Speaking of D&D... this type of argument has gotten under my skin since the early 1980's, when I started playing D&D. That's when I first started getting irked by the whole "[blank] makes kids violent/drug users/satanists" thing. My own father, a smart enough man normally, felt the need to sit me down and ask me if I understood that I wasn't really casting spells and fighting monsters. All because of the stupid hype generated by people who grossly misrepresented a pretty harmless hobby.
Back in the day, I had to make myself stop playing Tetris, because I kept obsessively stacking things on top of each other. The game made me do it.
I completely misread that title, and at first thought it said "Iran Cracks Down on Boogers". I was thinking, "man, those guys are strict!"
I think the main reason that people resist this type of research is because studies like this are typically either exaggerated or spun in a way that supports the conclusions of the people pushing the study, in this case Lieberman and Clinton. The bias of a very small number of people can be quickly turned into "scientific fact" by politicians and the media. It's better not to do the research at all unless we can guarantee that the research is performed and distributed in an unbiased fashion.
"He said you're really an ugly girl
But I like the way you play"
It's really sad that, for a lot of people, attractiveness is more important for a woman then any skills she might have. If she's pretty, additional skills are a bonus. If she's not, then whatever skills she has are considered a waste. I've discussed this with my wife many times, about how its really no wonder that so many geeks have a hard time getting a girlfriend. They can't understand why women want only the attractive guys, and want all those really hot women to see through their pimply, overweight, geek exterior and see the wonderful human being inside; at the same time, they consider themselves too good for a not-so-attractive girl. It's a fine irony.
You'd see a lot more accuracy in grammar if people had to successfully compile a statement before being able to get their point across.
We have to let you go. Having a ninja-looter like yourself on our team undercuts morale.
What I remember of this incident (too lazy to look it up at the moment), someone was recruiting over open chat in a busy area. All it would take is one person to get offended and call a GM, who would see that such recruitment is, at the very least, in a grey area in their TOS. This would be why, when/if you see someone shouting for a Christian guild, they don't get stopped... odds are, nobody has called a GM. Now, if someone called a GM on a Christian recruiter and nothing happened, then there would be a clear bias on their part.